Last game rage-quitted and my observations about it.

[Naokaukodem]

I begin.

Why do developers want us to play with big cities already ? In Civ3, I played with big cities but that's only because I failed to see the advantage of close cities spamming. (you were able to settle 2 tiles away another city, it is to say with 1 tile separating them)

I think you should be able to settle close cities. That's from my last game where Macedonia took all the north line by settling a city there in turn 10 or less. I had half the map forbidden, in red, loyalty pressure or on a cow in the right corner. I quitted, obviously. I have such a pain to settle in this game... the map is too clustered, that would be nothing if we would have enough space to expand, but that's not the case. I think I would have preferred that it was Alexander that discovered me, at least he would have send all his units after me and that would have been a classical rage-quit, with no need to create a whole topic to relieve me.

So legit wish, not legit ? Good suggestion to modify the whole game or is it just me who is to be fixed ?

 

[Zaarin]

Since I play peacefully, I always play with fewer civs than the map can support. It gives you more breathing room. If you play Continents, there will often be an unclaimed landmass to colonize in the late game, too, if you can deal with the barbarians.

 

[bene_legionary]

I think there should be more interaction, so I tend to put more civs on the map than normal. Losing settlement locations to the AI is a fact of life then, and there's some point to combat. Civs die out more often too. The only problem is that if you don't like AI stealing your cities, or the snow...

 

[Naokaukodem]

Since I play peacefully, I always play with fewer civs than the map can support. It gives you more breathing room. If you play Continents, there will often be an unclaimed landmass to colonize in the late game, too, if you can deal with the barbarians.

Since this last game was Deity, I sure didn't want AI get yet more space to spam cities. But in lower difficulty levels, like Prince, I try to play peacefully too, and when I fail, I realize all of a sudden that the game lost its spice. Alas, there is situations where I HAVE TO declare war, even if there's no example coming in mind. I guess it's also a problem of living space. There, I will try your method next Prince game, where I wouldn't have to fear the AI overexpanding. Thx for the idea.

I think there should be more interaction, so I tend to put more civs on the map than normal. Losing settlement locations to the AI is a fact of life then, and there's some point to combat. Civs die out more often too. The only problem is that if you don't like AI stealing your cities, or the snow...

In Deity this can backfire, but at least AIs won't have that much space, but neither the player. Basically, every civ will be quite on equal foot. This is interesting. Especially if you take Rome or Scythia. And by the way, in my last attempt it was already basically it. Thx for the suggestion. (there's still a chance to get invaded early, but maybe your neighbours will choose other neighbours)

 

[VGhost]

I'm on sort of the opposite end from the OP in terms of solving the spacing problem - especially with the district mechanic, city spam seems anti-fun and I'd rather see the proximity ban be at least 4 or 5 tiles. Do agree that the current game doesn't feel right.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Unfortunately we're stuck with the current system of Spamitization Enthroned in Civ VI.
Among the suggested 'solutions' or at least, sources of brand new and different problems for Civ VII, have been:
1. A more crowded map, but not with Civs, with 'lesser entities' like City States, Barbarian Tribes re-imagined to have more variety in their interactions. This makes spamming cities harder without automatically throwing you into war with most of the non-Civ neighbors.
2. More non-City ways to gain territory: "less than city" settlements, possibly in the form of isolated Districts that can seize or hold territory in place of a full-blown new City emplacement. Most of these would also be a lot less secure than a City in that they might be more easily conquered by an opponent, or voluntarily convert to an opponent's Civ, a City State, even a 'barbarian' Settlement over time if neglected.
3. Map Revision. Reduce the reliance on terrain variety for all Bonuses to placement so that you can actually get a true forest or jungle/rain forest or plains site for your city, instead of a ridiculous mixture in which you have desert, rain forest, plains and marsh tiles - all adjacent to different sides of the same city. This could be planned to make really OP city sites harder to come by, and even viable cities a little harder to achieve.
4. Rewrite the dinamic between City Defense and (foreign) Armies. Right now, a city once set is pretty hard to get rid of without major military effort. But early cities, especially, were destroyed, abandoned, moved, 'rose and fell' regularly. What if cities had an early period in which they were very vulnerable to Set Backs - either natural, or economic, or military?

Basically, keep it easy to 'found' a city, but harder to Maintain a city and turn it into a Metropolis without more work and more resources than now. Point to remember: virtually all colonies during the 'Colonial Period' of the Renaissance cost the colonizing power immense resources to get them started: military, economic, and population, and more than one new colonial/city foundation failed completely.

 

[Naokaukodem]

I'm on sort of the opposite end from the OP in terms of solving the spacing problem - especially with the district mechanic, city spam seems anti-fun and I'd rather see the proximity ban be at least 4 or 5 tiles. Do agree that the current game doesn't feel right.

That would make it very difficult to settle new cities, practically. Personally, I never had this feeling of "too many cities" in any iteration of the franchise, I think the great force of Civ is to make us unpack our initial forces into many cities, other known as Xpanding. Of course, I wouldn't want too many cities causing too much micromanagement, and I think there should be ways of kind of merge their efforts (I'm thinking production) a la Humankind, but with more flexibility. (basically, the techs you have would make it possible freely anytime)

Unfortunately we're stuck with the current system of Spamitization Enthroned in Civ VI.
Among the suggested 'solutions' or at least, sources of brand new and different problems for Civ VII, have been:
1. A more crowded map, but not with Civs, with 'lesser entities' like City States, Barbarian Tribes re-imagined to have more variety in their interactions. This makes spamming cities harder without automatically throwing you into war with most of the non-Civ neighbors.

Yeah, I think population points should be the core of your progress rather than block cities. (see my signature ) They could be friendly, even making you gifts a la tribal villages, hostile, replacing barbarians (although there would be the need to keep the red/black icons colors for hostile ones I think), neutral, giving you nothing but not attacking you, and maybe also preventing you to explore further in their direction unless you set up a treaty with em or improve your relations, and also a thing I've thought about a long time ago, they could be part of your clan, tribe or anything, (at the start !) and thus be more easy to attach to your sovereignty, peacefully or by war. (example : unifying of China, mongolian hordes, etc., the war solution being quicker but maybe with some con)

2. More non-City ways to gain territory: "less than city" settlements, possibly in the form of isolated Districts that can seize or hold territory in place of a full-blown new City emplacement. Most of these would also be a lot less secure than a City in that they might be more easily conquered by an opponent, or voluntarily convert to an opponent's Civ, a City State, even a 'barbarian' Settlement over time if neglected.

Heck yeah ! I've thought out a simple solution to this : make scouts grab territory. Only problem : it could make a tiny village own the territory of Russia early, which would be unrealistic. But do we care that much ? I mean, this should be playtested I guess. I'm wondering if a MOD could do this... always wondered actually. Other than that, I miss the outpost of Civ3, where you could send a worker there and put an outpost to claim a source of iron for example. Downside : it was pretty much open to attacks, except if you kept a unit in it (had to declare war then), or of ennemies' settling. (no penalty for settling an ennemy outpost, it removed it and that was it) But it could create interesting momentums in Civ6 for example. (have to determine how it can be done though, through builders with one/three charges (but builders are defenseless and very vulnerable to barbarians, so need an escort too, which can be annoying) or throught any type of military unit a la roman Legions forts.)

3. Map Revision. Reduce the reliance on terrain variety for all Bonuses to placement so that you can actually get a true forest or jungle/rain forest or plains site for your city, instead of a ridiculous mixture in which you have desert, rain forest, plains and marsh tiles - all adjacent to different sides of the same city. This could be planned to make really OP city sites harder to come by, and even viable cities a little harder to achieve.

The problem here is all scale and number of tiles a "standard size" map should hold. It's intrically linked with computer power AND efficiency/computing time of AI turn. I've imagined a solution to that that could sort of bypass this problem : being able to settle multiple cities in the same tile, (as many as there is pixels in it fully zoomed, or even in the same pixel) Obviously, this poses the problem of citizens affectation, indeed all the way this works. I don't know if this would be Civ anymore. I don't think so. Or simply design the map generator to generate more blocky zones, why not with the help of a weather simulator. (but maps would take a ton of time to load, so I don't think they would go that way, or maybe yes if they assume the latest~ish powerful computers) Fact that we don't know how a Pangaea map would look like. Maybe inspire from Eurasia ? Wait, couldn't a single Earth continent seen as a whole pangea on its own ? Study more how each continent geography is. Hard, because the Man vastly modified it. (deforestation, desertification, more erosion, etc.) They could at least look at, if it exists, some scientific picked up maps where the world was pre-industrial, or about half way since Homo Sapiens apparition. (I say half-way because the weather can change by itself in such "long" time spans) Because IMO this all relies to realism here, nothing else. (and a little bit of gameplay when it comes to use some leaders's abilities, pantheons and such)
However, I wouldn't like less viable cities possible. Some cities are as with that much low production as it is, eventhough their spot seems promising (I'm thinking about those floodplains sites with lot of wheat). I have enough problems with production in this game already.

4. Rewrite the dinamic between City Defense and (foreign) Armies. Right now, a city once set is pretty hard to get rid of without major military effort. But early cities, especially, were destroyed, abandoned, moved, 'rose and fell' regularly. What if cities had an early period in which they were very vulnerable to Set Backs - either natural, or economic, or military?

That's the idea behind city walls, and that was an idea of mines if I'm correct. In average difficulty levels, like Prince, an early city takes 2-3 warriors to take without walls. Obviously, your warriors have to be at the same place this moment, and possibly not too far from that city. With some promotions, they could take such a city quite easily even if it's defended by a slinger. But granted, those times are too short. As to making them elligible for falling from other things than military, that's basically my idea of true rise & fall : you have "coercion" points (not sure anymore if it's that appropriate as a name, I had to learn what it truly means ) above a threshold, earned majorly by specialists (bureaucrats), and once you reached that threshold yu may not suffer from collapse, unless there's an event and you weren't prepared for it (never happened in History before or simply a slow percentage you collapse even with max "coercion", like 1% each turn or 10% or more each event) You could think it out city per city too. Like, I imagine a global collapse wouldn't necessarily mean all your empire is "destroyed", it could affect only some regions and maybe one single city only.

 

[DeckerdJames]

I begin.

Why do developers want us to play with big cities already ? In Civ3, I played with big cities but that's only because I failed to see the advantage of close cities spamming. (you were able to settle 2 tiles away another city, it is to say with 1 tile separating them)

I think you should be able to settle close cities. That's from my last game where Macedonia took all the north line by settling a city there in turn 10 or less. I had half the map forbidden, in red, loyalty pressure or on a cow in the right corner. I quitted, obviously. I have such a pain to settle in this game... the map is too clustered, that would be nothing if we would have enough space to expand, but that's not the case. I think I would have preferred that it was Alexander that discovered me, at least he would have send all his units after me and that would have been a classical rage-quit, with no need to create a whole topic to relieve me.

So legit wish, not legit ? Good suggestion to modify the whole game or is it just me who is to be fixed ?

Feel your frustration. Claiming territory is one of the first things that has to be done and there are a variety of methods. You may be inclined to be more aggressive and declare war before they discover your cities. On deity, the computer will attempt to defeat your civilization during an early war if the are close enough, but only if they know the location of one of your cities.

If you declare a war but they don’t know where your cities are, you may have to defeat a unit or two in the wild right away, but they won’t gang up against a lone warrior in the wild unless you are a threat to their cities. If you can drive off the units from a city location you want to claim, generally, the AI will tend to avoid the area, or at least be more cautious. That can buy time. They may slip a scout around and find your cities, but a full scale invasion does not seem as guaranteed like it does when they discover you early and you are at peace.

In short, you might have some success with declaring war and placing military where you want to expand and follow up with a settler. Once the city is placed, if it was placed in an area the computer has revealed already, they will be able to attack a city target. They might or might not. If your military strength is high relative to theirs, it can act as a deterrent.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Yeah but here it was like turn 10 in Deity, when the AI gets 2 free settlers after founding respectively their 2 first cities (I think). So even with military it was kinda unavoidable.

 

[DeckerdJames]

Yeah but here it was like turn 10 in Deity, when the AI gets 2 free settlers after founding respectively their 2 first cities (I think). So even with military it was kinda unavoidable.

Early war is probably going to just slow down your advancement race. By the time it is over, they have advanced, but you probably only produced units to defend yourself. Sometimes, diplomacy can help.

I have had some success with a couple of things.

A) Send a delegation on the same turn you meet them. Their initial impression of your civilization won’t take effect until the next turn. They will always take it on the first turn. That is a +3 adjustment.

B) Pay a tribute. You always start with +5 gold because of the palace building. Gift your neighbors +1 gold or more per turn. A single gold per turn is actually pretty valuable in the ancient era. If they go to war with you, the unpaid remainder is a loss. That one gold might prevent a war that will put you farther behind.

C) Make deals that are favorable to the AI to improve your relationships. If they say they will pay +6 GPT for something, you could give it to them for +5 GPT.

D) Get your first trader after researching the foreign trade civic and send it to your neighbor. Trader units improve your relationships.

E) Open your borders as a gift. Both the favorable deal and open borders will improve your relations.

F) As the game progresses, try larger gifts. In a recent game, I gifted a great bounty to a civilization that was still unfriendly after sending a delegation. It was 25 diplomatic favor, a luxury for 30 turns, 20 horses, and 20 iron. They were friendly after a few turns.

G) Amani is your diplomat. Sometimes you need Amani first. Her first rank adds two envoys to a city state. Whenever you are the first to meet a city state, you get a free envoy. Whenever that happens, think about whether Amani can help. Sometimes a city state is between you and a hostile neighbor. You could save some money and levy their troops for fighting or exploring.

H) For more time to expand into unclaimed space, Amani’s emissary skill can be useful. Amani can be placed into city states and your own cities. Other cities within 9 tiles and not owned by you gain +2 loyalty per turn towards your civilization. (Gathering Storm) Even if your cities are not affecting the loyalty rating of distant tiles, Amani will. The AI either needs loyalty pressure from its own cities, an available governor, a policy, or their own diplomat with the emissary promotion to counteract your Amani’s pressure or a newly placed city will immediately start flipping to you. They can counteract Amani but it does seem to slow down their expansion when they elect not to try.


I don’t know the exact rules that govern each civilization and they probably won’t all react the same. It might be that if a civilization spots your city location very early, it will try to eliminate you no matter what. If that happens, I think you may as well go all in on the war because you probably need to turn the production spent on military units into cities under your command.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Heh, thx for the input but I was talking about your suggestion to send up military units to discourage AI to settle, not war.

Nonetheless, although I knew about some of your advices, I didn't know about all of them. Especally the "generous guy" part, I always tend to be a very greedy person to AI and take the max possible from every deal. (to the close penny)

Alas, none of them apply to the problem i related in the OP. All the north land between my capital and that civ was red when selecting a settler. It can apply to early rushes though. Thx for the advices.

 

[DeckerdJames]

Heh, thx for the input but I was talking about your suggestion to send up military units to discourage AI to settle, not war.

Nonetheless, although I knew about some of your advices, I didn't know about all of them. Especally the "generous guy" part, I always tend to be a very greedy person to AI and take the max possible from every deal. (to the close penny)

Alas, none of them apply to the problem i related in the OP. All the north land between my capital and that civ was red when selecting a settler. It can apply to early rushes though. Thx for the advices.

The diplomacy game can be very fun. I didn't start playing civ as a diplomat either and I learned the unit game. I have been learning recently. It can be interesting because sometimes you might have to choose who you will be friends with. I am just getting into it this week. Try it. Role play a different kind of leader. Play a generous glutton, as a Conan like person, or make up a personality for the civilization leader in all the actions you take in the game. Think like them. A religious figure wants the bonus faith on the map, for example. Have fun with the leaders.

 

[DeckerdJames]

I forgot something that it helps to know.

When you meet a civilization, the stance you take makes a big difference.

There are three ways to meet. Close to your cities, close to theirs, and in between.

Based on your meeting, you can choose to invite them to your closest city (if the meeting was close to your cities), visit their closest city, or exchange information about the location of your capitals (if met in between).

If you invite them to your city, they will know where that city is located. In the beginning, that will often be your capital city.

On deity, as soon as they see your capital (maybe any city), if it is to their disliking enough, they will sometimes immediately denounce you and soon after they will declare war. Often they will immediately surprise attack you. If you play on deity, it can often be better to say you don't have time. Unfortunately, the leader screen pops up and you can't see exactly where you have met. I always decline to invite them to my city unless I am a reasonably certain that they have seen my city already or will see it very soon. I am just learning the diplomacy side of things so maybe there are times when you can take the risk if you can offer a good gift in the same turn and perhaps include a turn to turn agreement in the first deal too.

If you choose to sample their hospitality, their closest city will be revealed. I don't know what else it could affect.

If you exchange locations, you will be revealed to each other. Sometimes you can estimate that the civ is too far away for them to try to attack you. If you are meeting well into the game, then they are probably far away. I am not sure of the actual numerical ranges. Perhaps if both units are over 9 tiles away from their nearest cities, it will ask for an exchange. Maybe it is more or less. I found it much safer to offer to exchange capital locations with a far away civilization than it is to invite a closer civilization to visit your city. In the case of an exchange, they will still denounce you, but probably won't invade. I have seen them settle directly toward me though, to claim space and get closer, presumably.

Also, it might not always a good idea to accept a delegation right away. I read this somewhere and at the time I thought it was reliable information, but I can't remember where I read it. The information I read was that a civilization gains diplomatic visibility (in some manner) when their delegation is accepted. Supposedly that works for the player's civilization too. That means all civilizations can get a small combat bonus by getting their delegation accepted (if your visibility level goes up a level). I would have to look into it more or pay closer attention after I send a delegation to be sure, but be wary of the possibility.

 

[DeckerdJames]

Another early game tip that can be useful. Rushing governor promotions.

After researching Code of Laws on the civics tree, you have two choices about how to proceed. You can go to Craftmanship or to Foreign Trade.

Craftmanship gives you production bonuses to building melee, ranged, and anti-calvary. In the Ancient Era, that correlates to warriors, archers, and spearmen. In the early game, and if the policies are running, you can build a security force 50% faster and builders to improve your capital or an early city 30% faster. If you continue down this civics path, the advancement that leads to your next tier government is State Workforce. That gives the polices conscription and corvee. If archers or spearmen are a part of security force, you can eliminate the maintenance cost with conscription. Corvee gives a 15% production to wonder building. You will also be able to build the Government Plaza. Since you get a governor recruitment/promotion when you finish State Workforce and another when you finish building the Government Plaza, going to this side of the tree gives you the ability to get a rank 2 governor before going to Early Empire, if you can build it fast enough. The plaza is on the cheap side. The big picture is that State Workforce is better if you want to rush an early wonder or rush an early rank 2 governor. Military Tradition is also on this side of the Ancient Era civics tree. That unlocks flanking and support bonuses meaning that when using units together you can get attack and defense bouses. I find this side of the tree more useful if you want to develop your capital before you settle your next cities.

An early monument will speed up your base progression rate through the civics tree. You might still try to get the boosts for extra fast speed, but with a monument it is quite a bit faster even without boosting them. You can attempt to speed up the acquisition of State Workforce by building a district as soon as possible. The Holy Site, Campus, and Encampment are the most plausible choices and a case can be made for all of them. If you want to rush State Workforce, remember that going directly to one of those districts is an option. The trade off is that you won't be going directly to archers, but sometimes it is worth trying to defend with warriors and slingers, or other means, especially if you are in an easily defensible position.

What are the rank 1 and 2 governor abilities? (Gathering Storm)

Victor (Castellan) (special: establishes in 3 turns instead of 5 turns like all other governors)

I	Redoubt	Increase city garrison Combat Strength by 5. Established in 3 turns. (With the Archer's garrison promotion, an archer has a +15 bonus)	-
II	Garrison Commander	Units defending within the city's territory get +5 Combat Strength. Your other cities within 9 tiles gain +4 Loyalty per turn towards your civilization. (the +4 loyalty can help you expand further into contested areas)	-
II	Defense logistics	City cannot be put under siege. Accumulating Strategic resources gain an additional +1 per turn.	-

Moksha (Cardinal)

I	Bishop	Religious pressure to adjacent cities is 100% stronger from this city. +2 Faith per specialty district in this city.	-
II	Grand Inquisitor	+10 Religious Strength in theological combat in tiles of this city.	-
II	Laying On Of Hands	All Governor's units heal fully in one turn in tiles of this city. (I have not tried this ability but it seems very good)

Amani (Diplomat)

I	Messenger	Can be assigned to a City-state, where she acts as 2 Envoys.	-
II	Emissary	Other cities within 9 tiles and not owned by you gain +2 Loyalty per turn towards your civilization. (In food poor regions when city growth is slow, +2 loyalty out to 9 tiles can slow the expansion of other civilizations and increase your own loyalty pressure)	-
II	Affluence	While established in a city-state, provides a copy of its Luxury resources to you.

Magnus (The Steward)

I	Groundbreaker	+50% yields from plot harvests and feature removals in city.	-
II	Surplus Logistics	+20% Growth in the city. Your Trade Routes ending here provide +2 Food to their starting city.	-
II	Provision	Settlers trained in the city do not consume a Population.

Liang (Surveyor)

I	Guildmaster	All Builders trained in city get +1 build charge.	-
II	Zoning Commissioner	+20% Production towards constructing Districts in the city.	-
II	Aquaculture	The Fishery unique improvement can be built in the city on coastal plots. Yields 1 Food, +1 Food for each adjacent sea resource. Fisheries provide +1 Production if Liang is in the city.

Pingala (The Educator)

I	Librarian	15% increase in Science and Culture generated by the city.	-
II	Connoisseur	+1 Culture per turn for each Citizen in the city.	-
II	Researcher	+1 Science per turn for each Citizen in the city.	-

Reyna (Financier)

I	Land Acquisition	Acquire new tiles in the city faster. +3 Gold per turn from each foreign Trade Route passing through the city.	-
II	Harbormaster	Double adjacency bonuses from Commercial Hubs and Harbors in the city.	-
II	Forestry Management	This city receives +2 Gold for each unimproved feature. Tiles adjacent to unimproved features receive +1 Appeal in this city. (the +2 gold also works on flood plains. The +1 appeal can help with making a great early preserve and grove which provide great bonuses on breathtaking tiles)

I can not be authoritative about what should be done or when. There are many ways to approach a strategy for a civilization and I am not good enough to know the best way with certainty. My interpretation is that Victor, Moksha, and Amani all provide ways to defend in the early game. Liang, Pingala, and Reyna all provide ways to develop. A quick level 2 ability can be helpful and with the Government Plaza and the first government building after researching Political Philosophy, you can have a governor with a level 4 ability near the beginning of the classical age.

A level 4 governor ability can be very powerful in the right situations. A level 4 Liang can build city parks in the Classical Era. In a city where you can build parks adjacent to water means that you will get an amenity for each park permanently, not to mention 4 culture for each park while Liang is in the city and 1 per park if he is not. What does that mean? It means that as soon as Liang establishes himself in the right kind of city, he can add local amenities and possibly raise the yields bonus for the city. The bonus can go as high as +20%. It means that as soon as your first park is built, if you work that tile, the borders of a new city will expand very quickly. It means less reliance on luxuries. In the early game that could mean you have to improve fewer tiles in a city for it to stay content and instead spend production on something other than a builder. If you do improve or make a luxury an unnecessary luxury, you could sell it and remain content from your parks.

All the governors all very good in their own way. I am still learning to understand all of the abilities and when they can be useful. It isn't straightforward unless you have already learned the relevant game mechanics and rules. Take a look at them all.

The info in the tables is from Fandom Civilization wiki (except for what is in parentheses and I changed the rank numbering to start at 'I' (1), instead of 'default').

 

[DeckerdJames]

The real fix to this problem, in my opinion, is a deity AI that can start with 1 city and hold its own against deity level players. Eliminating the bonus cities and all other bonuses would make the start of the race fair. Then the race for city number two and three would actually exist on deity level. What we have in the current deity level game is an unwinnable race to get to three cities first. Most of the game involves racing to objectives.

In the current state of the AI, if they drop three cities and it makes your game too hard, then consider restarting it. That race to an empire of three cities will never be fair. My tips in my other responses might be useful or they might be known already, but nothing can fix them starting closer to the goal of having enough territory.

Any kind of bonus would probably lead to an advantage in gaining territory. If deity only had bonus culture or science, then the deity AI can concentrate on improving tiles that give production instead trying to improve other types of yields. That means more units and more settlers. That means, on the whole, they probably have the ability to settle faster. All bonuses have to go someday so that the player can run the same race as the computer, from start to finish.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Problem with Liang is that she would be useful in more than one city. If you place her near a volcano or flood plain, then you cannot (most of the time) place her in a coastal. And if you have a volcano/flood plains/whatever city with her in it and displace her to a coastal city, and you have a disaster in the disaster city, it is bad luck. Governor lacks greatly of flexibility, I mean how they act and how they move. In Civ7, I hope their effects to be zonal, like 6/9 tiles from where they are, and they could be anywhere on the map, not just in cities. But even like that, there would still the annoyance to count hexes. Maybe governors should be replaced with global governors that give perks to your civ, like the civics in Civ5. Except none of them would be locked early. That would open up for strong and accessible strategies. In Civ6, there's always a "but" with governors. For example, I use to pick up Magnus with provision first, but I often end up not using him as much as I would like to. After all, building settlers is kind of rare and early. Not sure the one pop spare worth the cost, especially if your city growth overpasses your housing capacity. I guess you have to think about it : 4/5 food tile in your capital ? Several ? Don't go Magnus. Now do you prefer to go Magnus if your city has low housing, or not go Magnus if your city has low housing and high production ? I don't know, because if you have low housing, when you hit the first shreshold of slowdown, you could as well say it's useless to have one more point of population. On the other hand, you can say yourself you will never want to lose one pop because it's long enough to get it. (example : coastal start without FRESH water) These kinds of perks are like thrown in the game without much thinking at start, and it becomes a nightmare to min-max. Exactly like the infinite city sprawl in Civ3, although this was unexpected. Now what's expected is that you can't settle a whole half of the map. No, it's probably not expected either. But it happens. So why not expect ICS (infinite city sprawl) from the start and see what happens ?

 

[DeckerdJames]

Problem with Liang is that she would be useful in more than one city. If you place her near a volcano or flood plain, then you cannot (most of the time) place her in a coastal. And if you have a volcano/flood plains/whatever city with her in it and displace her to a coastal city, and you have a disaster in the disaster city, it is bad luck. Governor lacks greatly of flexibility, I mean how they act and how they move. In Civ7, I hope their effects to be zonal, like 6/9 tiles from where they are, and they could be anywhere on the map, not just in cities. But even like that, there would still the annoyance to count hexes. Maybe governors should be replaced with global governors that give perks to your civ, like the civics in Civ5. Except none of them would be locked early. That would open up for strong and accessible strategies. In Civ6, there's always a "but" with governors. For example, I use to pick up Magnus with provision first, but I often end up not using him as much as I would like to. After all, building settlers is kind of rare and early. Not sure the one pop spare worth the cost, especially if your city growth overpasses your housing capacity. I guess you have to think about it : 4/5 food tile in your capital ? Several ? Don't go Magnus. Now do you prefer to go Magnus if your city has low housing, or not go Magnus if your city has low housing and high production ? I don't know, because if you have low housing, when you hit the first shreshold of slowdown, you could as well say it's useless to have one more point of population. On the other hand, you can say yourself you will never want to lose one pop because it's long enough to get it. (example : coastal start without FRESH water) These kinds of perks are like thrown in the game without much thinking at start, and it becomes a nightmare to min-max. Exactly like the infinite city sprawl in Civ3, although this was unexpected. Now what's expected is that you can't settle a whole half of the map. No, it's probably not expected either. But it happens. So why not expect ICS (infinite city sprawl) from the start and see what happens ?

I am still learning the governors and generally still learning the game. The way the governors are now are basically like city governors. Perhaps the idea could be expanded into regional governors, or perhaps in Civ 7, you can rank up your Civ leader. Who knows?

As I said, I am still learning. To that end, I wanted to know which civilizations/leaders would be better for tall, to test what I have heard about tall vs wide viability. When I say tall, I mean 50+. A 25 city could be found in a wide empire fairly easily, I think, by the late game. So what about 50+? What does that take and how do the governors help?

First, let me say I have only tested a few games and before I had acquired a better understanding of the governors. The issue is not just food abundance, if you want to grow tall from the beginning. The issue is housing. So, I went through the list of civilizations to see which ones get ways to boost housing and how quick can it be made use of. The Inca, India and the Cree were the ones that I have attempted so far, but others may be viable.

The Inca are very easy to grow tall because their unique terrace farm gives great food and a whole housing. They can also work all of the mountain tiles. They seem like the easiest tall civilization, so far. I just went back a found the save game for that playthrough. My capital is size 45 on deity level on turn 316/500. I am pretty sure I finished the game and the capital was over 50 by then. I either won that game or the computer might have reached a space victory just before me. It was close at least. I had 7 cities total and it seems viable to play them tall.

The Cree were far more difficult, but they can also increase their housing significantly after researching pottery. The Mekewap building gives a whole housing. That's the main thing, but it gives other bonuses. I have not been able to get the Cree up to 50 and after a few attempts, I had moved on to try other things. I think it can be done. As I write this, I am thinking I just need to think a bit more out of the box. The minor bonus is the gold for being next to a luxury, but the only restriction is that they cannot be adjacent to each other. At civil service, I think they give 2 housing. Looking at the Cree's abilities, they are born to play tall. That is the theory.

India was also more difficult. The stepwell gives housing and food, but also faith if next to a holy site. After researching sanitation it become 2 housing. This civ is meant to be very tall too I think.

Playing tall is harder than playing wide in Civ 6 but with certain Civilizations, I think it is doable. I need more practice though.

I have understood the governors a bit better now. Sometimes governors seem better to be moved around and I think they have abilities that shine when doing that, but if you are aiming for very tall cities, their abilities could be seen differently.

Liang

I	Guildmaster	All Builders trained in city get +1 build charge.	-
II	Zoning Commissioner	+20% Production towards constructing Districts in the city.	-
II	Aquaculture	The Fishery unique improvement can be built in the city on coastal plots. Yields 1 Food, +1 Food for each adjacent sea resource. Fisheries provide +1 Production if Liang is in the city.	-
III	Reinforced Materials	This city's improvements, buildings and Districts cannot be damaged by Environmental Effects.	Zoning Commissioner
III	Water Works	+2 Housing for every Neighborhood and Aqueduct district in this city. +1 Amenity for every Canal and Dam district in this city.	Aquaculture
IV	Parks and Recreation	The City Park unique improvement can be built in the city. Yields 2 Appeal and 1 Culture. +1 Amenity if adjacent to water. City Parks provide 3 Culture if Liang is in the city.	Reinforced Materials or Water Works

Liang has two different paths to the level 4 ability. One side speeds up your district building speed and protects your infrastructure. Repairs take time. That side is about time. The other side is mainly about growth. The fishery gives +1/2 housing and you can get an additional +2 for neighborhoods and aqueducts. The housing bonus for the neighborhood is based on appeal. That synergizes with the city parks. If you identify a city location with abundant food, you can place Liang there permanently and try to grow the city very large. It can be done in a coastal city or inland. The city will have many parks and neighborhoods and/or it will have many fisheries. It will have many districts and when not building districts it probably run a city project all the time. That is what the abilities look like, but perhaps this governor is better in a city that has enough population to build all of it's districts and to have the specialists running in all of them and to be working all of the city parks for the +4 culture each.

The level 2 abilities for Pingala are based on population. In my game with the Inca, I did have Pingala in my capital and I was trying for the space victory. I have 248.1 production in that city and her Space Initiative ability adds 30% to space projects.

The level 3 ability for Reyna provides gold based on population however at level 50 city only provides an extra 100 gold. However in a city with a nice harbor and commercial district and as many districts as possible (to make the city attractive as a trade destination -- +3 gold for each route to or through the city), with undeveloped land or one with a preserve and/or a natural wonder so that forestry management kicks in, and with her other abilities, the city could become very valuable. You can run city projects all the time and buy new districts and buildings instead.

I played a practice game with Magnus the other day. I built my first city up and didn't expand until sometime after getting Provision. My capital was 9 or 10 by then. My first governor was Amani with Emissary, to hold the land I wanted to expand to. I was able to do that but had to defend the city state where Amani was posted from two civilizations so I was in a war with two civs. Alexander and Lady Six Sky. They both wanted Amani gone. I did defend successfully and eventually I made six cities around my capital with industrial zones as the first district in range to provide regional bonuses to the capital with Vertical Integration. I did get my production up to 150 but out knocked out of the game, as I was just too far behind. I was just beginning to run the campus city project in 1 turn. That looked like it would get me over 100 great person points per turn. I was at peace but Dido attacked me right after I started to do that and sacked two exterior cities with more advanced units than I had and then pulled back. I retired the game. I need more practice with Magnus structured as the central city in a highly industrialized nation.

The point I am making, is that the governors sometimes seem to make more sense if you imagine they are in a very tall city, but Magnus shines in a highly industrialized area that has many industrial zones. Vertical Integration, I believe, will get the regional bonus from the factory and the oil and nuclear power plants. You could, but don't have to, upgrade from the coal power plant. Coal power plants can give a larger bonus to the city it resides in but doesn't help other cities, as far as I can tell.

edit: On the Inca game that I played. I looked a bit closer. The capital growth is stagnate at 45 and has housing for only 40. I am one turn from completing the Launch Exoplanet Expedition project, but two other Civs are already traveling, but only for a turn or two. I don't remember if I caught them. I look at around at the cities now and probably all 7 cities are not totally necessary. Some of the things I an building are not necessary for what I am doing. I am building the Manhattan project in one for the cities. It was only an experimental game. I did learn that although the Inca are probably the fastest at getting large, I suspected that they might not be the best suited for being 50+. Because of the mountains, I had fewer places to put neighborhoods and housing became a problem.

On the subject of neighborhoods. I felt they are a little bugged, at least the last I checked. I could build more than two neighborhoods in a city, but I could only build 1 food market and 1 shopping mall but in different neighborhoods, I think (maybe I had to choose just 1 building). The 3rd neighborhood and beyond would only provide extra housing. I don't know if it by design but it seems like it shouldn't be. I think you should be able to put one building into all neighborhoods.

edit: I was just starting a game with Poundmaker and I saw that the Mekewap has to be next to a bonus or luxury resource and they cannot be built adjacent to each other. Well, that is probably the reason I was having more difficulty growing tall than with the Inca. Might be better with abundant resources, but I play standard settings so I get a sense of comparison between the civilizations.

 

[DeckerdJames]

Spoiler Picture of tall Inca game :

I thought it might be useful to see a picture of the tall Inca game. Wanku is the largest city at 45 pop. Pisac was the second largest at pop 36. I don't know how much the other cities helped. The extra districts helped for sure. If you look at the civics boost for the governments Democracy, Totalitarianism, and Communism they require 3- 4 cites to boost. I don't think the game is meant to be a one city challenge usually but I think 3-4 very tall cities with the right governors might be competitive with a wide empire. There is nothing against making satellite cities but they might not be necessary. There has to be some compensation for not having as many districts across the empire, so using Pingala for the extra culture and science seems important. I really don't know how competitive a tall society can be in an expert game, but I think they take much more skill regardless. The cites need to be situated well and you need all their tiles if possible and the hardest part is developing the city well.

I am by no stretch of the imagination an expert at the game and this one is probably full of mistakes from the very beginning. I am sure that the Inca can be played better that I did in this game, but having this amazing mountain range helped a lot.

Spoiler Map seed is at the bottom of the menu :

I don't remember for sure what settings I used, but I use all standard settings 99% of the time and this is probably a huge map since there are 10 opponents. It doesn't seem like an out of the ordinary map for the Inca, but there is the seed data if you want it.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Oh, a 45 pop city... I wonder how useful that is (beside take profit from Pingala's perks, who cannot be in this 36 pop city in the same time...), since you must lack tiles to work. I guess you have all your districts filled with specialists, but even like that, I fail to see how all your citizens are busy. (what kind of benefit an unbusy citizen gives ? I don't even know how it works lol, never saw that)

 

[DeckerdJames]

Oh, a 45 pop city... I wonder how useful that is (beside take profit from Pingala's perks, who cannot be in this 36 pop city in the same time...), since you must lack tiles to work. I guess you have all your districts filled with specialists, but even like that, I fail to see how all your citizens are busy. (what kind of benefit an unbusy citizen gives ? I don't even know how it works lol, never saw that)

Spoiler Close up of Wanku :

I count 34 at work (including the city center and the encampment, which are a little covered up by the health bars). As far as the remaining citizens go, I think they can amplify the governors and the religious effects, if the religious effect is based on population. If I recall correctly, one of the earlier Civs I played would give 1 production for idle workers, but I don't see anything here. (it does say I get some production from population and a separate listing for worked tiles. I don't know. Specialists?) Oh yeah, they give some science and culture per population.

Spoiler The other yields :

Spoiler City Report Screen :

I think Pingala, Reyna, and Liang could all be very useful in a large city. Pingala and Reyna both amplify some abilites directly from population. Liang benefits the population with appeal and the parks. (+4 culture each). I think Liang is for building the largest city possible because Liang amplifies housing. If you want a mega-metropolis, think about Liang. I have not tried Liang that way yet, but I suspect Liang can go much higher pop than 45, in the right city (only a theory though). If you want to play tall, think BIG.