Does City Planning Actually Matter?

[MarigoldRan]

Or should you just ICS?

Show me that you can do better (T1, T25, T100 save provided).

[Good map and civ to compare ICS vs a more "planned" approach to district placement. You can do both on this map. My save is the ICS approach]

 

[bbbt]

I'm not sure I get the question, they aren't really mutually exclusive. City planning is just a time commitment so to speak. If your goal is fastest win tine, you should do both for max efficiency.

If you don't care and are just looking to win, ICS is usually enough as the game isn't that challenging to the point that the margin usually matters. Putting a district in the highest adjacency when you can built it is usually enough.

If you goal is wonder-whoring to the max, that probably does require city planning, especially for things like Zimbabwe or Big Ben.

 

[Ziad]

Depends. If you go for smaller empires, then yes. If you go for bigger ones, then no.

Regardless, it's almost always better if you actually have some plan, particularly in the early game when individual choices have bigger returns of investment.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Yes it does matter, however it only matters if you plan in an appropriate way, i.e., considering more of instant value instead of meaningless questions like "if I have the city grow to 16 population and spent 2000 hammers building all those districts, how much adjacency I'll get".

 

[MarigoldRan]

Feel free to take a look @ that save and critique it. The map is an easy win. The issue is "but can I do better?"

 

[Pietato]

Of course it matters. Do both; it is not hard.

 

[Cerilis]

well city planning is mostly what makes the game fun for me, so...

yes?

 

[MarigoldRan]

But does it actually matter for winning the game/ winning the game with the fastest time?

As long as you spam cities as close to one another as possible, you're guaranteed decent adjacencies at some point.

 

[Equilin]

But does it actually matter for winning the game/ winning the game with the fastest time?

I think you should put that in the OP post to make things clearer (yes, "do better" is not clear enough).

 

[Fluphen Azine]

I think it matters more if you are playing peaceful compared to warmongering.

Another question for you all is what districts do you build first or concentrate on?

What is the best 3 or 4 districts to build in your 10 pop cities?
I seem to start with Encampment or Campus first unless I am going Holy Site.
However, as stated before are Holy Sites really worth the investment?

I tend to focus more on Commercial Hubs and the Campus but finding out I don't need as many as I once thought if you push for War more and more.

 

[GrumboMumbo]

I don't think you have asked the question very well, but I think this kind of thread is actually quite healthy. Obviously more planning/city micro is always better than very little or none. But I think the real question you are trying to ask is:

Could I have played this game with a different playstyle other than just Monumentality/Golden Age/ICS...and still been competitive with this playthrough?

I am also interested to know the answer to this question, because having different ways to play, imo is core to this game being interesting. That essentially is 'Grand Strategy' and I think it might be something that is missing in civ6 (something I have talked about in more depth in other threads)

Recently I have been playing through the same game multiple times, to try and find if different playstyles can be comparable/competitive with each other. So I will try and play through this game with a different gameplan and I will report back (I think it would be great if others do the same too).

Usually I play on Online Speed, and I think the first 100 turns of a Standard speed game probably isn't a large enough sample of time to answer the 'Does Grand Strategy Exist in Civ6?' question, which if I am reading you correctly, might make a better thread title?? Or perhaps I am talking out of my rear end...

 

[Linklite]

Newb question, what's ICS?

 

[criZp]

infinite city spam

 

[Laurana Kanan]

Newb question, what's ICS?

Infinite City Sprawl

 

[GrumboMumbo]

So I played the first 100 turns. I tried to go for fewer cities, focused on Religion/Faith/Culture more than it looks like you did @MarigoldRan However you have lots more cities and perhaps that sets you up for a stronger late game. But I would say it is very hard to say who is doing 'Better', difficult after just 100 turns I guess. I purposely went for only 3 cities in an attempt to provide a contrast with the ICS approach you took.

Perhaps somebody more experienced could weigh in...Are the two different saves at least comparable in power level? I think maybe they are, but I'm not sure. I think going for Religion is an uphill battle on deity. Personally I prefer to play games against my friends when possible (usually a mix of AI and human players on lower difficulty) The AI just acts as placeholders in our games mostly.

I could talk more about what I did (planning wise) and screenshots to compare, but I will leave it for now because maybe others don't want the game spoiled? Idk...

 

[MarigoldRan]

Thoughts, anyone else?

 

[fantsu]

Pushing out settlers bit early compared to bit late doesnt really punish much at all in civ6?

I play on small maps with water, so the planning is much easier. On huge pangea I would probably examine more of the surroundings first to find the best outcome forward settles to pin the most annoying AI down.

I dont think there is one clear answer to this.