Are colonies any good?

[Westly]

I my current game I discovered two clusters of 7 sources of spices next to a shore about 12 squares away from my borders. So I built 7 workers, built a road to the spices, and built 7 colonies. Several turns later two French boats dropped off 2 settlers and they established two cities right over my colonies effectively stealing my all 7 sources of spices without declaring war I didn't realize this could be done. If I had built 2 cities over the spices the French would not have been able to steal them without starting a war or without surrounding my cities with other cities that have strong cultures. I don't see any advantage in building a colony over a city? I my game it would have required less resources to build 2 cities as opposed to 7 colonies (a 4 population loss as opposed to a 7 population loss).

 

[Gray]

this kind of stuff happened to me once or twice and really ticked me off---which led to a war btw...

what i have started to do is just build a city if possible, and suck up the corruption costs. I would only build a temple, walls, and harbor if necessary (maybe a marketplace to keep folks happy and/or a library to expand culture) in the city and station some troops there. The just keep your pop turning folks into entertainers and everyone will be happy. If the city is too far from your empire there is no need to build all sorts of stuff that cost money there since the corruption drains away your money.

colonies are useful if you know you will expand over the area or if your culture will get there soon. I also use colonies in areas that the AI cannot get to easily or in areas where building a city is not allowed-mountains.

 

[sysiphus]

I agree.

They're only useful for that single square, early in the game, just out of reach of your culture borders. Even then you have to defend the hell out of it.

 

[Logans Run]

I find them useless and from using them originally I have gonna to a no colony policy, waste of time.

Also has anyone seen the AI build them? can't say I have.

 

[AKMike]

I think they have their place, but it is limited.

When you develop new technologies, that can allow the new resources to "spawn" (or go visible, whichever) those new resources could lay just outside of your borders.

In one case, I got some new Iron sources right by the coast, where I couldn't really build a new city without competing for territory between my already existing cities. A colony worked great for that.

So even if they are not the perfect solution, They have their purpose.

Of course, if I had 7 of them disappear in 1 turn, I would likely consider a "no colony policy" too.

 

[Zannhart]

aaaaa

 

[donsig]

Colonies have their uses. I prefer cities but there is some terrain (besides mountains) where I won't build a city (at least right away). The maps seem to mirror earth in that the equator has jungles and the poles have tundra. I would build a colony in either (though I would eventually clear the jungle for a city).

I have had a couple colonies absorbed by other civs (including an oil colony ).That actually triggered a world war after 5900 years of peace...

 

[AWAD]

For less resorces you can go an get an odd resource to use for trade. Also good when you are trying to avoid corruption. I find them better when early in the game they are inside my sphere of influence but not borders. Have not gotten to late enoguh to really see. Wonder how much oil appears in the ice caps.

Colonies seems to show up to the AI as one big target. Everytime one is built it seems not much later they are pillaging it, building a city close by, being beligerant, etc. So remeber to guard them also.

All in all, use sparingly and smartly. Do wish it was done a little different.

AWAD- My iron colony was a magnet