1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

[R&F] Is there any penalty for spamming cities?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - Strategy & Tips' started by Question, Feb 20, 2018.

  1. Question

    Question Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    945
    In civ 5 you got a pretty big happiness penalty but the only penalty in civ 6 that i can find is that luxury resources for amenities only couts for the first 4 cities. Are there any other penalties that im unaware of?
     
  2. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    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).
     
    Japper007 likes this.
  3. ShahJahanII

    ShahJahanII Homesick Alien

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,847
    Location:
    South Florida
    Doesn't the era score cutoff for a Golden Age go up with each city?
     
  4. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    Yes, true, forgot about that too.
     
  5. gooberman

    gooberman Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2015
    Messages:
    33
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Great question. I've gotten to the point where I spam out cities mid game and my science doesn't take off like expected.

    I do hate the days of the 4 city games and like to settle places. (and overthrow!)
     
    Victoria likes this.
  6. Bad Wolf

    Bad Wolf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    631
    Gender:
    Male
    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".
     
    Japper007 likes this.
  7. trashcat

    trashcat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    Messages:
    20
    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.
     
  8. EditorRex

    EditorRex Master of Allusion

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    356
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NC
    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.
     
  9. EditorRex

    EditorRex Master of Allusion

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    356
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NC
    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?
     
  10. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    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.
     
  11. kb27787

    kb27787 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,508
    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.
     
    Infixo likes this.
  12. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    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.
     
    Thibaulthc likes this.
  13. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    That was the single worst game design decision ever implemented IMHO. That would probably make me quit playing instantly.
     
    Japper007 likes this.
  14. Question

    Question Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    945
    So district cost scales with number of cities too?

    Whats the benefit of going tall (other than luxuries) if spamming cities gets you so much more territory and other stuff?
     
  15. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    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.
     
  16. Question

    Question Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    945
    Going tall means to focus on a few large cities instead of a large number of cities.
     
  17. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    yeah ok, but how many is a few for you ?
     
  18. Question

    Question Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    945
    In civ 5 the optimum amount was 4 cities or so if you were going tall, if i recall correctly.
     
  19. CorneliusBrutus

    CorneliusBrutus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2017
    Messages:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    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: Feb 22, 2018
  20. Athmos

    Athmos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    236
    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.
     

Share This Page

Ebates: Get Paid to Shop