How many cities?

[Rygaros]

So I played through 3 games now and I'm still confused whether there is a penalty for building many cities(as in Civ 5 where you got science and culture penalty the more cities you had)
From what I've seen the more cities you have the better it is?
Only thing you have to keep track is that you have enough amnetie so that your citites grow.

Anyone have an idea?

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Even the amenity penalty is only minor in comparison to the bonuses. And you can get around it by building entertainment districts only for your core cities while all the others are at -2 or -3. Basically, settle as many cities as you possibly can. It's still viable ~t100, becomes less viable at around ~t150 and pretty useless shortly before you win. When your games usually take 300 turns it can be worth settling a city let's say t179. If they finish around t200 it might not be worth settling on, say t132. Really depends on your play style.

 

[joncnunn]

Even the amenity penalty is only minor in comparison to the bonuses. And you can get around it by building entertainment districts only for your core cities while all the others are at -2 or -3.

Note that the "Department of Luxury resources" will attempt to equalize the overall amenity situation in this case by relocating the luxuries from the section of the empire with entertainment districts to the ones without.

 

[TheGreatSleepyOne]

In my experience with the game, I find that I build cities until I deem it no longer necessary for my win condition. I'll do so even if those cities will never grow past 4 pop. In fact, I actually avoid fresh water for "garbage" cities so that I can have them not grow big as fast therefore reducing the amenity penalty.

 

[Japper007]

As many as you can build and as close as possible to each other. Worse thing that can happen is some barbs spawn and pillage a few tiles, the maluses to yields aren't even worth considering and can be fixed with Entertainment Districts later, or just grab the Colloseum.

pretty much the opposite of Brave New World

 

[yung.carl.jung]

In my experience with the game, I find that I build cities until I deem it no longer necessary for my win condition. I'll do so even if those cities will never grow past 4 pop. In fact, I actually avoid fresh water for "garbage" cities so that I can have them not grow big as fast therefore reducing the amenity penalty.

This doesn't really make sense since you can actually lock cities out of growing, otherwise agreed

 

[TheGreatSleepyOne]

While I am aware of the ability to lock cities out of growing, I don't like to micromanage 12-16 cities.

 

[joncnunn]

While I am aware of the ability to lock cities out of growing, I don't like to micromanage 12-16 cities.

Usually simply ignoring housing capacity limit warnings is sufficient to get a city you don't want to grow much more to virtually stop.

 

[Gtdead]

I usually go for 8-10, depending on the land and the neighbor.

 

[kb27787]

Maybe its just my BNW habits kicking in, but I take 7 cities as Aztecs and 5 cities as everyone else. (to get the most out of luxuries) I still space my cities 7 tiles apart, to get the most number of resources/luxuries possible, although if you found cities late, then better plant them close to the industrial district of another preexisting city for the hammers.
I find the extra trade routes from extra commercial hubs (which, unless Aztecs, you take FOREVER to build with new cities) are rather underwhelming... in BNW sea trade routes provide HUGE food and hammers but in civ6 they only provide a few points of stuff at most.
That said, I am not aware of any direct penalty (15 percent increased tech and civics cost as in BNW, as well as national buildings requiring specific stuff in all your cities) from having many cities at all. Although those extra cities won't be hindrance, I don't think they help that much either. A huge capitol is still key for getting wonders (but wonders have suffered such a major nerf from BNW and cost an ungodly amount of hammers such that if I don't have a GE or am playing as China I don't bother with them) but cultural victory is much, much less dependent on wonders than in BNW; you can win one just fine without world wonders except for Eiffel.

 

[Hythian]

It has been a bit of a re-learning curve after C5:BNW, but basically I settle cities now until I run out of convenient space, or I just get tired of escorting Settlers and start using my troops to take other peoples cities instead.

I often also have to build cities hella-far away from my capital as I go up the tech tree as I have yet to have a game where, when I generated the map myself, I had any strategic resources anywhere near my start spot. If Iron even exists on my starting continent I tend to consider it a miracle at this point, so that alone has driven me to a very wide spread, far-flung habit of empire building.

It also varies based on the victory condition I am going for, in particular the Tourism (refuse to call it Culture) and Religion victories. Both of those are so heavily dependent upon Theatre / Holy site districts that pretty much the fastest way to win is to build as many cities as you possibly can, as early as you can, and get the districts out earning GPP / Faith so you can produce Great Works / Apostles. So those victory types tends to encourage me to build more tiny cities that I never plan to have grow past size 5 or so, just to get those districts churning out the points needed for victory.

With Entertainment Districts being relatively early in the Civics tree and (except for Kongo) Neighborhoods being later, I tend to find that Housing far more then Amenities limits my growth and keeps me from getting myself into too much trouble from expanding myself into an imperial implosion.