Some questions about cities

[hanterp]

I have read a lot of topics and learned a lot, but I still have some questions about cities:

1. What is better: Lesser, but large cities ( size 10+ ) or a lot of small cities (size around 5 )? I think expanding goes fast when you have a lot of cities, but do small cities produce enough?
2. How far away should I build cities? I mean howmany tiles in distance to each other?
3. About working in land. When choosing a new location for my worker to work, the game sometimes advices ( with blue circles ) to build where already an improvement is, like a cottage. Isn't that a wrong advice?

 

[Silence101]

I have read a lot of topics and learned a lot, but I still have some questions about cities:

1. What is better: Lesser, but large cities ( size 10+ ) or a lot of small cities (size around 5 )? I think expanding goes fast when you have a lot of cities, but do small cities produce enough?
2. How far away should I build cities? I mean howmany tiles in distance to each other?
3. About working in land. When choosing a new location for my worker to work, the game sometimes advices ( with blue circles ) to build where already an improvement is, like a cottage. Isn't that a wrong advice?

1. Lesser, but large cities is better.
2. I would be more concerned with building cities on good terrain. You don't typically want them to be too far away... the maintenance will eat you alive. If they overlap a little, that's fine.
3. Ignore the computer's advice in most circumstances... you'll be better off.

 

[one2tieyourshoe]

Ignore the computer's advice in most circumstances... you'll be better off.

How does a computer decide to "hint" you at where to build? It changes every turn it seems like and generally is terrible. I use them to get into a general area (if I don't notice the rice or deer in the trees, etc).

 

[Grawss]

How does a computer decide to "hint" you at where to build? It changes every turn it seems like and generally is terrible. I use them to get into a general area (if I don't notice the rice or deer in the trees, etc).

It seems to be the greatest balance for the immediate 9 squares available to be worked. So it may try to choose the perfect amount of food for a certain amount of citizens in the city.

The only time I've seen it take city expansion into consideration is with sea food. All else, it normally suggests sitting my city right next to a cow when a single expansion two squares away from the cow will cover a few extra resources. It'll just take a few turns to get that cow.

 

[cronullasharks]

A city should probably exist for one or more of the following reasons.

1. It provides resources
2. It has alot of food /commerce/production tiles
3. It occupies a strategic location (choke point , sea access for example)
4. You have captured it and it contains wonders or holy cities.

These types of cities are generally worth building/taking without considering maintenance as in time they will pay for themselves many times over . Your economy would need to be at breaking point not to build one that fits within these reasons (or raze one you take).

In regards to city overlap , its nothing to worry about . Generally I try to cottage the overlapped square as its not too hard to always have the tile worked.

Better players than myself could probably explain why I am wrong , but given the chance to have more cities (not junk cities.....see previous criteria) I will always go for it and take the short term maintenace pain.

More cities= more beakers , more food , more production , bigger army , more wonders , basically unless its gonna keep you in the dark ages forever ,then bigger is better (city size included)

 

[hanterp]

I asked all this because in my last game I builded 5 medium to large cities at the southeast part of the map and when I tried to expand, Juilius cutted me off to expand to the west, so I decided to open borders with Julius and still move to the west. I managed to build 5 other cities overthere but the maintenence-costs were high and they didn't grow very much. Maybe those western cities were strategically strong, as I was neighbour of Julius in the west AND the east, but my armies were not on maximum strength to attack him ( in fact, I had only an average amount of soldiers and Julius got much more). Julius probably didn't like to have me on two sides of his civ, so he declared me war. The game is still in progress, but I lost some cities in the west. In the east my biggest city was attacked and I succesfully beated him overthere. Still I have the idea that I did something wrong.

 

[Supr49er]

I asked all this because in my last game I builded 5 medium to large cities at the southeast part of the map and when I tried to expand, Juilius cutted me off to expand to the west, so I decided to open borders with Julius and still move to the west. I managed to build 5 other cities overthere but the maintenence-costs were high and they didn't grow very much. Maybe those western cities were strategically strong, as I was neighbour of Julius in the west AND the east, but my armies were not on maximum strength to attack him ( in fact, I had only an average amount of soldiers and Julius got much more). Julius probably didn't like to have me on two sides of his civ, so he declared me war. The game is still in progress, but I lost some cities in the west. In the east my biggest city was attacked and I succesfully beated him overthere. Still I have the idea that I did something wrong.

Yeah, distant cities are very costly. You can always liberate them, or make them your colony. How many cities you build really depends on how large the map is, how many good locations, and how much room you have. Often it is better to capture cities than build them yourself.

 

[hanterp]

How can you liberate or colonize cities?

 

[Supr49er]

How can you liberate or colonize cities?

Click on your Domestic Advisor button (or F1). If you see a red fist at the bottom, click on it and it will show you if you can liberate/colonize.

If they're on the same continent as you, you'll have to gift them to an AI.

 

[Silence101]

I asked all this because in my last game I builded 5 medium to large cities at the southeast part of the map and when I tried to expand, Juilius cutted me off to expand to the west, so I decided to open borders with Julius and still move to the west. I managed to build 5 other cities overthere but the maintenence-costs were high and they didn't grow very much. Maybe those western cities were strategically strong, as I was neighbour of Julius in the west AND the east, but my armies were not on maximum strength to attack him ( in fact, I had only an average amount of soldiers and Julius got much more). Julius probably didn't like to have me on two sides of his civ, so he declared me war. The game is still in progress, but I lost some cities in the west. In the east my biggest city was attacked and I succesfully beated him overthere. Still I have the idea that I did something wrong.

I don't think you necessarily did anything wrong, judging by your description. There's a lot of details that I don't know, though... under the right circumstances, spliting your civ like you did may work out, but it comes down to effective city specialization and a horde of other variables like playing your traits, resources, diplomacy, etc... Spliting your civ in that manner does become a defensive nightmare however, because you've now got multiple fronts to defend. It's hard to tell from just a description, but it sounds like your military was lacking, and if you were already having money troubles, you might have been better off just sticking with your five original cities, building your military, and attacking Julius for his territory before peacefully expanding again.

 

[hanterp]

Yes, my militairy was lacking indeed. The number of soldiers was less than Julius' number of soldiers. Julius came with a mass of units stacked and especially in the smaller western cities I lost heavily. I will take your advice by not splitting my Civ next game.