What benefits are there to playing wide?

[Athenaeum]

Aside from early rushing somebody, and the Sacred Sites reformation belief for TV (Tourism Victory), is there any other benefit to playing wide?

Having more cities ups the costs of research and social policies...sure smaller cities grow faster than bigger ones, so you might accumulate a higher aggregate population than a tall civ if you could keep your happiness up...

 

[Gen.Washington]

More land, resources, manpower, and in the event of a major war more places to build units...if done correctly, but I often struggle with happiness when playing wide.

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

You don't necessarily need to early rush, just execute a timing push: Crossbows and Knights in Medieval work just as well as Chariot Archers in Classical, provided you have enough cities already to pump those units out. Frigates, Cannons, Artillery, and Foreign Legions also work, just make sure you hit someone with good lands.

As I mentioned in another thread, the problem with wide is that you need a lot of cities to make up for not having Tradition's bonuses, and Liberty only helps you get there, it does not guarantee you getting there. If you can get there before the game is halfway over, the yields your cities will be generating will carry you through the rest of the game.

Of course, you'll need to rely on religion, primarily for happiness, but also for converting faith into science through purchasing GS and/or Jesuit Education.
With at least two extra happiness buildings and/or cities all built in locations that let you build a lot of Circuses, you'll run into the same amount of happiness problems later on as Tradition: while their populations will always be outgrowing local happiness, your city populations can usually stay relatively near local happiness levels, so the only thing you'll need worry about is covering per-city unhappiness.

Wide is basically a gamble: if you can secure enough cities with the help of Liberty and timing pushes, you can outproduce and possibly even out-tech Tradition players into the lategame, but if you cannot, you will fall behind around early Modern Era. By contrast, Tall is a lot more reliable: a good Tradition empire may be worse than a good Liberty empire, but it's a lot easier to have a good Tradition empire than a good Liberty empire.

 

[CraigMak]

The main advantage to going wide is the fact that more cities make more production. When you are at war, production is king. So, it's mainly for war. Going wide will negatively effect your science unless you are able to get all of your cities to be large.

Going wide often negatively effects your gold since more cities = more buildings to make and more workers needed plus you probably are not going to have Monarchy when going wide.

Going wide can also benefit your religion since more cities can make more faith.

That's about it. Wide play is not very advantageous unless you plan to conquer a lot. 4 city tradition will dominate in science, gold and happiness over wide liberty play almost always.

 

[joncnunn]

Aside from early rushing somebody, and the Sacred Sites reformation belief for TV (Tourism Victory), is there any other benefit to playing wide?

Having more cities ups the costs of research and social policies...sure smaller cities grow faster than bigger ones, so you might accumulate a higher aggregate population than a tall civ if you could keep your happiness up...

Eventually it would have more total science (and by enough of a margin to pay for the increase), however in Civ V, the expected turn number of victory is too low, (and the time needed for the newest self built cities to get all the science buildings of the more mature cities too high) in many cases resulting in the above problem.

 

[Athenaeum]

Production is indeed king in war, but why should having more cities help with that? Production comes from surrounding terrain (and other modifiers) so whether or not your population is consolidated in a few cities, or spread out among many, I don't see why you should bring in more production just for having a more spread out population.

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

All cities generate free production via their city tile; building on hills gives 1 extra free production, and many policies will increase the free yields gained from city tiles. In addition, smaller cities grow faster, so if you have 2 cities working the same general group of production tiles, you will be able to work more production faster than if you just had 1 city trying to grow its population to a point where it could work that general group of production tiles. Basically, wide empires are usually able to work all the eligible tiles in their empire faster because they space cities closer together because they do not expect to reach the same per-city population levels as Tradition. Since BNW has eliminated gold yield from most regular tiles, the only remaining non-growth yield that is maximized by working as many tiles as possible is production.

 

[Acken]

I don't know if there's really an advantage. I kind of can make it work but I never feel I'm doing better than my tradition games.
Maybe for domination. More production allows more room for units (you can specialize cities more easily, using 2-3 production hubs for units while some others make guilds and such).

 

[reddishrecue]

Playing wide gives you more land, more resources and also allows you to build and support a lot more units.

 

[twilson1972]

I am ashamed to admit that in civ v i have never self built more than 5 cities, ive had a lot more through domination, but after 5 it never seems worth settling.

Such a contrast to my empires on civ iv and especially civ III

 

[Redaxe]

Playing wide gives you more land, more resources and also allows you to build and support a lot more units.

You also get a lot more culture and faith from having more cities and more landmarks.

 

[Acken]

I am ashamed to admit that in civ v i have never self built more than 5 cities, ive had a lot more through domination, but after 5 it never seems worth settling.

Such a contrast to my empires on civ iv and especially civ III

Building more than 5 is still very viable if you like the playstyle, see current tradition vs liberty discussions. Probably won't give you Hof gold medals but still worth playing.

 

[phillipwyllie]

I believe the tactic for a sub t200 SV pre patch was to go wide and rely entirely on GS bulbs. Post patch there has been a few sub t200 that I'm sure relied heavily on RAs, irrc Ironfighter's sub t200 with Babylon OCC was post patch. Why would you want to go wide now? because you are aware of how the nerf works and don't want to worry about relations.

 

[budweiser]

I don't know if there's really an advantage. I kind of can make it work but I never feel I'm doing better than my tradition games.
Maybe for domination. More production allows more room for units (you can specialize cities more easily, using 2-3 production hubs for units while some others make guilds and such).

What I noticed in the last China game and in some Austria games that I have been plying is the amount of GPT that comes in.

Here is a very wide aggressive empire:

Spoiler :

I married all the CS to create a huge red blob.

 

[Solutionfinder]

You don't necessarily need to early rush, just execute a timing push: Crossbows and Knights in Medieval work just as well as Chariot Archers in Classical, provided you have enough cities already to pump those units out. Frigates, Cannons, Artillery, and Foreign Legions also work, just make sure you hit someone with good lands.

As I mentioned in another thread, the problem with wide is that you need a lot of cities to make up for not having Tradition's bonuses, and Liberty only helps you get there, it does not guarantee you getting there. If you can get there before the game is halfway over, the yields your cities will be generating will carry you through the rest of the game.

Of course, you'll need to rely on religion, primarily for happiness, but also for converting faith into science through purchasing GS and/or Jesuit Education.
With at least two extra happiness buildings and/or cities all built in locations that let you build a lot of Circuses, you'll run into the same amount of happiness problems later on as Tradition: while their populations will always be outgrowing local happiness, your city populations can usually stay relatively near local happiness levels, so the only thing you'll need worry about is covering per-city unhappiness.

Wide is basically a gamble: if you can secure enough cities with the help of Liberty and timing pushes, you can outproduce and possibly even out-tech Tradition players into the lategame, but if you cannot, you will fall behind around early Modern Era. By contrast, Tall is a lot more reliable: a good Tradition empire may be worse than a good Liberty empire, but it's a lot easier to have a good Tradition empire than a good Liberty empire.

Or you could go both, Tradition and Liberty and have 4 good sized cities with other smaller sized(15) cities. GPT, strategic resources and science output is just too good to be missed out. As long as you can keep happiness up...

 

[twilson1972]

so

Lets say i play a civ such as the celts or the mayans.

Their UA/UB are flat benefits per city (pyramid or faith from forest and the celtish hall), which would suggest wide will get the maximum benefit.

But does it really?

Also how do people time wide empires?.

Right now i tend to get 3 cities out fast, then ill often NC and drop my fourth city as the NC finishes.

Do wide players delay NC or do they settle in waves?. (For instance 3/4 city NC then expand again?)

And is liberty definitely better for wide?. I boringly pick tradition almost every game, the variation in my game is my second policy tree (usually piety, but with raging barbarians i dip into honour, and on water maps dip into exploration)...3rd tree is always rationalism.

 

[Solutionfinder]

so

Lets say i play a civ such as the celts or the mayans.

Their UA/UB are flat benefits per city (pyramid or faith from forest and the celtish hall), which would suggest wide will get the maximum benefit.

But does it really?

Mayans are different to Celts, I`d say that Mayans benefit more than the Celts. The hall is good but comes later than the pyramid. 2 and 2 is just amazing early on.

Also how do people time wide empires?.

Right now i tend to get 3 cities out fast, then ill often NC and drop my fourth city as the NC finishes.

Do wide players delay NC or do they settle in waves?. (For instance 3/4 city NC then expand again?)

Aye, at least me personally. 4 cities before NC. the 3rd and 4th city usually(unless there is a lot of trees or enough hammers) immidately start working on library before anything else. With Collective rule from Liberty you get 1 free settler + 50% speed settler training reduction which is why you probably get 3 instead of 4. After NC then I put out at least 3 more and after policy finisher the rest.

And is liberty definitely better for wide?. I boringly pick tradition almost every game, the variation in my game is my second policy tree (usually piety, but with raging barbarians i dip into honour, and on water maps dip into exploration)...3rd tree is always rationalism.

Yes. Just look at the policy tree



It unlocks Pyramids which if you can get it done and then combine it with Citizenship, your workers are going to rock all over the place, roads and improvements built in no time. Unlocking also provide 1 culture per city. Republic and Meritocracy are always useful, especially early on. And finally Representation comes as a proper finisher, reducing culture cost for the rest of newly founded cities, puts you in the golden age and you get to choose your great person.

I would also like to add that Liberty goes well with Tradition, you just need to figure it out how to combine policies because you want to finish both as soon as possible.

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

And is liberty definitely better for wide?. I boringly pick tradition almost every game, the variation in my game is my second policy tree (usually piety, but with raging barbarians i dip into honour, and on water maps dip into exploration)...3rd tree is always rationalism.

Yes. Just look at the policy tree

View attachment 394132

It unlocks Pyramids which if you can get it done and then combine it with Citizenship, your workers are going to rock all over the place, roads and improvements built in no time. Unlocking also provide 1 culture per city. Republic and Meritocracy are always useful, especially early on. And finally Representation comes as a proper finisher, reducing culture cost for the rest of newly founded cities, puts you in the golden age and you get to choose your great person.

I would also like to add that Liberty goes well with Tradition, you just need to figure it out how to combine policies because you want to finish both as soon as possible.

You forgot the most vital policy in Liberty: Collective Rule. Basically, the strategy is to slowly build up your capitol while you rush Collective Rule, then start churning out settlers like nuts to settle as many cities as you can. Collective Rule not only gives you a free settler, but the increased settler production lets you essentially get one free settler for every 2 you build, which is why it's better to wait until you unlock it before pumping out settlers.

In fact, Collective Rule is so powerful that it's actually used for Tradition/Liberty mix strategies, which go Tradition opener into Collective Rule into finishing Tradition.

You will definitely be behind on your NC timing and you definitely won't be science leader unless you're Maya or China, but you will be hammer leader, which means that you might not be able to get Universities quickly, but you will be able to get to Crossbows before other people and then steamroll your neighbor with a force of 7-8+ crossbows and a capture unit.

The biggest things Liberty tends to suffer with are early gold, early happiness, early border growth, and early science. Early religion can be vital to combating all 3 drawbacks, with gold coming from the Founder belief, Happiness coming from follower beliefs, and science coming from the Reformation belief (Jesuit Education or Glory to God, the latter will let you purchase GS without having to complete Rationalism and GE without having to complete Tradition). Policy points can also help nab some key stuff that Wide may wish to rely on, eg. Wagon Trains in addition to Mercantilism, the four policy points in Piety, etc. Their biggest advantage is early hammers, usually to produce military units. As a result, civs with UB's and/or UA's that address those drawbacks and/or UU's that can capitalize on early hammers are best suited for wide Liberty.

Examples of good Liberty civs or civs more suited to Liberty than Tradition include: Arabia (UB helps with early gold, great UU to spam), Byzantium (UU is decent, UA can help a lot if you get a good religion), Carthage (free harbors is best when you have a lot of cities that can capitalize on it), Celts (UA helps with religion, UB helps with happiness), China (UB helps with science and gold, UU is great to spam), Egypt (UB helps with happiness and gold, UU is great to spam, UA helps nab key wide wonders like Sistine), England (two great UU's to spam, free spy helps with early science), Ethiopia (UB helps a lot with early religion), Huns (two great UU's to spam, free tech helps with early science, free production is flat so it's better utilized by wide), Inca (UA helps with early gold and military movement during pushes, UI is just obscene), Iroquois (UA and UB are both more useful for wide than for tall), Maya (UB helps with early science and early religion, UA lets you get GP's without have to work specialist slots, which are harder to work for wide anyway), Mongolia (UU is great to spam), Persia (UB helps with early happiness, UA helps with military movement during pushes), Poland (UA helps with everything, UB helps with early gold), Russia (flat production boost is utilized better on wide than on tall), Shoshone (UA helps with early border growth, first UU helps with everything, second UU helps for Industrial pushes), Songhai (UA helps a bit with early gold, UB helps with early gold, UU is great to spam), and Spain (UA helps with everything if you're lucky). Notice I did not mention Rome because % hammer modifiers are not as significant for wide as they are for tall, and neither UU is really that ideal to spam (maybe Legions, but you're sacrificing a lot tech-wise if you go for early Legions vs. early Markets or early Colosseums).

 

[reddishrecue]

You also get a lot more culture and faith from having more cities and more landmarks.

In a way yes but there's a increase cost in social policies when you have more cities. Research costs also increase. I'm not that sure about the research costs but i think it increases too.

 

[Solutionfinder]

You forgot the most vital policy in Liberty: Collective Rule. Basically, the strategy is to slowly build up your capitol while you rush Collective Rule, then start churning out settlers like nuts to settle as many cities as you can. Collective Rule not only gives you a free settler, but also doubles production on Settlers in your capitol, which is why it's better to wait until you unlock it before pumping out settlers.

In fact, Collective Rule is so powerful that it's actually used for Tradition/Liberty mix strategies, which go Tradition opener into Collective Rule into finishing Tradition.

You will definitely be behind on your NC timing and you definitely won't be science leader unless you're Maya or China, but you will be hammer leader, which means that you might not be able to get Universities quickly, but you will be able to get to Crossbows before other people and then steamroll your neighbor with a force of 7-8+ crossbows and a capture unit.

I suggest you read my whole reply again I haven`t forgotten about CR at all and am very aware how important it is and no I won`t be behind in timing for NC with 4 cities. Tested, mastered...

And If you think it`s good to kamikaze spread with liberty, you are wrong. It should be done thoughtfully and carefully because there is a very thin line between success and failure.