Do you ever go 'far away' for your second city?

[Sherlock]

It's good to have your 2nd city close. Better for defense, trade routes, passing workers back and forth.

And if you build the 2nd city too far away someone can come along and clobber you.

But every now and then I do it anyway. My home city was on the coast and there was another coast. So I put my 2nd city there thinking I'd do a harbor thing. It turned out I pretty much ran that continent because I was able to win that first 'we're neighbors, so now you die' war.

So where do you put your 2nd city? Close, far, in-between?

 

[Qinshihuang]

I go far away if the spot is like a choke point or something sometimes. Normally I try and place cities with 6 tiles between them. Sometimes there are more tiles between them and you then have to think about settling filler cities to keep the AI from expanding in pockets between your cities, which it will do if you're not paying close attention.

 

[Pouakai]

Sometimes. One time I found a massive hill desert with Mount Sinai, so I sent a settler over with my Liberty GE and popped Petra.

 

[whyidie]

I know its bad strategy, but I'll usually settle with some distance. If the maps right I'll found my second city pretty far away if there is a coast. 3rd city will cover the gap between capitol and 2nd city.

 

[Disgustipated]

I do it to block AI expansion. It does hurt me a bit, because I know I have to devote more to defensive units because I may provoke a war. But I prefer to block, and build my own cities, rather than go into early war. I don't like to take over cities until my infrastructure is significantly built up.

 

[OmniPotent42]

I try to settle my second city at least 6 tiles away from my capital if I know my capital is going to grow a lot. Every other city that isn't adjacent to my capital I will settle maybe 5 tiles away from the next city. If you want to defend effectively, this is the maximum distance that it's effective to have roads between cities. Just remember:

Settle city next to AI = suicide
Settle city away from AI = prolonging your murder

 

[nefloyd]

As Spain, whatever it takes to snag dem fancy ol' mountains.

 

[Mesix]

When playing Into the Renaissance scenario, the key to getting the achievements is to found your second (and third) city far away. As England, I founded one in north Africa and the other in southern Turkey. As Russia, I walked my first two settlers out to the Baltic sea from Moscow. Setting up a base camp near where you want to war later in the scenario is key to getting the scenario going. It also gives you the opportunity to build the National College in your capital right away while it is cheap.

In a standard game, I generally found 3-4 core cities relatively close together and then conquer the rest. If I find a really good spot while scouting, I may have the second city further away and the back fill the area in between with the third and fourth cities. I often try to found my second city next to a mountain with potential for a lot of food. This is a good spot for the National College since it can also have an Observatory eventually and enough food to support a big population for maximum science.

 

[Buccaneer]

Absolutely (in answering the OP question). The whole point of city placement, to me, is to grab resources, particularly luxuries. If my scout(s) find a sweet spot 10 hexes away from my capital, then that's what I try to get. If it's really good (2+ new luxuries), I do what I can to beat an opponent to it and they get it before me, then I go all covet lands on them (i.e., DoW and stuff).

 

[Tachii]

A bit too chancy on higher difficulties. The max I'm willing to go is a 6 tile road trade route, any more will need to have a fairly isolated region for me to do so. Settled Barcelona once that was like 10 tile away because of the great gibrator or whatever it was called, it was like a second capital by the time I got my third city... another 6 tiles away to snatch Petra and literally become a third capital, lol.

 

[ahawk]

A bit too chancy on higher difficulties. The max I'm willing to go is a 6 tile road trade route, any more will need to have a fairly isolated region for me to do so. Settled Barcelona once that was like 10 tile away because of the great gibrator or whatever it was called, it was like a second capital by the time I got my third city... another 6 tiles away to snatch Petra and literally become a third capital, lol.

All I had to do was see Barcelona and immediately I agreed with this for several reasons:

1) Spain can get a free settler from discovering a wonder first (on standard game pace, 500 gold from a wonder is exactly enough to purchase a settler)
2) The same wonder they discovered first can also give them double tile-yield from their UA
3) And with the right wonder, this can really give them a boost (any wonder that offers food as part of its bonus is an ideal candidate for an early, distant 2nd city).

In short, Spain is the most likely civ to tempt you to settle a far ways off for your second city, and at Emperor on down this tactic can usually give you a boost, given that the second city is at least a ways away from the nearest warmonger.

 

[Furycrab]

Sometimes. One time I found a massive hill desert with Mount Sinai, so I sent a settler over with my Liberty GE and popped Petra.

I would do that... but I've failed so many damn times even with the plan to use the Liberty GE + the fact that the AI seems to have a +1 to wanting cities with a wonder I put limits on myself for doing that and stopped rushing for cities that would be godlike with the petra , or at least I've curved my enthusiasm for it. (Deity)

Generally speaking I won't unless there is an obvious easy to defend choke point that I'm covering and I know I can eventually cover the gap with my next few cities, having that city be on a hill is almost a requirement too.

 

[Callonia]

Yes, it does happen but its always reliant on location location. Sometimes, my 2nd city is even at a island off the mainland. It just happens. It's all about location.

 

[n00bxqb]

I usually do my cities like this:


Allows for my capital to be up to 52 population (36 tiles + 16 specialists), the middle ring of cities to be up to 37 population (21 tiles + 16 specialists), and the outer ring of cities to be up to 34 population (18 tiles + 16 specialists).

Insanely easy to defend, don't have to worry about AI settling between, almost no road maintenance cost.

Of course, if it's an island, I have to switch up the strategy ...

 

[draaibaar]

When I see a nice spot with three different luxury resources a bit further away I'll certainly grab it: getting those resources quickly on line ans sell them secures me of the money I'll need to defend the city if attacked.

 

[BrokTheFanatic]

Usually close but terrain dependent. For instance, a great spot that is linked by a river to the capital is often worth taking (a long river can be effectively built along and save on roads for a long time). My goal is always 4 cities that 'claim my plot of turf'. I play on high difficulties so it has to be resource or defensive based and then I fill in with cities 5 and 6/7.

 

[GhostSalsa]

I had enough bad experiences with over-clever early settling to stop.

Sometimes (because of lux gaps in the landscape) settling close seems riskier than settling far. It turns out that is not true. Also, lux gaps might point to strategic resource reveals later on.

Actually, what I find the most frustrating and risk aspect of early settling now is coasts. It's hard to reveal all potential fish tiles fast enough and you end up settling blind. And then it turns out to be a lake with no strategic value and it eats all your great admirals forever! And then you realize this is what your parents felt like after they had you. Wait.

 

[Harv72b]

I go far away if the spot is like a choke point or something sometimes.

This. Any time you can minimize the number of directions the AI can attack from (at least until Astronomy) it's a good thing. Many of my best games came when I was able to block off a 4-6 city-sized chunk of continent by settling my 2nd & 3rd cities strategically.

Yes, you're probably going to provoke an early war by doing it, but again, you only have to worry about defending a small area. If you have a mountain range or isthmus to narrow it down to a few tiles then you can defend indefinitely with a couple archers and city walls.

 

[Cyberian]

I often find myself settling near the AI if there's a sweet spot.
It is good for halting their expansion and I don't consider it suicide as you have to build CompBows anyway for Defense against early DOWs.

Of course when settling near the AI I especially look out for rivers, hills and forests to make it easier to defend. If it is just open grassland I won't usually settle near the AI in the beginning.

But choice really depends if I go for a tall or wide empire. For tall I just pick the 4 best spots available without considering anything else. With wide I go for an early landgrab near the AI to have more total land available for settling all those cities. While I am then fighting and winning the defensive war against the AI I settle the gaps.

 

[Koiranputki]

I try to settle my second city at least 6 tiles away from my capital if I know my capital is going to grow a lot. Every other city that isn't adjacent to my capital I will settle maybe 5 tiles away from the next city. If you want to defend effectively, this is the maximum distance that it's effective to have roads between cities. Just remember:

Settle city next to AI = suicide
Settle city away from AI = prolonging your murder

Yeah..."suicide"...I'll attest to that...in one recent game, playing as Isabella at the 'king" level, I tried to settle a good Petra site with my second city..close to my capital, but closer to the Aztecs... I thought I would be able to withstand their assault which came almost instantly...I put up a valiant attempt with a couple of archers, but it was no use. Within about four turns...maybe five...they simply overwhelmed my little 1-size city... It was just too much of a provocation...
Perhaps if I had built my second city further away and built a few more archers before I tried for the Petra site, it might have improved my odds a bit.

In my current game as the Mongols, I stayed far enough away from the Celts until I had my first keshik unit, a rush-built unit as the Celtic assault approached..and a massive wave it was, but having that keshik made the difference...I held them off, and was quickly able to build two more keshiks and turned the tide decisively...and very exciting it was...

They gave up and asked for peace on highly favourable terms.... I'm now in a position where within the next couple of turns I'm going to wipe them out and it should be a cakewalk for me...