[NFP] City-States Elimination Thread

[Chefofrats]

Antananarivo [10] (9+1) - It's my favourite City State, for reasons stated by me and others many times above.
Auckland [14]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [13]
Nan Madol [1]
Rapa Nui [3] (6-3) - I just don't get the love for this one. You have to spam them to make a real difference, but that means less mines on volcanic soil and other improvements elsewhere, leading to lower production, hurting overall performance.
Yerevan [17]
Zanzibar [12]

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [11] 14-3 Even with the buffs Coastal cities are poor. GMs are better than GAs. It's a nice bonus but out of place on this list.
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [13]
Nan Madol [1]
Rapa Nui [3]
Yerevan [17] I guess people have different play styles, a non religion game for me is like 1 in a 100. It helps with all victory types e.g. Crusade for Domination.
Zanzibar [13] 12 +1 Powerful bonus that only needs the envoys to trigger.

 

[TCBB]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8] (11-3) I think it’s end of the line for Auckland. As useful as it may be, it’s obviously bound to the coast, which makes it the most situational. Apart from Nan Madol which is already on the way out, all the other options can apply, in some way or another, to every one of your cities regardless of map types.
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [13]
Nan Madol [1]
Rapa Nui [3]
Yerevan [18] (17+1) @JJOne, we’ve explained many times that ‘power’ does NOT mean necessarily equate to ‘having an impact on multiple victory conditions’; it can also mean ‘having a meaningful impact on ONE victory condition’. Yerevan provides more of an impact on one condition than any other city-state; indeed, it is SO powerful that it creates the fastest victories in the entirety of Civ 6. Secondly, it’s a falsehood that Yerevan only applies to religious victory. For example, if you’re going for a relic & martyr tourism victory, Yerevan is way more reliable (and quicker) than rushing Mont St Michel. Or if you’re going for a domination & crusade victory, Yerevan speeds up the process of converting your nearby cities by tenfold. And as @bengalryan9 pointed out, Yerevan is incredibly powerful in ANY game where you pick up a religion, even if your goal is science, culture, diplomacy, or domination victory, because it lets you defend your territory so much easier: if you have Yerevan, you can pick Debater on every apostle you want, meaning that you are 100% safe from the inevitable onslaught of AI apostles.
Zanzibar [13]

 

[Drivingrevilo]

Very interesting to see how well the cultural city-states performed. Vilnius and Mohenjo Daro were eliminated fast, but then there was a massive gap before Caguana. Reflects how powerful it is to have any boost to early-game culture.

Also interesting to see how quickly the militaristic city-states tumbled. They were doing so well collectively, but they all fell at once. I guess must show that military bonuses are good up to a point, but since domination is pretty easy anyway they’re not hugely impactful overall.

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [13]
Nan Madol [1]
Rapa Nui [0] Eliminated. I’ve got more use out of Nan Madol than Moai in the past, so I’ll eliminate Rapa Nui first. Good improvement, but requires a fair amount of builder charges to make.
Yerevan [19] (18+1) to bring it equal to Bologna. A worthy top 2.
Zanzibar [13]

 

[monikernemo]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [13]
Nan Madol [2] (1+1)
Last hurrah for Nan Madol. Just a reminder that Nan Madol's bonus also applies to lakes, so your aqueduct gives you +2 culture, which can be satisfying.
Rapa Nui [3]
Yerevan [16] (19 - 3)
I think it is equally valid to rank city states based on its impact on multiple victory conditions as much as its effect on a particular victory type.
I think it is only fair that some of us can judge Yerevan based on this criteria since we have done the same for other CSes as well.
Heck, La Venta has a good impact on Culture Vic (providing tourism and faith per tile) but people just think that the improvement is not good enough.

Some counterarguments against the love for Yerevan:
(1) Most fast RVs (check out Religious vic HOF) do not in anyway rely heavily on Yerevan and are won by missionary spreading religion, so to some extent this speaks about the real impact of Yerevan in fast RVs.

(2a) If you are going for a relic-based tourism game, you will want to build Mont St Michel anyways. It just that with Yerevan, you can have Matyr apostles more quickly but of course, the number of relics you have are capped at the number of slots you have to store them so there is absolutely no reason to not to go for the Mont St Michel anyways. This, I argue, diminishes the effectiveness of Yerevan.

(2b) By no means is Mont St Michel less consistent than Yerevan; you can lose suzerainity of Yerevan but its hardly the case that you can lose a city with Mont St Michel.
Mont St Michel is hardly prioritised by the AI anyways. Obviously, if you want to get Mont St Michel, you have to plan for it and chop it out asap!

(3) Like what is pointed out by the OP, Yerevan is powerful if you pick up a religion or build holy sites, so it is conditional on your game plan.
Obviously, if you dont go for a religion, then chances are you dont build holy sites, and have less faith income thus apostles becomes alot less relevant to your games and so is Yerevan.
So obviously, if your play style or the civilisation's play style is just more efficient not revolving going for a religion, we can all agree that Yerevan is just garbage for that civ.

(4) There is a easy way to defend against AI apostles, just buy a few gurus and watch the AI apostles suicide to your gurus. Or launch an inquisition. There is no need to get debater just to defend against the spread of AI religion.

(5) If I have a faith-based domination game, do I want to spend 400 faith for apostles, or do I want to use my faith to purchase more military units? do I want to spend 400 faith to spread crusade, or do I want to plug in the +4 CS to civs of other religion card and use the remaining faith to buy military units at the front line?
Zanzibar [13]

 

[JhGf_123]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [10] (13-3) Great improvement, but less impactful than the rest. Housing & amenities only take you so far.
Nan Madol [2]
Yerevan [17] (16+1) Niche arguments for niche situations ignore the most obvious point, that it’s bloody powerful for your apostles to pick any promotion.
Zanzibar [13]

 

[kaspergm]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [10]
Nan Madol [2]
Yerevan [18] (17+1) Super powerful and gives you something you can't actually get by other means, because of the non-random nature of how the apostle promotions work.
Zanzibar [10] (13-3) All the remaining ones are good, I'm just not sure this is better than Antananarivo or Auckland.

 

[Solver]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [10]
Nan Madol ELIMINATED (2-3) It's not even close to any other CS that remains. Yes, it can also turn Aqueducts, which are normally a wasted tile, into a +2 culture tile, but overall it's too situational, too map dependent. A finish in the #7 spot is very respectable but it's time to go.
Yerevan [19] (18 + 1) I am surprised this is not the runaway leader. Yes, I'm voting based on effect for one victory condition, not across multiple. Yes, you can already get fast religious victories, but Yerevan speeds them up. Yes, of course it doesn't do much if you haven't founded a religion, then it only has very niche uses. But the overall point remains the same, this suzerainty bonus is the most powerful one in the game, with a greater effect than anything else.
Zanzibar [10]

 

[ZarduStar]

Antananarivo [10]
Auckland [8]
Bologna [20] (19+1) One of my favourites for sure. GPs are good for any victory types.
Cahokia [7] (10-3) I really like this bonus but it's not as impactful as the rest. I don't think it should be in the top 5.
Yerevan [19]
Zanzibar [10]

 

[Leucarum]

Antananarivo [11] (10+1) One of the biggest effects you can get from a CS.
Auckland [8]
Bologna [17] (20-3) A lot less opportunity cost than divine spark for sure. Good but I'm not sure it's runaway winner good...
Cahokia [7]
Yerevan [19]
Zanzibar [10]

 

[bengalryan9]

Antananarivo [8] (11-3) Still strikes me as more of a "win more" bonus than something that's actually going to change the tide of the game.
Auckland [8]
Bologna [17] Even if I had Divine Spark I'd still want to see Bologna in the game...
Cahokia [7]
Yerevan [20] (19+1) There are ways for me to increase my culture output. There are ways for me to increase city production, even in coastal cities. There are ways for me to increase the amount of great people points my districts make. There are ways for me to increase food or gold in a city. There are ways for me to get amenities I need. Some of these ways may take more work than others, but I have control over all of these things to some extent. There is literally no way I can do what Yerevan can do without Yerevan. It's the *only* way you can choose which apostle promotions you take in the entire game. That's HUGE, and it has far more applications than just religious victory.
Zanzibar [10]

 

[hhhhhh]

Now I don't know what to upvote.

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [9] (8 + 1) Can be very helpful if you get it early-mid game and have lake/sea tiles.
Bologna [17]
Cahokia [7]
Yerevan [17] (20 - 3) Yeah I know this will be upvoted again and again and again. Some people love it. But it's a boring bonus.
Zanzibar [10]

 

[CrabHelmet]

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [9]
Bologna [17]
Cahokia [7]
Yerevan [18] (17+1) - I didn't want to have to vote for Yerevan again, but it drew level with Bologna and I'm already down-voting Zanzibar...
Zanzibar [7] (10-3) - I think people are being really inconsistent here. Geneva was booted because the main value comes from the AI being dumb and not just DoWing to void it. Equally, Zanzibar's main benefit is not the Amenities (who is seriously limited by Amenities in Civ VI?), but the fact the AI will pay waaaaay too much to access those Amenities. In an MP game Zanzibar is basically worthless - other players aren't going to give you that gold, and if you become dependent on Zanzibar's Amenities, you have to commit to defending it or get put in a sticky situation when it gets taken out. I'd really like someone to explain to make how Zanzibar gets to stick around when Geneva got the boot. Either Zanzibar needs to go or Geneva should still be here, and I'm opting for the former.

EDIT: I am absolutely agreed as well with @Francel 's view on Zanzibar below. Just not seeing it as that amazing, sorry. Cahokia is slightly slower to come online than Zanzibar but if anything is better because once built the benefits can never be taken away, meaning you don't need to contest for Cahokia all game long and can put envoys towards other stuff.

 

[kryat]

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [9]
Bologna [18] (17+1) Great people are awesome in every victory type.
Cahokia [7]
Yerevan [15] (18-3) I do t know whether it’s a boring bonus or not, but it’s not extremely useful in every game. Yes, if you’re playing a Korea or Sweden or whatever you could build holy sites and use apostles as busy work, but that requires using up district slots to build holy sites and spending on apostles (which are very expensive). They’re not going to affect your non-religious victory game as much as a CH or IZ. And diplomatic games want pagodas, not necessarily spreading the religion. There’s even religious-driven games for other victory types where Yerevan isn’t overly useful, like with Ethiopia or Spain. It’s a worthy #2, but not higher.
Zanzibar [7]

 

[Jewelrunna]

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [9]
Bologna [18]
Cahokia [4] (7 - 3): While Cahokia Mounds are very good, they require the most hoops to jump through compared to the other five (which simply reward you for playing the game as normal). To really get the most out of the Cahokia Mounds, you first have to get to Feudalism, and then socket these things in between your districts in a non-intrusive way. Otherwise, you get a single amenity (for most of the game) and a single housing (for most of the game), plus some gold. That's really good, yes, but is it that much better than the other City-State tile improvements? Compare that to Zanzibar's buttload of amenities, or Auckland simply making all your coastal cities amazing. I just don't see the Cahokia hype, even though I'm happy to have them in most of my games.
Yerevan [15]
Zanzibar [8] (7 + 1): Zanzibar gives you the most bang for your buck out of all the suzerainty bonuses left, I feel. Myself and others have talked a lot about how much utility Zanzibar has, but one thing I'd like to touch on is how valuable amenities are. Sure, managing amenities isn't much of a task, but essentially not having to worry about them for the rest of the game is a huge weight off a player's shoulders. But on top of that, getting Zanzibar essentially means most of your cities are going to casually be sitting at Ecstatic, which means you will have larger and better cities (20% to growth and 10% to all non-food yields isn't a joke). Getting that, plus all of the other benefits we've mentioned, from pretty much just maintaining Suzerainty over Zanzibar is insane. Vote for Zanzibar.

I'd also really quickly like to touch on the subject of Yerevan. Yes, Yerevan is the single best City-State in the game for a Religious Victory, and there's probably not a single City-State that helps a specific victory condition more than Yerevan. That alone I think should guarantee them a spot in the top five. With that said, Yerevan isn't much use at all if you're going for any other victory type. If I'm playing a Religious game and I see Yerevan, I will break my neck to get Suzerainty over them. Otherwise, there are better spots I can dump my envoys into. All of the remaining City-States grant a huge boon to any player's game, in every game. I can't say the same for Yerevan, so I don't think they should be as high up near Bologna. That said, I chose not to downvote them today because I would still rate them in the top five over Cahokia.

 

[Francel]

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [9]
Bologna [18]
Cahokia [4]
Yerevan [16] (15+1) - Obvious number 1. This is the first one I upvoted, because I knew how strong it is for religious games. Now I realize it's even stronger than I first believed. It excels universally. Going for domination? Use crusade and super apostles - +10 combat strength is no joke. Use chaplains to heal your units, and use heathen conversion to recruit barbarians. Culture? Get them relics and monastic isolation. Religion is obvious. None of the above? Use your own debater apostles to crush any opponent attempting to win a religious victory (without going to war). This is the tip of the iceberg. No need to make the same arguments over and over. For me, it boils down to this: you can't do what Yerevan gives you any other way. You can get amenities, culture, science, gold, and other benefits provided by other city states in a number of ways. Choose your favorite. Yerevan is unique. If you want 4-5 debater apostles to form an unstoppable force of theologians, you need Yerevan. You want to insta-convert large ai cities? You need Yerevan.
Zanzibar [5] (8-3) - I haven't heard any persuasive arguments as to why this is top tier. In my games, I usually run a large amenity surplus without Zanzibar. Let's pretend though that these extra amenities do make a difference, and my city goes from being content to happy, or from happy to ecstatic. Wow, all of a sudden my cities are growing 10% more and earning 5% more food. Oh wait, not all cities, only a few (six cities get 2 at most, 12 get 1 at most). Hardly a game changer, especially since people are saying food and growth aren't limiting factors. Milta was taken out early, and that gives an extra 15% growth rate. I've never run negative amenities, but even if it did take a city out of negative, it would at most improve city yields by 5%. Amenities do not win games. Amenities do not provide culture, science, production, or faith. Only a couple civs receive any special benefit - Scotland and Aztecs come to mind. For the rest, I am scratching my head as to why people think this is so good. I have learned a lot in the elimination threads since joining the forums, but nothing so far has convinced me Zanzibar should be top 10 let alone top 5.

Edit: To the poster above, respectfully, I just don't get why Zanzibar is better than Cahokia. Cahokia can give every city 2 amenities (and housing, and gold), not just 1-2 to 6-12 cities. Yes, you need a builder charge, but it's a robust benefit that lasts even if you lose suzerainity.

 

[CoconutTank]

Mostly just want to comment on the side dialogue regarding military city states; their bonuses can be relevant to military purposes, but science is most relevant to large scale domination (as is culture to a point). Better science translates to better military units and more choices, and being able to reasonably deploy them. There's nothing military city states can provide which tips the scale against an enemy with better science in their armies, whether that means leverage from more units that can work together, to units being outright superior in tier (and eventually formation). It's why I don't care much for military city states despite personally trending towards warmongering most often. Regardless of domination's difficulty, scientific city states are more relevant to domination than military city states are.

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [9]
Bologna [19] (18+1) Can't really go wrong with more Great People.
Cahokia [4]
Yerevan [13] (16-3) I don't know about y'all, but I'm not building a Holy Site if I can't get my own religion, in which case I'm definitely not getting Temples and Apostles. Being able to pick Apostle bonuses is great, but Apostles are very expensive to get to, and to get more of.
Zanzibar [5]

 

[JJOne]

Antananarivo [8]
Auckland [10] (9+1) If the map has any water, I always find myself having a good number of coastal cities. If not from the beginning, at the latest when I hunt some new resources after getting exploration.
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [4]
Yerevan [10] (13-3) Only half of the civs get a religion. If you don't get a religion, it becomes just as useful as Preslav.
Zanzibar [5]

 

[xaiviax]

Antananarivo [5] (8-3) For me, early game pluses and minuses trump late ones. This is weak early.
Auckland [10]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [4]
Yerevan [10]
Zanzibar [6] (5+1) Early on, this is huge. And it stays good.

 

[Josephias]

Antananarivo [5]
Auckland [10]
Bologna [19]
Cahokia [5] (4+1) While I'm not really a fan of how Cahokia Mounds look in the map, and therefore is not my first pick to use, I've to recognize they are a neat improvement.
Yerevan [10]
Zanzibar [3] (6-3) Following the thread of discussion above about Zanzibar: while it is true it provides a powerful bonus in the form of two extra amenities, it is not clear this bonus can defend it being longer. If it is for the result of the extra amenities, Buenos Aires and Muscat are already long gone. If it is for trading these luxuries out, while it is interesting, they are just two more in the pool, and exploiting AI weaknesses has been discarded by downvoting Geneva. Of course, the upfront bonus is interesting, and - if this was Civ 5 -, would have been key in helping early growth. But civ 6 is not as limiting in terms of happiness.