couple of questions

[elonin]

How long does it take for court houses and markets to start affecting their cities? I've just noticed that these improvements don't affect on the turn they are produced.

Also, how much spacing should I put between cities? For what ever reason the ai tends to cram cities right next to each other.

 

[Bartleby]

Welcome to CFC.
Courthouses and markets should take effect immediately as far as I'm aware; it could be that your cities are very corrupt so the effect is very small?

Most people space their cities two to three tiles apart, four at the most--if you have more space between your cities then you're wasting tiles. As a general rule you should try to get your citizens to work every tile within your borders as quickly as you can. Think about it this way: if you use wide city spacing you have to wait for hospitals, which means a lot of unused potential for a lot of the game.

 

[vmxa]

How long does it take for court houses and markets to start affecting their cities? I've just noticed that these improvements don't affect on the turn they are produced.

Also, how much spacing should I put between cities? For what ever reason the ai tends to cram cities right next to each other.

I would not say they cram town next to each other, if anything they space them too far apart. Yes they will stick a few too close, but that is not the norm.

The court and or market will have no real effect in a totally corrupt town and should not get them. Example, town is making 7 shields, but net 1 and 1 gold.

Courts are not my thing and I seldom build them. If you are in Republic they could be useful in towns that are partially corrupt. If they are not going to save you more than 2 gold, they are not worth having.

Markets are different in that they have the ability to act as a multiplier for lux. So the corruption is not going to affect that aspect. IOW the boost to income is still not going to occur in a totally corrupt town from a market.

However, if you have 3 or more lux the extra content faces will still apply, without regard to corruption.

Now you just have to evaluate, if that is important to you enough to build the market. If you are going to farm there and have 3 or more lux, you probably do not need the market anyway. You always should evaluate a structure and not just use a rule of thumb.

 

[elonin]

Sounds like I wasn't clear about city spacing. I'm trying to learn to use resources efficiently but without having the having production squares contested by two cities. Also, this would eliminate some of the distance corruption without regard to corruption based on number of cities (can't remember if there is a better name). I've also read about a spacing strategy of CxxxC. When using this method are only 1/2 of the cities getting temples?

The court/market place question had mostly to do with distance from capitol corruption. Under republic I had cities that were only producing one shield after corruption. In an effort to get these cities going I built court houses to no avail. Not sure where I read it but according to some article stating that getting the city to celebrate the "we love the king day" would overcome the corruption.

I have also noticed that court house didn't have affect right after construction (wasted coins/shields didn't change) and the luxury effect from market places didn't change number of entertainers either.

Is there a consensus about building cities in vast stretches of useless tiles? If a city would be on entirely desert or mountain tiles. Jungle would also take some thought since so much work is required.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Sounds like I wasn't clear about city spacing. I'm trying to learn to use resources efficiently but without having the having production squares contested by two cities. Also, this would eliminate some of the distance corruption without regard to corruption based on number of cities (can't remember if there is a better name). I've also read about a spacing strategy of CxxxC. When using this method are only 1/2 of the cities getting temples?

The court/market place question had mostly to do with distance from capitol corruption. Under republic I had cities that were only producing one shield after corruption. In an effort to get these cities going I built court houses to no avail. Not sure where I read it but according to some article stating that getting the city to celebrate the "we love the king day" would overcome the corruption.

I have also noticed that court house didn't have affect right after construction (wasted coins/shields didn't change) and the luxury effect from market places didn't change number of entertainers either.

Is there a consensus about building cities in vast stretches of useless tiles? If a city would be on entirely desert or mountain tiles. Jungle would also take some thought since so much work is required.

If the town is totally corrupt, courthouses don't help. Courthouses work best in partially corrupt towns. There's a cap on corruption - I think it's about 90%. Therefore if a town is, say, 95% corrupt, it only shows 90%. Courthouse reduces corruption to 90%, it still shows 90% and you pay the maintenance. WLKD does reduce corruption, but totally corrupt towns are just for scientists.

If the court house didn't effect corruption, the town was too corrupt. Market places make unjappy citizens content (or, if no unhappy, make content citizens happy) if you have more than two luxuries. It does this automatically, not by increasing the number of entertainers. Most players use entertainers very sparingly.

If the city would be entirely mountains (haven't seen that) I wouldn't build the city. Deserts will be useless until railroads - EXCEPTION: Agricultural Civs do just fine with deserts if they can be irrigated. As you noted, jungles aren't optimal but will eventually be worthwhile if you have enough workers.

 

[vmxa]

I do not spend any time thinking about corruption. I could careless about it. I will make as many towns as I can and only the core will be of interest to me. If I see they are making a bunch of shields and are about 50% corrupt I will slot in a court, when I can.

They do not reduce corruption all that much. I probably will not be making anything in towns more corrupt than 50-60%, so I do not are if it is 70/80/90 or 100%. Just going to make it a farm.

I already said that a totally corrupt town does not get a court. It may get a market, if it will allow me to have several extra scientist. The market will not add gold to the net as the town is 100% corrupt.

WLTKD is of no interest to me, never pay it any attention. I do not want that much happiness, would rather spend the shields on guns. WLTKD can reduce corruption a little, not going to turn that 100% corrupt into an oasis. It is not cost effective.

CxxxC means some tiles are dead for most of the game, till you get Hospitals, if you do get them and build them. I do not research Sanitation and would not make many Hospitals, should I get the tech. You can do it, I don't.

Vast stretches? Well I fill in all the land I can as more towns means more unit support, more specialist. I take those tundra towns and make the citizen a specialist and it does not grow. The same for deserts.

Jungles are different as the tiles can be cleared. They may then become a farm. Clearing them late in the game is a snap as I will have scores, if not hundreds of slaves. Earlier, the jungle towns sit till I can get to them.

Land I fill is land they don't fill and I do not have to come along and capture it.

 

[elonin]

Seems my whole way of doing things was completely wrong headed. Thanks very much.

 

[RFHolloway]

be aware that Vmxa (from what I have seen on GOTM) is an extremely experienced warmonger who typically builds nothing much but fast units (cavalry, knights & horsemen) and barracks, and sees everything in terms of would I rather have this market, or an extra 1.X units. It works for him, but it may not be the way that you play. It is however a useful challenge on thinking.

Three questions you should always be asking

1) How am I going to win the game (military/tech/culture)
2) what am I trying to do now that will help me achieve this (expand as fast as possible, get more territory, build more science/culture production capability)
3) does this particular decision help achieve the answer to question 2

As Steven Regdrave would have it "Does it make the boat go faster?"

 

[elonin]

I've found from reading this forum and guides that advice is contingent on play style. I'm a bit more of a peace monger and tend to get culture victories, but expansion seems good for everyone. One thing that I've noticed that may be so elementary is that playing germans has an advantage as a peacemonger. Playing Germans I found that no one demanded tribute. This was on warlord so may not apply to higher difficulties.

Also how important is the ring city building strategy? For example would you break that to cut off a choke point? For a resource?

 

[vmxa]

Pretty much no one should demand on Warlord, regardless of civ. They are just too weak. You should be fine at least up to emperor.

 

[MysteryX]

I usually play a peaceful style on Monarch level. I try to space out cities such that there is not too much footprint overlap. It works for me, because my game strategies usually don't involve the quick wins, and I do plan to have and use hospitals.

Still, it is better to have overlap than to have wasted tiles. Every tile in your territory should be working for you, if possible.

Plan your cities based not on using the full footprint, but based on which tiles they need to achieve your goals. How many shields of production do I want this city to have in the endgame? The answer is not as many as possible; excess gets wasted. Then, how much population do you need to support the production? Again, you don't want as much population as possible,just enough to support the production. I usually have 13-20 in my core cities; 13 gets me the defensive bonus of a metropolis, and you never need more than 20 to work a full city footprint.

From what I have observed with the AI, city placement is not so much a matter of intentionally cramming cities together. In the middle of a land mass with resources evenly distributed, the AI may do a lot of spacing. Things get crammed together when terrain makes it hard to space the cities, or when certain resources get clumped together (the AI likes to plop cities down right on top of resources), or in the latter stages of city placement when the AI is trying to squeeze out every last remaining tile.

I would definitely not hesitate to break the ring to plant a city at an important choke point or to get a vital resource. Both of those things are probably more important to you in the long run than the corruption savings of the ring. For me, since I'm playing peaceful most of the game, a choke point is vital so that I don't have to build a huge army to defend my country. Getting the extra resource depends on the resource; if it's a luxury or strategic I don't have, it's defintely worth getting. Even if it's a second or third source of a strategic or a luxury, it gives me something to trade.

 

[elonin]

I've been in the odd situation of having been demanded on the easiest setting. That happened near the end of the expansion phase. Was also pushing things with diplomacy, though not to the extent of violating deals.

 

[vmxa]

A demand is just letting you know they see you have weak. This is hard to avoid early in Demi or higher and can happen at Emperor, but you should be able to tell them to stuff it.

Below that you are doing something wrong, namely making too many spears or not enough units at all. I won't say you cannot draw a horrible start and benext to Bismark and get a demand at Warlord, but even then I would say they cannot hurt you.

 

[elonin]

Fair enough. Likely not making enough military units in the first place.

 

[Ataxerxes]

I've been in the odd situation of having been demanded on the easiest setting. That happened near the end of the expansion phase. Was also pushing things with diplomacy, though not to the extent of violating deals.

Expanding a bit on Vmxa, who's a lot better than I am.

If they're demanding on the easiest setting and can hurt you, something is terribly wrong. part of the problem could be underexpansion, as # of cities count. Look at military advisor, if he says your military is weak compared to a neighbor they will demand or consider you a target. Some people coming from IV have this problem. In IV diplomacy matters more but the AI isn't as ruthless. You can be weak in IV and get along through diplomacy. In 3 a weak military means you should expect problems.

One tip - the AI looks at your military compared to yours with an anamoly. It respects attack points a lot more than defensive points - in other words, an Archer intimidates more than a Spearman (another reason not to build spears usually). My expansion phase doesn't really end. The AI is so unreasonable in trading luxuries and resources that I usually find it better to take it by force. In Civ3, the more cities you have the better.

See if you can find Vmxa's (I always want to misspell his name) sample game at Regent. Although he feels it could have been better, it will show you how a good player approaches the lower levels.