C-X-X-C or C-X-X-X-X-C?

Tundra is much better - which isn't saying much!

Mined and railroaded, it yields one food and two shields (desert 0 food, three shields). This means your investment of a settler will lead to at least a pop two town against a pop one town in a desert without doing more than build a road. Of course, you can irrigate the desert for one food which equalises things a bit. When rail comes along, the irrigated desert will yield two food, but:

Tundra may hold woods for one food & two shields (desert oasis 2 food & 2 shields mined)
Tundra may hold furs for +1 shield (desert incence)
Tundra may hold game for +2 food
Tundra may also hold oil and aluminium (desert oil and salpeter)

Now, a coastal town (temple, harbour) in "tundraland" with one or two fish, one game and a couple of furs - yumm! Here, OCP is definitely better than CXXC and as a bonus, settling a large tract of tundra will almost certainly get you oil!

 

In my current game I'm playing, I have CxC, CxxC, and CxxxC (no CxxxxC at all), depending on corruption, rivers, hills, resources, etc. In reality, building on a grid is very impractical, and no one really does a grid. If I need to build farther or closer, I do. I only build culture if that culture building serves a purpose besides expanding my borders or protecting against flips, like Libraries and Universities. And to get victory, as it's a 20k culture game. I am finding that building lots of culture is a pain.

 

I'd never make settling a desert a priority, but odds are that I will eventually settle it and when I do I'll try to get as much out of it as possible.

Tribute, if you have a town with a couple of floodplains, cash rush a couple of settlers and go settle the desert, it won't take long for the extra cities to pay for themselves. If you use CxxC I'm sure you have had towns with 10+ citizens, 2 of them tax collectors or scientists and a lot of extra food (multiple floodplains, cattle, wheat, etc), using those 2 pop points to build a city won't kill you.

 

I always figure an otherwise completely useless town is worth 6 gpt: 2 gpt unit support, 1 uncorrupted commerce, 1 from building wealth, and 2 from making the lone citizen a taxman (obviously make him a scientist if you are researching).

MAS' point is a good one - by settling a useless town, you are increasing rank corruption in every town further than the desert one. It could certainly end up costing you more than 6 gpt making the town a liability even ignoring the cost of the settler.

 

Well, I guess the reasons are the cost of 2 population + 30 shields and the increased corruption. You may as well settle somewhere else first, is probably my reasoning. Anyway, I know it doesn't mean much, but the game I'm playing has a whole lot of desert in the 1st and 2nd ring north of my capital. I guess that's what inspired my comments.

 

What a discussion here! I could probably comment on many things. One thing I noticed that some people said one can't really play as a "builder" above Emperor or something like that and that one can't play peacefully... not true at all. I think Pyrrhos had a point about military advantages coming as the primary advantage of C2C. I would say that ancient, medieval, and early industrial commerce advantages also come with C2C. But, I think one can largely offset these if one builds the Great Library. Perhaps not economically, but scientifically speaking. One can more offset these if one gives the Great Library right away before Education, then takes it back shortly before the Industrial Era and then triggers one's Golden Age soon thereafter (and cash-rushes universities if possible). Also, I don't know about all the emphasize on specialist farms all over the place. Sure they will help in the medieval and early industrial ages. But what about for later-style games? I can see their benefits for *distant* towns... but if you have a *semi-distant* town and get a fair amount of gpt from trading with the AI your empire might get better served by cash-rushing a courthouse and then a police station.

I think a lot of the "which spacing works better" depends on map size, game conditions, and *especially* desired win condition (hence the C2C vs. C4C 20 turn tests don't make all too much sense... since lacking in technological speed in the ancient age for a C4C gets offset by faster techonological discoveries in the mid-to-late industrial age and the modern age). For a 20k game I *currently* feel it a toss-up... though I guess early research comes as more important so perhaps C2C (even if you own the GL, since you won't want to give it away and want your desired techs at specific times for your 20k city prebuilds). For a conquest/domination rather obviously C2C... unless one won't go for conquest/domination until tanks/bombers/modern armors/stealth/nukes/etc. For a diplomatic or spaceship victory I'd say the C4C. And I'd suggest that anyone who really thinks C2C as the best strategy for all maps and all victory conditions I suggest the following challenge... go play COTM48 and build the spaceship faster than I did (it's in the final spoiler... where I reveal my basic strategies and have some saves). You get to play as the Byzantines on Demi-God with RAGING barbarians. Maybe I should add that you can only fight as many wars as I did... but I really think warring slows you down in a spaceship game... and I certainly don't get all the players who warmonger to beat back the AI in spaceship games.

 

I don't think I'll have time to play that entire game, and unfortunately I missed that COTM, but I haven't started COTM 49 yet - if you want I can battle you for a early spaceship date in that game .

Spaceship games are still war games. After the Ancient Age, there are only a handful of techs that the AI will beat you to unless you are going more slowly than you should be. Even on demigod, if you want an early spaceship launch, you have to do most of the Middle Age Research and almost all the Industrial Age and Modern Age research yourself.

In order to do fast research yourself, you need a lot of territory, and the only way to get it is by taking it. You shouldn't beat down all the AI, just enough to keep your own research at 4 turns/tech throughout. I'll usually pick a couple of AI trading partners early in the game, and try to speed up their research ability (giving gpt, bribing them to declare on a weak neighbor of theirs, dogpiling their neighbors, etc - sometimes these strategies work better than other times...). All AI who are not my research partners are just taking up valuable space from me and my partners.

The other problem with C4C is that you need hospitals eventually. For a successful space game, you should be able to do 4 turn research throughout the Industrial and Modern Ages without hospitals. If you can already do 4-turn research without hospitals, then researching Sanitation costs you turns that you can never make up.

 

There's no doubt in here as to the power of the Great Library. One thing to consider, though: If I use CxxC, I know that my distance corruption will be lower than if I used CxxxxC. I may not be able to calculate exactly how much, but I know it will make a difference. Relying on the GLib to offset the disadvantages of CxxxxC is a 600-shield gamble. If I miss it, I get the "Awfully-Expensive-&-Not-So-Great Library."

Specialist farms are actually very useful for longer games. It takes a while to "grow them," but they are really useful after you get rails laid. Here's a screenshot from one of my games. At 0% science, I was putting out 600 gpt and set to grab a 2600 beaker tech in 5 turns.

Spoiler :

Unfortunately, a challenge like this doesn't test the power of city spacing schemes. It has more to do with the skill of the players. For example, if I were to take you up on this challenge, the only thing I would prove is that I can lose faster than you. At Demi-God with Raging barbs, there's a good chance that I'd never make it out of the Ancient Age, much less launch the SS faster than you. I would submit that the real test would be to see whether you could launch the SS faster than you did last time.

 

Corrections:

Provided that I have the same number of towns/cities, I know that my distance corruption will be lower than if I used CxxxxC.

If I have the same size, as measured in tiles, territory, I know my distance corruption will be the same but my rank corruption very much higher than it would have been had I used CXXXXC.

 

How does having the same number of towns/cities in my empire have any affect on the distance corruption of each one? Maybe I don't understand corruption properly, but my assumption was that the number of towns under my control would affect rank corruption, not distance corruption.

Does this still hold true if I've gone over the OCN? I was assuming that you would continue to expand as far as possible. For my games, I think that probably puts me way over the OCN. Perhaps that was a bad assumption on my part.

 

Chamnix,

"if you want I can battle you for a early spaceship date in that game ."

LOL... thanks for the challenge... but I can't say I have confidence in building the GL on a *standard* sized map on Deity (huge seems much more feasible since we have a slower tech pace... I think). Maybe I underestimate my skill here though. Not having it or having to capture it makes for a different sort of spaceship game. Don't get me wrong, I've started playing that COTM, but with the enhanced UU I've decided to try and play MUCH, MUCH differently than I usually do... including city spacing wise. Maybe it'll end in disaster for me. Who knows.

"Spaceship games are still war games."

*raises my eyebrows* Didn't I give an example of a peaceful spaceship game??? Also, check the referenced saves below and check the tech lead I had when I ended the game diplomatically. Don't you think I could have launched the spaceship easily without firing another round of ammunition? I know in the France game I had aluminum and uranium up to my ears. But, even if I didn't have it, with the tech lead I had and the cash I had flowing in or could have flowing in potentially, as well as the cash stashed up, I could gift whoever I wanted to rocketry and/or fission and buy the resources.

"In order to do fast research yourself, you need a lot of territory, and the only way to get it is by taking it."

*looks quizzically again* Check the saves here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=263213&page=11 Admittedly those victories came as diplomatic ones and two of them on emperor, but all of them had basically no research until education other than the beeline to literature (I think I may have researched ceremonial burial and/or pottery for the Mayan and Byzantine games... maybe I took the philosophy-literature slingshot... I don't recall). I think I "took" one or two cities on cultural flips in the Mayan game. In the saved Byzantine game that didn't really happen. In the French game I actually *lost* a city on a flip. In my fourth or so attempt through COTM 48 I took one city... and it gave me something like 9 more science beakers. Also, check Drakan's "deity builder" strategy article here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=122419... He indicates he didn't take territory for some games. He just founded cities in the wake of AI razings.

[Even on demigod, if you want an early spaceship launch, you have to do most of the Middle Age Research and almost all the Industrial Age and Modern Age research yourself.]

The second part, yes. The first part... no. Just give away the GL and then take it back.

[For a successful space game, you should be able to do 4 turn research throughout the Industrial and Modern Ages without hospitals.]

Do you mean to say that you've succesfully researched Industralization at higher levels in 4 turns between say 1100-1200 (maybe earlier... I don't recall)??? Edit that... I researched Industralization in 750 in the COTM 48 game. I had a finish date of 1305 in the Mayan game... so I'll guess something like 1000 or 1100 for Industralization. Probably about the same time for the France game and the Emperor Byzantine game.

Aabraxan,

[Relying on the GLib to offset the disadvantages of CxxxxC is a 600-shield gamble. If I miss it, I get the "Awfully-Expensive-&-Not-So-Great Library."]

Good point, and here piling in workers, focus on developing the cultural city, and though not necessary really... perhaps succsefully trading for masonry (trickier to do on Deity... though conceivable if you have mass regicide enabled on a pangea map and start as commerical or agricultural), and having experience with the 20k games can help A LOT (see T-hawk's article). I use to play almost all 20k games... so I guess that helps, mostly all on monarch and 2 good ones on Emperor so far.

The screenshot looks impressive... so I'll have to look more into those specialist farms I guess. But, when I look into it more closely I see the date as 1525. From my experience I'd have researched or traded for (I focus on the bottom part of the Industrial tech tree until I at least get scientific method... and sometimes sell industralization) The Corporation quite a few centuries earlier (even with the GL off before education)... so do you ever have that sort of science power around say 900 or 1000 (by all means check the finish dates for those saves above and try and estimate when I researched The Corporation to check my guess here... by all means)? Maybe you do... I don't know.

[At Demi-God with Raging barbs, there's a good chance that I'd never make it out of the Ancient Age, much less launch the SS faster than you.]

I basically didn't make it out of the ancient age SEVERAL times, but I learned how to do it. The thing about specialist farms comes as that they DO have their uses absolutely. But, how much science does a semi-distant city *extremely* corrupt city that can become a decently uncorrupt city with a cash-rushed courthouse and police station fare *in science* over time vs. a specialist farm? Check my COTM48 save and sell the courthouses and police stations (and libraries and universities... specialist farms can't reap the benefits of those from my understanding of them) in my towns near the northeastern English city. Then consider which style does better in the mid-to-late industrial ages and the modern age. Also, my "challenge" lay as one for people who think C2C necessarily works better for all conditions. But...

Checking my saves it seems I don't really use C4C. It doesn't look like C2C fits better either. It looks more like I use C3C or cxxxc... This doesn't come as the general pattern I have in mind though. I think of cxxxxc as the basic plan. But, if I see a river or luxury or a nice coast or don't want to settle on a mountain or hill for later production I plop down where I think appropriate. I'd also say that I *tend to* underspace my cities with a general C4C pattern than overspace, and the result comes out more like C3C than C4C... at least from looking at my saves. When I do overspace (at least lately), I sometimes found "camp towns" which produce nothing but units and workers and I may abandon later on (I didn't have these towns in COTM48).

But, maybe this doesn't get at the essence of the discussion. If you check my saves, my cities do become metros and I know I generally want as many metros as possible. So, maybe we more mean to discuss metros (gets a hospital ASAP and can usually top somehting like size 15 and generally have their "best days" in the industrial/modern eras) vs. cities (gets a hospital only in certain situations, topping size 12 comes as rare enough and has its "best days" in the medieval/ancient era).

 

Sorry, for butting in a little ...

Of course you can do something like that. But your overall finish date will suffer greatly.

Even on Deity I have found the GLib only useful for the first influx of techs up to and including Education; while after that taking things into your own hands research-wise results in much faster progression trough the tech tree.

 

[Of course you can do something like that. But your overall finish date will suffer greatly.]

I'd like to see evidence to back this up. I keep hearing it... but I see no evidence. Maybe you speak rightly... but I need more than say-so. I present my evidence that you can actually get a faster finish date as my finish date for COTM48 vs. what people have posted in the spoiler forum there. Also, notice how having the extra gold the GL library provided helped me to get Industralization faster than the other player who indicated how long it took them to research Industralization in my fourth or so attempt through COTM48... and no doubt having that extra gold from the GL speeded up my research thereafter. Maybe that all comes as some sort of weird exception, I'll admit. Still, please try and show that using the GL slows down one's finish date or explain to me how it slows things down on say Demi-God or Deity for the high middle ages. Those high medieval techs hardly seem to cost that much and the AIs rate the optional techs lower than most of the non-optional ones according to DaveMcW. No doubt, if one actually didn't take it back by the Industrial Ages it'll slow things down since that top part works as a slow-down of the AI tech pace. Maybe you speak correctly though... lots of useless tech for a quicker tech pace in the high middle ages. I just wish I knew of something more to back up such a claim or refute it.

 

If two nations/empires/civs have the same number of towns, say 25, it follows that Nation A that uses CXXXXC covers a much larger territory and its towns/cities are farther apart and the outlying parts more distant from the capital than Nation B, which uses CXXC.

If these 25 cities are placed in rings and you have three rings, the most outlying in CXXXXC would be ~15 tiles from the capital whereas the CXXC would only be 9 tiles distant.

 

@Doug.Lefenhocz - Regarding the saves you posted – Mighty Maya you are in 1300 AD and have 1 Modern Age tech. France you are in 1340 AD, have 2 Modern Age techs, and may not be able to research other Modern Age techs in 4 turns (you may be able to, but your save isn’t set it to do it right now). Byzantina, you are at 1345 AD and still need 3 Industrial Age techs to advance. In each of them, you are probably at least 40 turns from completion of the spaceship. As Lord Emsworth mentioned, you certainly can win a space race using your strategies, but your dates are not what would be considered very fast in competitive play.

The last COTM I played as a space race was COTM 42. It is also Emperor level, but it was as the Portuguese. My spaceship was launched in 1290 AD. Here are the spoilers:

Ancient Age
Middle Ages
Industrial and Modern Ages

 

I don't know off the top of my head if I've still got my 900 AD or 1000 AD saves from that game but I doubt it. If I remember correctly, by 900 or 1000, I was still trying to rid my continent of other civs. So, no, I wouldn't have had that kind of research power by 1000. But I was setting them up by then and they were probably busy producing workers/settlers/artillery during that period. Also bear in mind that the screenshot comes from a Monarch level game, so trading wasn't as lucrative as (I hear) you'll find at Demigod and above.

I suspect that they fare well. Corruption has no impact on food or specialist output.

I'm not a mathematician, but doing some quick "back of the envelope" math;

If you've got a size 5 city, with 2 farmers and 3 specialists, 90% corrupt:
Cost:
30 shields +2 pop for the settler
Time to grow to size 5

Return:
1 uncorrupted gpt
1 uncorrupted spt
9 bpt

If you've got a size 5 city, with 5 laborers, 90% corrupt (before improvements):
Cost:
30 shields +2 pop for the settler
Time to grow to size 5
80 shields (or cash) +1 gpt for the courthouse
160 shields (or cash) +2 gpt for the police station (is that right? I never build PSs)

Return:
(Caveat: Here's where my math gets really shaky, & I don't have a save to look at. Everyone, feel free to pull up a save and correct these numbers.)
~2-3 uncorrupted shields
~1-2 bpt
Most likely running at a deficit in gpt because of upkeep on the PS and the courthouse.

You are correct. Specialist output doesn't go through the various multiplier buildings.

Fair enough, Pyrrhos. Now I see what you were saying.

 

Thanks Chamnix! I think there may still exist *some* (though possibly very few) exceptions where my sorts of strategies work out as faster (perhaps like COTM48... an admittedly irregular sort of map). But, for the most part it looks you speak rightly. Nice evidence. Interestingly enough though, I think your saves almost make a sort of argument for smallpox (or ICS) or something close to smallpox instead of C2C... "we love the leader days" come easier to reduce corruption and you use TONS of specialists for research and/or cash. Does anyone here want to try and argue for smallpox?

 

@Chamnix

As I said before you produced good evidence that having more smaller cities (smallpox or C2C) along with not necessarily relying on the GL can produce a greater science output. However... once I thought about it I realized you had wars with the Iroquois and the Americans. Will "building small" work better than "building metros" for games where you fight no wars, only fight a defensive war since you got attacked, or only fight a GA war to trigger your golden age? I don't know myself.

@Aabraxan

I think meisen right when he calls your argument a straw-man. I wouldn't agree with meisen in comparing a full-blown "outer metro" (as opposed to "inner metros" near the core) to a specialist farm entirely. For a fuller analysis we have to compare an "outer metro" to a specialist farm over the entire time of the game... or at least from the industrial age to the modern age. That does make things tricky to evaluate. Sure, a specialist farm won't eat gold in upkeep like an "outer metro" will... but from my, perhaps limited, experience that even on Monarch if you have a tech lead in the industrial age you can make a decent profit from trading even if you have your science rate at 100% on a standard sized map with the maximum number of opponents.

 

The wasn't really necessary, meisen. In spite of your apparent opinion of me, I wasn't trying to mislead anyone.

Actually, you have a good point, though I think you missed the mark slightly.

Yeah, that's true. I should have compared a larger city to a few science farms.

As I stated above, I think you're a little off, but you're close. I think the most accurate comparison would probably be the fully outfitted metro and several (maybe 5-6?) science farms, including tiles worked. If that comparison is to be run, though, I think we'd need to start with comparable pre-improvement corruption.

 

Not in my games. I raze lots of enemy cities. The few that I do capture, I starve down to size one. Probably 80% of my science farms are founded using a settler that I built. Usually, the only enemy cities that I keep: (1) contain a Great Wonder that I want; or (2) are captured when that civ is already in its death throes.