Some Questions for gameplaying

[Veteranewbie]

1. If I am lucky enough to have a continent with no other civilization, should i swarm the continent with my cities?
2. Is it good to maintain many cities thats is heavily corrupted (i.e. dont want to raze cities in war, but if don't then i just keep many corrupted cities that I have to protect and wasting money on)? Or to maintain a optimal numbers of cities that are productive with max infrastructure?
3. What how far should the Forbidden Palace away from the capital city?
4. Why is there so little strategic resources? I have 5 civilizations in this map but there are only 3 Oil, 3 coal, 3 irons etc. that are monopolized by one civilization.
5. Does nuclear bomb speed up global warming?

 

[Scyphax]

1) Yes - but if you are isolated you can not trade techs and will fall behind quickly your other priority needs to be to find other Civs.

2) I don't think it matters the main problem with many corrupt cities is managing them

3) If you are not going for a culture win build the FP close then later move your palace to an area where you have lots of cities with plenty of shield potiential.

4) Thats the way it is - I think the age of the earth may contribute a older earth I think has the resources more evenly spread. Certain resources are more likely to be found on certain types of terrain if you have more mountains you have agreater chance of having iron.

5) don't know

 

[Yzman]

5) Yes it creates more global warming by making more pollution.

 

[mad_stork]

Here's a piece of advice related to #1: If you are alone, try to meet the other civs as soon as possible. This will allow you to trade with them, and trading is very important. Plus if you meet civs first then you can trade communications with other civs for techs.

 

[TheNiceOne]

1) definately. You should always swarm any land you can. Isolated on an island, it is more important than ever to have a big empire that generate money, because you will need money to buy techs and catch up when you finally get contact.

2) I keep them, at least if you don't have to fear much about culture flipping. If the city is totally useless (for production), then rush a temple (for culture expansion) and set the city to produce wealth. It will then generate two gold minus one for upkeep of temple, netting you one gold per turn. Then manage the citizens so that as many as possible are taxmen. It will generate a few more gold and keep the city from growing into unhappiness.

This way you will gain money by keeping the city, get a few extra victory points, and this city should be a seasy to defend as anyone else - you only need to defense your border cities.

3) Difficult to give an absolute answer - but it should be further away on larger maps (obviously). But normally it depends on your map - if you have a cluster of 10+ cities a bit away from your capital, build the FP there.

4) IMHO, that's because if there were more than enough of them, they would stop being very strategic and only be a nice little bonus resource. Some of my most memorable games are when I though that I had the game in my pocket and then discoverd I had no oil...

5) I'm not sure really. I've read that pollution don't affect global warming - only the pollution triangles in your city view. But it may be that each nuclear bomb directly adds to global warming.

 

[Phantom Lord]

1. Yes you should, otherwise the AI will settle the places you didn't. It settles virtually everywhere once it runs out of space on its home continent, even on a two tile tundra island with no fish in a ten tile radius.

2. That's a matter of personal taste. The "Razing a City" thread a little down the forum covers this theme too. If you want a nice and compact empire on your home continent, you can raze, abandon or sell them. If you want to conquer the world, keep it.

TNO's calculation shows that it still pays off if you can keep it in the long run, altough it doesn't take the side effect of higher corruption for having more cities into account.

3. Unless you have a GL to rush it you'll be forced to build it not too far away. You can still move the palace later, eg using a GL you may get later on in the game or by moving it step by step further away from the FP.

4. In my last two games I had no salpeter on my continent. This forced me to take action and conquer or trade some, which made these games more interesting overall. I like the concept as it is, because it increases the depth of the game.

5. I don't know, but someone here certainly does.