Capital

OceansEleven

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
82
I've never done this, ever. But has anyone ever changed their capital city? I think you build the palace and it becomes the capital, correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyone ever do this? Do you know when we/I should do this?


I'm not sure if this is allowed in the new patches or whatever. I just remember seeing 'Palace' always being an option for another city.
 
Yes you can do this but there are requirements to build a new palace, something to do with number of cities. If you go into the city screen and mouse over the palace icon in a non capital city it should tell you what is required.

The only time you may want to do it is when you capital is at one extreme of your empire so you can cut down on distance maintenance, or if you want to use bureaucracy and move your capital to either a high commerce or a high production city to get the +50% bonus.
 
Sometimes it is a good idea, but usualy I can't bear the thought to downgrade my original capital..
 
i know you can, i've seen in some succession games people doing it, but i don't do it.

When you could want to do it?
when you have expanded far from you first city, and another city would be better for lowering maintenance from distance.

I was thinking of another strat : using the bureaucracy bonus for building versailles, then move the palace. Could be useful for a cultural victory too (bonus from palace isn't huge, but often the capital doesn't need it).
 
Uhm Cabert, when you have the bureaucracy bonus it means it is your capital. When it is your capital you are unable to build Forbidden Palace or Versailles...

Capital = city with palace in it (right?)
 
voek said:
Uhm Cabert, when you have the bureaucracy bonus it means it is your capital. When it is your capital you are unable to build Forbidden Palace or Versailles...

Capital = city with palace in it (right?)

why couldn't you build versailles in your capital?
must say i never tried, but if you cannot, it's good to know it :lol:
 
Well I must admit I don't have proof, but I thought you can't build it the capital for the same reason you can't build the Forbidden Palace, since it counts as a EXTRA palace. I guess a small test should determine if it is a option. Although I still wonder of the 50% bonus for Versailles (under bureaucracy) weights against the extra hammers for moving the capital twice...
 
voek said:
Well I must admit I don't have proof, but I thought you can't build it the capital for the same reason you can't build the Forbidden Palace, since it counts as a EXTRA palace. I guess a small test should determine if it is a option. Although I still wonder of the 50% bonus for Versailles (under bureaucracy) weights against the extra hammers for moving the capital twice...
not twice!
You build versailles in your initial capital, while building the palace, which is cheaper, in the wanabee capital = less turns than building versailles in the non capital.
I must admit i never tried.
What i did was chopping for versailles in a city under revolt + pop rushing it asap (you need marble, obviously; and if the city has a forge it's better, and if the city benefits from organized religion, it's also better).
 
Of course, IF you can build Versailles in the capital you only need to build the palace once, my mistake. Too bad I can't test it right now.
 
cabert said:
Don't worry, I'll do it...any day now :lol:

You can't build Versaille or the Forbidden Palace in your capital (the city containing the palace).

It sometimes seems almost worth moving your capital e.g. when it's at a map or continent edge of a map or continent, although I have never got round to it. The cost is prohibitive and my strongest cities are usually near my starting position i.e. palace.

I would rather get a great engineer and rush a centre of government elsewhere.

Edit:) Oops wrong quote, ahh well its pretty obvious what I'm referring to.
 
JimT said:
You can't build Versaille or the Forbidden Palace in your capital (the city containing the palace).
Do you know for sure? I think so too, but Cabert seems to be convinced it can. :lol:
 
I reckon it might be a good move to shift your capital if you get a start on a peninsula with lots of fish/crabs/clams. Those cities are great to start out with (huge growth/whipping potential) but can be relatively low in hammers/commerce compared to a grassland/floodplain/rivers capital in the mid game. If you captured a good enemy capital it might be better to re-site your capital, devote your original to a GP farm and use bureaucracy in your new capital.
 
I've done it exactly once.

Was going for culture with a 12 city setup, my capital ended up not being one of my big three culture cities as it was sited at an unusually bad location that about 1/2 fresh water lake and 2/5 plains (some had ivory), rest hills.

Anyway, since my capital was actually one of my *worst* cities in that game, I built the palace at the lowest of my big 3 culture cities for the culture boost it provides.

Other than that, no, I've never relocated my capital in any civ game ever (3 or 4).
 
It makes sence in two secenarios:

1. You have settled the whole continent and you capital is on one side. Then move it to the center of the continent...and save money.

2. You have few citties and a cultural war near one of the smaler cities. Then move your capital there and use the 12 (?) culture points...:scan:

mtc
 
Or 3. Your original capital is an ideal GPF, and you don't want to waste the Bureacracy bonus. Or other reasons.
 
Back
Top Bottom