Explain to me how to play Progress

[Txurce]

What I currently do is settler spam, grab as much continuous land as possible, keep the satellite city populations low, around 3 or so, send food to the capital, grow it, build infrastructure in the satellites that address happiness, then let them grow when Progress is finished.

Once Progress is done, there's a gold per births mechanic that makes satellite city growth extremely profitable. At that point you could run a loss building a huge army and navy, letting loose your population growth and you'd be running a profit just from the births alone, especially if your cities completed granary and aqueduct before turning off avoid growth.

When playing progress the capital is special and should still be ahead of other cities (this is something I didn't realize at first) so maybe its an issue people are having. I will often get my second city to just 3 or 4 pop and work high production like mines so it produces stuff, including settlers. Sometime I rush towards forge as well, this city often becomes a military or wonder spammer. As odd as it sounds there isn't much need to prioritize growth

If you want to do well with progress I'd try the USA, he is really strong and I'd play him now because I'd say a nerf if probable.

I'm playing with them, and had already settled into a feed the capital and have someone else build the military. (The builder also built 2 early Wonders!) But it's interesting that both you and jma22tb keep growth down. I'll try it next game.

Why do you think America will be nerfed? They're fun, and strong, but don't strike me as OP.

 

[CrazyG]

I'm playing with them, and had already settled into a feed the capital and have someone else build the military. (The builder also built 2 early Wonders!) But it's interesting that both you and jma22tb keep growth down. I'll try it next game.

Why do you think America will be nerfed? They're fun, and strong, but don't strike me as OP.

I think the 25 production on purchase is too much, 20 might be more reasonable. If you find ruins with 100+ gold I think you start to snowball really hard (that's basically getting a settler via ruins). I've had 2 games where I got to Medieval and was leading in tech, policies, and population. Didn't finish due to boredom

When it comes to growth, I like to keep in mind that a citizen will eat 2 food, so growing won't actually earn net yields unless you can grow to a tile with at least 3 yields. If you play with events staying in positive happiness is also pretty valuable. I will work hills over plains and plains over grassland. Food is great up until a city hits about 4-5 population, then I find hammers are the most important yield.

 

[Txurce]

When it comes to growth, I like to keep in mind that a citizen will eat 2 food, so growing won't actually earn net yields unless you can grow to a tile with at least 3 yields. If you play with events staying in positive happiness is also pretty valuable. I will work hills over plains and plains over grassland. Food is great up until a city hits about 4-5 population, then I find hammers are the most important yield.

That would go with keeping the pop low. Do you apply your food/hammer ratio just to progress, or across the board? I ask because I have never restrcited growth in VP, but am going to give it a whirl, based on your two posts.

 

[CrazyG]

That would go with keeping the pop low. Do you apply your food/hammer ratio just to progress, or across the board? I ask because I have never restrcited growth in VP, but am going to give it a whirl, based on your two posts.

In general yes, the only exception might be tradition's capital. I've even let cities starve before. Early on every citizen is going to produce -2 food and usually -1 happiness, I keep that in mind, so effectively that forest tile without buffs is only +1 hammer. I think the big thing to realize is growth gets "cheaper" over time due to stuff like granaries and aqueducts, so its not a huge loss to wait to grow.

 

[jma22tb]

The reason I stop growth is to get more production and to more properly prepare the city in question for population growth through buildings like barracks, walls, libraries, arenas, and markets. If you have those in your cities then you crime, illiteracy, boredom, and poverty will be lower as they grow, and continuing to add more as tech unlocks new buildings keeps growth sustainable. Plus Progress gets that gold per birth. Growing satellites just because you can without having infrastructure creates too much unhappiness for my tastes, especially when I'm aiming for at least 6 cities settled, preferably 8 or more in the early game.

 

[Owlbebach]

That would go with keeping the pop low. Do you apply your food/hammer ratio just to progress, or across the board? I ask because I have never restrcited growth in VP, but am going to give it a whirl, based on your two posts.

I keep groth down too, cities should be 3 population, not 4. 3 is a magical number: with +3 and +2 from progress they will not produce unhappiness for a long time wich allows to build more cities. Also one more interesting observation - cities that are built on hill "produce" more and if they are 3 pop - they do not have unhappiness from crime.

 

[Braum]

Yeah I added the Germany bit for extra help. Keep a decent infrastructure with good production and instantly switch everything to Hanse when it's available. That 5% extra production for each city state trade route is insane. It should help you make up for any inadequacies on industry and let you see Progress mount up.

I tried this and it was the most dominant game I have played on level 5. Never tried Germany before, and it looked to be a bad start. Just me and Arabia on an island with only 2 city states. But as I explored more there were 2 islands that once borders expanded, only I could access. And they had an additional 7 city states.

I went Progress and tried Commerce pantheon for the first time. Luckily I found a few religious huts because early faith generation was pretty weak. When I founded a religion I went with Tithe which I think stacked with Commerce for a big faith boost, and zealotry for units. I went with Statecraft to help keep City State alliances, but I think this may have not complimented the Hanse which works better with trade routes to other civs. I went with Rationalism because I had no happiness issues and already had the tech lead, then Authority for the airports.

I conquered Arabia early and made them capitulate. Then I fought a united world against me and won. Venice was pretty strong with 6 cities and had wiped out the Vikings early. Then Russia, China and Constantinople were all strong. There was a stalemate mostly naval WWI. Then WW2 with unstoppable Panzers and bombers. I had a 10 tech lead, 800 gold per turn and around +30 happiness. I'll try it again to see if it was a fluke.

 

[ashendashin]

I tried this and it was the most dominant game I have played on level 5. Never tried Germany before, and it looked to be a bad start. Just me and Arabia on an island with only 2 city states. But as I explored more there were 2 islands that once borders expanded, only I could access. And they had an additional 7 city states.

I went Progress and tried Commerce pantheon for the first time. Luckily I found a few religious huts because early faith generation was pretty weak. When I founded a religion I went with Tithe which I think stacked with Commerce for a big faith boost, and zealotry for units. I went with Statecraft to help keep City State alliances, but I think this may have not complimented the Hanse which works better with trade routes to other civs. I went with Rationalism because I had no happiness issues and already had the tech lead, then Authority for the airports.

I conquered Arabia early and made them capitulate. Then I fought a united world against me and won. Venice was pretty strong with 6 cities and had wiped out the Vikings early. Then Russia, China and Constantinople were all strong. There was a stalemate mostly naval WWI. Then WW2 with unstoppable Panzers and bombers. I had a 10 tech lead, 800 gold per turn and around +30 happiness. I'll try it again to see if it was a fluke.

Statecraft was the right choice. The Hanse only works with trade routes to city-states after all. Your experience was certainly not a fluke at that difficulty.

Rationalism is such a boring choice for Germany. Build the Alhambra for Drills and get Orders if you can, then go Imperialism to build the Berlin Wall for the full Blitzkrieg experience.
Panzers with Blitz straight out of the factories. That is all.

 

[vyyt]

I think you meant the Brandenburg Gate

 

[ashendashin]

I think you meant the Brandenburg Gate

I did... There is no smiley to properly express my shame.

 

[vyyt]

I did... There is no smiley to properly express my shame.

I forgive you You don't have to feel ashamed anymore.

 

[Braum]

The same strategy works with Spain, but even earlier. Might have to try level 6 again.

 

[Dawnpromise]

Well i finished my first game as Progress. Decided to try out the America buff and was not disappoint, manifest destiny land grab was strong (and an excellent way to provoke war with my neighbors). Wound up with a Diplomatic victory easily achieved due to my empire having more then enough paper to keep the diplo units marching out.

On a side note I was glad I disabled CV since Rome would have insta-won it due to conquering an entire continent. Turns out he too was taking progress and rather than building wonders he simply took them from his neighbors.

Progress as a good synergy with the current state of the game, favoring sprawling low-pop cities with higher output then unhappiness. The only real issue I noted was a dip in productivity when I ran out of room to peacefully spread (aside from some lone islands out at sea but then I started suffering from urbanization unhappiness).

I can honestly say I see why everyone talks about how strong Progress is. Now I'm concerned Tradition (and tall play in general) may be too weak comparatively.

 

[CrazyG]

I can honestly say I see why everyone talks about how strong Progress is. Now I'm concerned Tradition (and tall play in general) may be too weak comparatively.

I'm getting the impression that tall is much safer against a tourism threat, which is nice. Otherwise, I'm having similar thoughts.

 

[tu_79]

Well i finished my first game as Progress. Decided to try out the America buff and was not disappoint, manifest destiny land grab was strong (and an excellent way to provoke war with my neighbors). Wound up with a Diplomatic victory easily achieved due to my empire having more then enough paper to keep the diplo units marching out.

On a side note I was glad I disabled CV since Rome would have insta-won it due to conquering an entire continent. Turns out he too was taking progress and rather than building wonders he simply took them from his neighbors.

Progress as a good synergy with the current state of the game, favoring sprawling low-pop cities with higher output then unhappiness. The only real issue I noted was a dip in productivity when I ran out of room to peacefully spread (aside from some lone islands out at sea but then I started suffering from urbanization unhappiness).

I can honestly say I see why everyone talks about how strong Progress is. Now I'm concerned Tradition (and tall play in general) may be too weak comparatively.

Don't worry, Tradition has its own strengths (wonders, great people, pop size).

 

[Dawnpromise]

Don't worry, Tradition has its own strengths (wonders, great people, pop size).

Also has lack of output, resources, and a spiraling unhappiness problem from crime and urbanization. Late game on big maps the only option to compete with wide empires seems to be "get military and burn them to the ground".

Going wide you claim the enemies land as your own. Going tall you leave it an irradiated wasteland.

 

[CrazyG]

Also has lack of output, resources, and a spiraling unhappiness problem from crime and urbanization

Barring if a world ideology becomes active and it isn't mine, I usually do just fine for happiness as tradition all game.

 

[Dawnpromise]

Barring if a world ideology becomes active and it isn't mine, I usually do just fine for happiness as tradition all game.

If you stay between 5-10 cities then yes no problem. However I tend to play on huge maps and it can be difficult to have >10 cities compete with 20-30 city empires in terms of raw output. I won't deny I sometimes fall into the trap of expanding and growing beyond what tradition can support out of a misguided effort to compete with continent spanning empires.

That said I usually prefer to keep a small isolationist policy in regards to my neighbors. Not my problem until Rome comes knocking on my door.