Problems with expansion

[Prometeo]

Hi all, I've got a problem.
When I play with aggressive civs I use to try to expand my dominions with wars..
In ancient times I always study alphabet and currency and I use a lot of "wealth" production, to help my treasury and mantain my army.

But when my empire grows, my cash decreases and problems grows up! In my last game (monarch) in 1600 A.D. I was the bigger one, with something like 40% of people and lands.. but Mansa Musa (20% people in the world) was the tech leader (with ALL his cities sorrounded by farms! no one cottage !) and founded liberalism while I was researching banks !

My question is: is there a way to take a huge and obsolete empire and change it in a modern state?
I've got tons of cities, but the 50% are producing "wealth" in order to keep my tech % at 40/50 % ....

mmmm.... something is going wrong...
Suggestion?

 

[cabert]

tried cottages lately? and build those markets, courthouses, ... rather than wealth...

 

[JimT]

Half the land mass shouldn't cause you so many problems really. I wonder if your tech trading enough. Failing that, try any of the following you have missed.

Keep good commerce cities and the occassional production city.

Raze the others, don't worry about leaving open space. If somone plants a city in it you can always raze it later when your borders have expanded. Also randomly scattered cities makes your future enemies more vulnerable.

Pillage any tile improvement except cottages, roads and possibly resources. Anything else you can probably rebuild by the time the city is useful.

Cottages good, build more.

Check your city management, building wealth is rarely the best way of doing things in the early game (or the late game for that matter). Buildings with modifiers are a much better idea.

 

[Sisiutil]

I almost never produce wealth, culture, or science in any of my cities, unless it's very late in the game and I'm tired of micro-managing them.

Remember that building wealth means you're converting half of your hammers to commerce. The other half is wasted. In addition, hammer-heavy tiles usually produce less food, so the city isn't growing.

You'd be better off building other things, especially science and commerce multipliers (libraries, universities, observatories, markets, grocers, banks) in your best commerce cities, as well as growth and happiness buildings (granaries, harbours, lighthouses, forges, temples) to help the population increase so more cottages can be worked.

Along those lines, another reason to keep rather than raze some of those cities you went after early on is if they have a useful resource in their fat cross that you don't have anywhere else. Happiness resources are especially valuable, since they let your cities grow larger.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Remember that building wealth means you're converting half of your hammers to commerce. The other half is wasted.

You know that building Wealth (and Culture, Research, etc.) is much better in Warlords, right?

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

I almost never produce wealth, culture, or science in any of my cities, unless it's very late in the game and I'm tired of micro-managing them.

Remember that building wealth means you're converting half of your hammers to commerce. The other half is wasted. In addition, hammer-heavy tiles usually produce less food, so the city isn't growing.

You'd be better off building other things, especially science and commerce multipliers (libraries, universities, observatories, markets, grocers, banks) in your best commerce cities, as well as growth and happiness buildings (granaries, harbours, lighthouses, forges, temples) to help the population increase so more cottages can be worked.

I find when i'm following a certain tech trail a little earlier in the game and I don't have much else to build except units or wealth/research, (if I have enough units for defense), I'll build research in my capital (which usually has all the infrastructure buildings that are available) and my next best city to get a jump on that tech trail. Because building more units than necessary can stifle an early game economy. Or if I'm prepairing for war, I'll build Wealth to support a larger army and prepare for the economic hardships that capturing cities brings.

 

[Lord Kid]

So would you guys build each building in each of your cities, or just try to specialize them? I mean would you put a library/university/market etc in each city?

 

[cv431410]

I almost never produce wealth, culture, or science in any of my cities, unless it's very late in the game and I'm tired of micro-managing them.

I produce wealth quit often, especially in the following 2 situations:

(1) I can finish a research in current turn if I have enough gold, but I am just a few $ short. Finding 1 or more cities to stop the current productions and start producing gold will finish the research in the current turn.

(2) Assuming someone has a certain research rules (some people will never let research fall below 90%, some … 80%), gold production will fix the problem in short run.

Obviously this is a trade off, but it could be quit useful.

In OCC with 100% research rate already, very often research production is necessary, either just for research or to finish a research in current turn.

The similar rule applies for culture. I usually use the Code of Law/Artist to increase the city radius from 1 to 2 in the first 2 turns of a new city; but I suppose I could use culture production to do the same. I have never tried it though.

 

[cabert]

The similar rule applies for culture. I usually use the Code of Law/Artist to increase the city radius from 1 to 2 in the first 2 turns of a new city; but I suppose I could use culture production to do the same. I have never tried it though.

in warlords, it's doable (you need music, though)
in vanilla, you need a very good hammer tile to work
A plains hill mine will only give you 2 culture points
So to expand in 1 turn, you need 20 base hammers = 5 mined plain hills!

 

[Sisiutil]

You know that building Wealth (and Culture, Research, etc.) is much better in Warlords, right?

Nope, I didn't. I don't have Warlords yet. Enlighten me.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Building Wealth (and Research, etc.) in Warlords gives 1 gold:1 hammer (vs 1 gold:2 hammers in 1.61). Also, you get production bonuses from forge, factory, etc., but you don't get the effects of banks, libraries, etc. (which is the opposite of 1.61).

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=183121

 

[Skallagrimson]

If I'm expanding through war I go full on until I absolutely cannot afford the upkeep of the military anymore, then I bargain for peace from a position which is usually quite strong by then (and get techs and gold as an additional tribute for the peace I wanted anyway).

If I'm expanding through peaceful settlement I try to keep the slider at 60%: if it drops below that, "chew what you bit off" and develop, work, etc. If it nudges above 60% and there's still empty workable land out there, "go get it" is my philosophy. 80% or 90% will be unnecessarily restricting your expansion, IMHO, and less than that will be a more severe sacrifice of your research pace.

 

[karr1255]

For me having a shrine and a nicely spread religion is a big help. If you haven't found one, try and take one.
Also after a long time of warring most people are properly pretty pissed at you. So taking mercantilism+caste system+1 merchant everywhere can help, though it's very situational.