Optimal Forbidden City Placement

[Zachriel]

According to the FAQ compiled so diligently by Lt. 'Killer' M., the relative culture strengths do matter. I apologize for not having done my homework. Thanks DaveMcW for pointing out my oversimplification. Apparently, I nearly always have a culture advantage. (When I don't, such as on a hard-fought Deity game, I probably don't have enough troops for a double garrison anyway.)

From the FAQ
How many units do i need to surpess a culture flip?
G = (F+T)*Cc*H*(Cte/Cty)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23341

To simplify a little more, when conquering into enemy territory, Cc (local culture) will be 2. Assume city is no longer in resistance or disorder.

G=Foreign Influence * 2 * Culture Ratio

(However, I noticed that no one posted an example of a culture flip where the garrison exceeded Foreign Influence*2.)

 

[Arrian]

Personally, I try for 1 of 2 outcomes:

1) the "classic" example Zachriel is talking about: rushing the FP (w/leader) in an optimal spot, often a defeated foe's capitol.

2) building the FP close to my original capitol, and then moving the palace with a leader.

The map decides exactly how this shakes out. If my capitol is off-center to start, building the FP in a more central spot and then moving the capitol makes the most sense. If my capitol is nicely centered, then all I have to worry about is the FP. If necessary, it will be built from scratch.

If I have an island situation, the best is to get the FP built dead-center in my starting island, and then rush the Palace in the center of another.

How far apart? There was a pretty good thread on this over at Apolyton, and I posted some screenshots from the F5 screen, with the Palace & FP circled (in the strategy forum, I think the thread was called "Palace + FP placement"). If memory serves, there are usually about 5 cities between my Palace and FP. I play on Standard maps, and use wide city spacing (city, 1, 2, 3, 4, city or - under certain circumstances - city, 1, 2, 3, city).

-Arrian

 

[Arrian]

Ok, it was actually called "FP+Palace placement" but I was close

Here is the link:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59349&pagenumber=2

The Egyptian screeshots I posted show a near-optimal Palace/FP setup very early in the game. Just looking the map, it would appear that moving my palace 1 city to the SouthEast would be preferable. The deep south (straight south from Thebes) wasn't very hospitable, and Russia (the SE penninsula) had only a couple of nice city spots, so I decided to leave things be.

The Roman game was not "optimal" in that the Palace and FP were closer than I'd normally like, but the setup made the most sense at the time. Northward expansion would have required fighting the Iroquois, the only AI civ that could hurt me. It just wasn't worth it.

The key is getting a couple of rings of nice cities around both your Palace and FP. If putting your Palace and FP a little closer than looks "perfect" results in near-zero corruption in a bunch of cities on great terrain, then it may well be worth it. Also, bear in mind that the game provides for a lot more waste (shields) reduction than corruption (gold) reduction. This is due to WLTKD. Therefore, sticking your FP next to a bunch of commerce bonus tiles (like gold) at the expense of a perfect barbell shape may pay off.

-Arrian

 

[Park Ranger]

A bizarre set of circumstances in my current game playing Chinese (standard map, archipelago, min ocean size, emp level) resulted in an entire continent remaining undiscovered until the 900's AD. Since I had captured the Great Lighthouse, I was able to get 6 cities on some great grassland full of rivers before any AI had more than 2.

When the 4th city I'd built in this New World was 3 turns from getting a temple (about 40 turns after it's founding), I had the extreme good fortune of getting a Great Leader For the first time ever I rushed the FP.

WOW. Even though I had to wait until after 1100 AD, the results are amazing. "New China" is about a dozen cities strong with minimal corruption and waste, and is completely caught up in improvements. It's arguably in better shape than "Old China", which has more cities but is very expensive due to constant fight against corruption and culture wars.

The moral is: there are many strategies, and circumstances will dictate which is best. I might have built the FP earlier, near my original capital, but then "New China" would probably never have expanded beyond 1/2 dozen totally corrupt cities. Admittedly, without the Great Leader I'd probably still be building the damn thing. (Now c. 1850)

I don't know if I'd use a FP strategy that depends on a GL unless my civ was militaristic. In my games this seems to make a huge difference in leader production (due to high number of elite units).