Ring City Placement

Dianthus,

i will look into closer concentrations of the core cities. but i am having no problems winning games at emperor. with the way i play which is optismising city placement rather than getting over worried about corruption. i win game late, by dominating the later ages and give up wonders in the early game.

but as i have said my next game i will try the RCP approach, as it looks strong
 
>By overlap do you mean overlap between Palace/Forbidden Palace? Currently there is only one centre, so no.
I was envisioning the de/selecting cities option, and showing the 5x5, lopsided 'X' around each city. Any tiles shared by cities would be darkened, or something. Another question: does it read the location of the Palace from the save, or can one select which tile to use as center? Zoom function?

>>show a ratio of single/shared workable tiles under each city site? (12/20=60%)

>No, it doesn't. What constitutes workable?
The 20 tiles around the cities that the citizens work on. These numbers should be polled after de/selecting cities within each ring. You could probably do a couple math loops and come out with an weighted suggestion, once the ring distance is set (maybe even suggest an optimal ring selection). That's a lot of number crunching, though. :(

However, if you like crunching numbers, you could calculate food production and population potential (with and without improved tiles?), and suggest optimal placements for cities of size 12 and 20 (or maybe a variable city size).

Well, I should stop before trying out the first version. :)
 
I have used RCP in a number of games now...

Even if your map isn't ideal for 2 complete rings you can still use equidistant cities to great use. There are people here who look at maps and say "that's not suited to RCP", but really RCP is now part and parcel of every cities placement.

I have also come to realise that in certain situations a tightly packed close second ring and a very lightweight inner ring (3 or 4 cities) can be ultra-powerful. With a city rank of 4 or 5 for all your outer ring cities you can get 15 or 20 very powerful cities, and you can still get maybe 12 tiles per city.

I have also started relying much more on getting aleader to build my FP core. This is then (usually) a much more optimal RCP layout, with an inner ring of 6 or 7 cities, and an outer ring of 20 or so. My games have yet to get to the point of realising this second FP core since they are all PBEM's and have some time to go before I am there.

The only other strategy I have found is when your capital is not optimal. Instead of Palace jumping I have found it more useful to build my FP in the 'center' spot of my rings, and have the capital in the inner ring of my FP core. Then a leader can be used to jump the Capital - in the meantime you get even better corruption reduction. The only downside is needing 'OCP' number of cities before you can build the FP - but until then your corruption is still low anyway, since you are building cities close to your capital.
 
Firstly, I am a big perfectionist, so all this optimum game mechanics stuff really makes my day! Cheers to all you hardworking people! :goodjob:

Now, onto the subject. I like the idea of combining several of the techniques that enable me to be a 'builder' to the fullest. In case you don't understand the title above, they are Ring City Placement (obviously), Optimal City Placement, the Palace Jump and Alexman's hybrid idea. First, at the beginning of the game, plan to have the centre of your rings not at the current capital, but at the first city you found. Note that the (then) capital should be in the first ring of the future RCP arrangement. After the position of future RCP centrepoint is sorted, build rings around it as you normally would your capital using RCP.

OCP comes into it with what ring distance you choose - on larger maps I'd choose maybe 5.5 (/5) as the first ring. What's important is to keep as many workable squares per city available - in the case of the 5.5 distance ring you just have to put a city on one city site, then miss out the city site to the side, then put one on the next site (i.e. every other city site). This leaves you with a ring of minimal corruption cities with ~16 workable squares each! The second ring could then be all the way out to distance 10 or something similar, again trying for as many workable squares as possible (preferably without wasting land). Loadsa workable squares = big production ring.

The Palace Jump comes into what I was saying earlier about how the capital wasn't the centre of your rings. You should have worked out by now that at some point (well, as early as possible) you're meant to build the Forbidden Palace in the centre of the rings. Then that can lead to the almighty Palace Jump...and guess what. You can start another load of rings around the new Palace site, whether it's on the other end of your continent, the other side of the world or whatever!

And finally we come onto where to put the rest of the cities...well, we use Alexman's hybrid approach of course! Shove the remaining cities in whatever beneficial positions you want (coast, wheat floodplains, resources...) knowing that it won't adversely affect your ultimate production rings, and knowing that you don't have to have the hassle of calculating any more distances (or that you don't have to settle on that bonus resource). Plus, the corruption in the outer cities won't be too bad anyway, unless you have a huge empire, at which point it won't really matter.

Welp, that's the basic theory behind my idea/combination of other peoples' ideas. One of the beauties of it is that it is fairly flexible - put the rings at whatever distances suit your playing style, and it won't make it any worse (unless you're perfectionist builder types like me), and you could have more than two rings if you want. Another big benefit is that you get a much wider choice for your FP centre position than you would for the starting capital (without making things more difficult for yourself). If you're on the coast, place the FP centre inland to get as large a production ring as possible. If you have scouted around and see mountains or bonus resources in annoying positions, try to place the FP centre so that all other cities can be founded on the ring without having to miss out. With Qitai's x.5 ring discovery it makes it even more flexible. etc etc.

Finally, note that this is all blissful speculation - I have yet to try it out due to my addiction to strategy posts until I find the ultimate playing style that best suits me. What do you guys think of it?
 
Gah, now that's some bad timing. I could at least have posted all that before Qitai's discovery. Heh, but thanks anyway.

Edit: Hm, you could use the Palace Jump to get the Capital to the other side of the map though. So it's not useless. :)

Edit2: Except RCP round the the FP doesn't make any difference...so it is useless...ack.
 

............................F F F
........................F F E E E F F
....................F F E E D D D E E F F
................F F E E D D C C C D D E E F F
............F F E E D D C C B B B C C D D E E F F
..........F E E D D C C B B A A A B B C C D D E E F
........F E D D C C B B A A 9 9 9 A A B B C C D D E F
........F E D C B B A A 9 9 8 8 8 9 9 A A B B C D E F
......F E D C B A A 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 8 8 9 9 A A B C D E F
......F E D C B A 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 A B C D E F
....F E D C B A 9 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 A B C D E F
....F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
..F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
..F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
..F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
..F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
....F E D C B A 9 8 7 6 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
....F E D C B A 9 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 A B C D E F
......F E D C B A 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 A B C D E F
......F E D C B A A 9 9 8 8 7 7 7 8 8 9 9 A A B C D E F
........F E D C B B A A 9 9 8 8 8 9 9 A A B B C D E F
........F E D D C C B B A A 9 9 9 A A B B C C D D E F
..........F E E D D C C B B A A A B B C C D D E E F
............F F E E D D C C B B B C C D D E E F F
................F F E E D D C C C D D E E F F
....................F F E E D D D E E F F
........................F F E E E F F
............................F F F
 
Hey Jansen, even better, you could use my CRpRings program to overlay the rings directly onto the map for the game you're currently playing. See the link in my sig.
 
Originally posted by Dianthus
Hey Jansen, even better, you could use my CRpRings program to overlay the rings directly onto the map for the game you're currently playing. See the link in my sig.

What link? I don't see any link in your sig except your CivReplayer. If you have a CRpRings program, I would like to try it out. Thanks!:)
 
Originally posted by Moonsinger
What link? I don't see any link in your sig except your CivReplayer. If you have a CRpRings program, I would like to try it out. Thanks!:)
You know, I'd forgotten to update my sig to mention the new 2.2 version of the CIVReplay stuff. CRpRings is included in the 2.2 distribution. Go to the CIVReplay link and take a look at the screenshots :).
 
Originally posted by Dianthus
You know, I'd forgotten to update my sig to mention the new 2.2 version of the CIVReplay stuff. CRpRings is included in the 2.2 distribution. Go to the CIVReplay link and take a look at the screenshots :).

Thanks!:) I just tested it out and left my message in that thread.
 
Originally posted by Dianthus
Hey Jansen, even better, you could use my CRpRings program to overlay the rings directly onto the map for the game you're currently playing. See the link in my sig.

Yeah, I know there were much better things around, however, I had developed this ASCII chart before I had actually registered in this forum, but dirctly after I had read David's RCP concept. Having already been familiar with Alex's corruption work from Apolyton, this was easy for me to comprehend right off.

So, in order to better understand the concept myself, I took the liberty of plotting each absolute value on a monospace font page in Textedit, starting with one quarter, mirroring it, then doubling it upwards. Yes, I did that totally by hand and mathematical reasoning.

Think of it less as a helpful post and more as an object d'art, or something that anyone could use (you have my permission to steal and post it) in a text-only FAQ or guide.

Oh, that is, only if it contains no errors.
 
I have just tried out the RCP planner. This is truely superb. I have been a big fan of the replay wiewer for a while now. Replaying crp files of different games is one of the highlights of GOTM for me, but this really is the business. :goodjob: :goodjob:

Great work Dianthus. You're the best.
 
Your August Sirs,

I am a newbee and was lucky enough to read the original post on RCP because I was frustrated with corruption (who is not?). Not having the benifit of your "ring" concept at that time, I worked out the tightest fit of "fat X" city boundaries topologically. It is interesting that it closely matches the 5 space ring. It has been very effective in my recent play. I have been staying Despotic and no courthouses. A remote FP anywhere is great too. I do not think that you need to worry about the rings interfering with each other between the palace and the FP. 8 good cities in the first ring and 9 more on the FP and all the ones in between are good!

I do have a question, the overlap of city boarders has to reduce the effectiveness of any city in a 2, or 3 ring. They are trebled up on map squares in many instances. How does this effect Their output? Are you not losing the very productivity that you are trying to achieve with RCP and corruption reduction. Yes is the answer I think. I would suggest No rings under 4 spaces (ok, maybe 3.5) but if you can get 8 at the 5 space ring that do not steal productivity from each other it is an awsome engine. Put them all on wealth and watch them cook!

Sorry if I have missed something, I am just coming up to speed.

Regards,

Jack Noir
PS Why is HTML turned off? Javaphobia?
 
this is changing in conquest i understand.

But your question was about reduced power of cities because they are so cramped. Even before Ring placement people would cram alot of cities right around their capital. Its all about an explosive start with low corruption. For the most part regardless of if i was on an island or the lay of the land i would put 8 cities down in each direction on the map all within 2 to 4 moves of my capital. (1 north, 1 northwest, 1 west etc) and if i had a coast square to the north and my citys to the north and northwest had to be only 2 squares away from capital and 2 squares apart from each other then so be it. If i notice after i got 8 cities all within 2 to 4 of my capital that 3 squares arnt covered and theres a fish nearby i could get ill plop down another settler too. And then as if to add insult to injury ill mine everything instead of irrigating~

Though i should note that i prolly dont play rank as well as i should and i dont play Pop rush as well as i should.

The only thing im testifying too is:
an explosive start trumps perfect cities 2500 years down the road.
 
Originally posted by Jack Noir
I do have a question, the overlap of city boarders has to reduce the effectiveness of any city in a 2, or 3 ring. They are trebled up on map squares in many instances. How does this effect Their output? Are you not losing the very productivity that you are trying to achieve with RCP and corruption reduction.
The answer is really "It depends" rather than yes or no :). This is because the Rank corruption bug (See A Rank Corruption Discovery and Exploit to negate rank corruption) means that RCP is of no use later in the game when you can ensure that your main core is around your forbidden palace and closer to it than to the palace (which you've moved to a long distance away).

Therefore RCP is only of use early in the game. At this point (prior to building the forbidden palace and moving the palace) you would normally be building lots of cities close together, maintaining a low population in each city (typically < 6 or 7) by building workers/settlers. To get the most use out of the tiles you want to place the cities close together so that the low population can still use as many tiles in your territory as possible.
 
Your August Sirs,

Thank you jeremiahrounds, and Dianthus. I knew that there had to be a reason, that dense placement frankly looked silly to my uneducated eye. I have tremendous problems with getting early growth, so now the dense pack makes some sence. I had not even thought about moving "kick-ass central" (Palace) I will go read the posting on Rank Corruption now!

One of the problems that I have had with "quilting" citys across the landscape in a edge to edge fit is that the landscape does not cooperate! So I have to jump and leave a hole in a desert for instance. Well of course the Germans come by and populate in the hole! Should I just be making Settlers rapidly and fill everything? That looks like what the AI does. At least the Germans in the game I am playing now are following that strategy. (If you must know, I am keeping up with the AI so far)

I have also discovered (by reading a great post in the academy) the Granary expansion. The dense ring and use of the granary are mutually exclusive I believe. The Granary strategy relies on rapid production of population which is hard for the dense ring. Or is this another case of "it depends"?

Regards,
Jack Noir
 
Can anyone confirm this is fixed in Conquests?
 
Back
Top Bottom