low population cities?? What to do with them??

[Xenos]

During my games I notice that I have alot of low population cities that I put out to get that one resource or I captured in early wars. But after that what to do with them, when they have served their purpose?

 

[dmanakho]

If corruption level is not extremely high in those city I would build at least library and marketplaces on those, and it is bery possible that those city once low populated will be a good addition to your empire at modern ages, producing shields, science and money.
Never give up on your small city. Even city built in the middle of tundra can provide an extra income and science...

 

[Shirastro]

Ususaly there are ways to get them biger.
If they are costal, build harbor, if not few irigatet tiles can get them biger once you ger railroad.......also if they are island cities and are big but have low production (surounded by water) they can get "useful" once you build offshore platform

 

[Xenos]

If corruption level is not extremely high in those city I would build at least library and marketplaces on those, and it is bery possible that those city once low populated will be a good addition to your empire at modern ages, producing shields, science and money.
Never give up on your small city. Even city built in the middle of tundra can provide an extra income and science...

If corruption is high will you build courthouses or just abandon them??

 

[dmanakho]

If corruption is high will you build courthouses or just abandon them??

Hmm.. Personally, I never abandon a city even with high corruption,
I keep them as a place holder, so other AI can't build nothing on that spot.
But I am not sure what would be best thing to do economically.
Plus, it's all about the age and government. Cities that you find useless at a time can become quite productive once you switch to communism or build/move palace or forbidden palace to the strategically right locations

 

[WS78]

An empire is made out of many parts. Even small cities with no industrial value can add to culture, minor income and ofcourse strategic value.

It also adds to your total score.

 

[flap dont fly]

keep em cause then uve got the land, the few resources and if you get em pretty early on, if uv got a palace near by, can turn into great cities.

 

[Binnor]

keep them and rack the culture

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

I would keep them, maybe if they are producing an extra shield or two then I will have htem build a marketplace. If not, then just Wealth.

 

[fret]

I struggle to think of any reason to abandon such a city, excpet to deny the attacking AI the pleasure if you know you are going to lose it.

Cities and territory are power in the eyes of the opponent, you dont want to be doing things that reduce their 'number'.

 

[Dell19]

If you have a city on grassland with no walls and an AI that is about to take the city then it may be a good idea to disband it to deny the AI the extra movement points and to give you an extra turn to defend a more important city that may be easier to defend.

 

[Kiech]

Hmm.. Personally, I never abandon a city even with high corruption,
I keep them as a place holder, so other AI can't build nothing on that spot.

Many, MANY of my cities seem to become 'placeholders' just because that darn AI thinks it is hilarious to found cities in the center of my empire.

 

[Kiech]

[rant]Heh, to add on to that, I am thinking of modding a game so NO ONE can build settlers. All you get is the X amount you start with, so better make em count! Really, does the AI have to cover every single square area of the world? Once I had a SINGLE square on my continent that was unclaimed, and surrounded by Tundra. What does the AI do? Settle it of course! I would LIKE to be able to use colonies once in a while, but don't dare, because the AI will always settle right next to it.

Heh.[/rant]

 

[general_kill]

Theres a few things u can do with cities, just make them build wealth in all ur small cities to rack up a few gold per turn or just give them away so they serve as a barrier between u and ur immediate neighbor. and definitely build culture buildings in them.

 

[Somewhataller]

[rant]Heh, to add on to that, I am thinking of modding a game so NO ONE can build settlers. All you get is the X amount you start with, so better make em count! Really, does the AI have to cover every single square area of the world? Once I had a SINGLE square on my continent that was unclaimed, and surrounded by Tundra. What does the AI do? Settle it of course! I would LIKE to be able to use colonies once in a while, but don't dare, because the AI will always settle right next to it.

Heh.[/rant]

Man, I can't agree with you more. From the beginning of the late ancient age and throughout the middle ages I am bombarded by leftover settelers from all sides. It gets really, really, tiring to kick them all out.

 

[BassDude726]

In shorter games, my little cities usually serve as staging points for invasions since they're usually on my borders. In longer games, I send workers out to the cities to irrigate every possible tile around them to increase the population, and then i use that to pop-rush units.

 

[Lord Jimbob]

Early on, two words: workers, catapults!

Later on, you can populate them as much as you can w/happy peeps to bulk up score (when railroads come around, even tundra cities will be able to crank out a few more pop). Keep 'em happy w/ a marketplace, or temple/cathedral if you're going for big culture. You can expand the border once with a rushed temple (for score) and then sell it off (if you don't need the happiness or culture) to keep from paying maintenance.

As mentioned, they're also good for unit support (if applicable to your government), but I'm not sure the extra 1 gpt from wealth would be worth the loss due to corruption/waste in your more productive cities if you are going beyond your OCN. But if you are going to keep the city anyway, might as well...