[R&F] Is there any penalty for spamming cities?
- Thread starter Question
- Start date
There is also the rising cost of settlers (per settler built or bought) and districts (per culture/science progress), which means later cities will take longer to pay for the investment, but no hard limitations, no. Which, I might add, feels pretty good to me (I could never stand civ 5).
ShahJahanII
Homesick Alien
Doesn't the era score cutoff for a Golden Age go up with each city?
Bad Wolf
King
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2012
- Messages
- 633
This was the worst part of Civ V. Founding a city should be an exciting moment in any Civ game, it's literally the foundation of the entire game. And yet every city founding in Civ V was wracked with anxiety - "Is this going to push me into negative happiness? Are their enough luxuries in the new city to compensate?" It cheapened the whole experience of playing the game and basically forced you to go Tall (and of course, always Tradition and Rationalism, always, ALWAYS). Civ VI is a massive improvement in this regard. Sure your later cities won't be as beneficial as your early ones, and there are some trade-offs - but that's what they are, trade-offs. You have to make strategic decisions about whether or not this new city will be worth it, as opposed to Civ V where the answer was invariably, "If it's any city after your fifth or sixth, then no, absolutely not worth it".
Yup. I love Civ V. I've played so much of it. Still, I always lean towards culture or science victories which meant ideally three cities... maybe four. If someone DOWd you and you took a city you pretty much had to burn it to the ground and take the short term happiness hit or else you'd take a hit to your science, culture and policy growth. Then again, after the expansions ,you still felt like you had enough to do so it balanced out in a way.
Coming from Civ V to VI was a huge adjustment for me. I had been trained to go tall for culture and science so my first few Civ VI games had me very leery of growing my civilization and planting new cities. As a result, those first games were harder and frankly less enjoyable than they could have been. Once I realized I could easily expand further the game got both easier and a lot more enjoyable.
I remember some strategy discussions about this very issue in Civ5 BNW, as well as G&K and Vanilla. Although there's clearly a penalty for spamming cities beyond 4, more than in any other edition of Civ, players who practiced at playing "wide" found that you could in fact achieve higher scores and quicker victories. You had to use courthouses. And to take full advantage of going wide, you wanted to maximize your science output in as many cities as possible, usually with public schools at least. Wide games were very playable or Domination or SV; not so sure about other win types though likely Diplomacy as well.
Is that quite right? I thought in Civ VI that it counts for 4 cities, but different luxuries can count for different groups of four, not just your first four. Am I wrong about how this works?
yes, each luxuries count as an amenity for up to 4 cities (6 for Aztecs). Not necessarily your first four.
They get spread out on all your cities that need amenities.
The entertainment complex, some wonders specially the Colosseum and Estadio de Maracana in the late game provide amenities as their main function.
There are also various other ways, from pantheon & religious beliefs to civic policies, city states bonuses and great people and governors perks.
They get spread out on all your cities that need amenities.
The entertainment complex, some wonders specially the Colosseum and Estadio de Maracana in the late game provide amenities as their main function.
There are also various other ways, from pantheon & religious beliefs to civic policies, city states bonuses and great people and governors perks.
Aside from requiring more points for golden age, practically none.... Magnus takes care of the rising district costs and one more trade riute is always better.. The loyalty flipping of dark age AI is just icing on the cake.
I would love it if they slapped a 5 pct tech or civic cost penalty for each founded or conquered city like in BNW though... It would actually make settling a new city have drawbacks for once so you cannot just blindly do so.
I would love it if they slapped a 5 pct tech or civic cost penalty for each founded or conquered city like in BNW though... It would actually make settling a new city have drawbacks for once so you cannot just blindly do so.
District cost scaling never mattered when it came to chops : chops and districts scale exactly the same way. 1 district = 3 forests = 6 jungles.
Magnus makes it more powerful, but in exactly the same way as it makes chopping more powerful for everything else.
Chopping always was a rather quick way to set up new cities districts in the late game.
Magnus makes it more powerful, but in exactly the same way as it makes chopping more powerful for everything else.
Chopping always was a rather quick way to set up new cities districts in the late game.
That was the single worst game design decision ever implemented IMHO. That would probably make me quit playing instantly.
There isn't much benefit in going "tall", whatever you mean by that. Expanding past a certain point simply isn't worth it as it won't have time to pay off.
District cost doesn't scale with the number of cities but with the advancement of your research/culture. Chops yield scale proportionally, which is why I mentioned this 1/3 ratio.
Actually the base yield was nerfed by 33% in R&F, so it's 1/4 now I believe.
District cost doesn't scale with the number of cities but with the advancement of your research/culture. Chops yield scale proportionally, which is why I mentioned this 1/3 ratio.
Actually the base yield was nerfed by 33% in R&F, so it's 1/4 now I believe.
CorneliusBrutus
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2017
- Messages
- 12
Based on the amenity cutoff I think 4 is the target, but I don't know for sure. That seems like it would mesh with the Governors available in R&F, there's not more than 4 I would really want installed in a tall civ.
edit: Although it feels like in a real game it never ends up staying that way...sometimes you need to settle farther from your start area to grab some resources or a Wonder spot.
Last edited:
Well, 4 cities is doable in civ 6 but it's a challenge. In a standard game you should probably aim for 8 to 12 cities I think.
You'll probably have enough amenities for 8 cities growing to their housing cap without penalties without having to think about it, and 12 is still quite easy.
You'll probably have enough amenities for 8 cities growing to their housing cap without penalties without having to think about it, and 12 is still quite easy.
Similar threads
