The merits of improvements: a counter to trading post spam

[dostillevi]

Recently the argument has been made that trading posts are the end all and be all of improvements because of the power of gold. While this is very generally the case due to the power of maritime CSs, I believe the argument that a tile can be worked just once and left for the entire game is no longer valid in civ5. Instead, I expect that the continual reworking of tile improvements is now an integral part of civilization.

Lets look closer at the maritime CS situation. In order to reap the benefits of a maritime CS, one must first scout for and get influence over the CS. This can a great deal of time and roughly $750 in order to assure an alliance. In the mean time, your cities need food to grow. Build farms! When you later get access to your maritime CSs, then pave over whatever farms you don't need.

Similarly there is an argument about hammers vs gold. While rush buying is powerful and can be made more powerful by certain technologies and wonders, it should be noted that wonders cannot be rush bought, although I've had success getting great engineers from CSs using patronage. An early production city MUST have mines, but these may later be paved over to provide gold if the circumstances change, such as researching the tech that adds science to trading posts, or when the lumber mill starts producing 2 hammers. The point is, static improvements no longer play a part in Civ. The well informed strategist will keep enough workers on hand to be continually reworking city tiles and adapting to advancements in technology and changes in CS diplomacy.

 

[aryah]

it should be noted that wonders cannot be rush bought

damn, so that's another manual errata?

pg 105:

"Purchasing Units, Buildings or Wonders
You can spend gold to purchase units, buildings or Wonders in a city.
"

 

[taltamir]

damn, so that's another manual errata?

pg 105:

"Purchasing Units, Buildings or Wonders
You can spend gold to purchase units, buildings or Wonders in a city.
"

yap... that is wrong.
Wonders AND courthouses cannot be bought.

 

[Zhahz]

Meh, it's hard to avoid going nuts with trading posts, but I still do a mix of specialized cities - or try to.

I also tend to space my cities out which means I can have my cities shift focus easily. They can work mines for max prod mode, or work money tiles for gold mode. I don't always fully micro, but I do use the "focus" selections quite a bit, which works good enough most of the time.

 

[NZV]

Don't forget that city-states can bring political issues as well. If someone is attacking a city state that you need for growth and you sunk thousands of gold into, you are going to need to defend it. Or more likely, allow them to take it and then liberate it, but either way you go to war. Which may be a very, very terrible idea in many circumstances. It also doesn't help when the only friendly maritime city-states are in awful positions all the way across the world. Furthermore, you risk angering civs if you are throwing money at a city-state that they want to ally with.

This makes a straight up trading post strategy pretty risky sometimes.

 

[taltamir]

Don't forget that city-states can bring political issues as well. If someone is attacking a city state that you need for growth and you sunk thousands of gold into, you are going to need to defend it. Or more likely, allow them to take it and then liberate it, but either way you go to war. Which may be a very, very terrible idea in many circumstances. It also doesn't help when the only friendly maritime city-states are in awful positions all the way across the world. Furthermore, you risk angering civs if you are throwing money at a city-state that they want to ally with.

This makes a straight up trading post strategy pretty risky sometimes.

all good point.. and according to some threads here, an allied city state can and will backstab you on occasion...
Safer to just conquer them all.

 

[milk steak]

Don't forget that city-states can bring political issues as well. If someone is attacking a city state that you need for growth and you sunk thousands of gold into, you are going to need to defend it. Or more likely, allow them to take it and then liberate it, but either way you go to war. Which may be a very, very terrible idea in many circumstances. It also doesn't help when the only friendly maritime city-states are in awful positions all the way across the world. Furthermore, you risk angering civs if you are throwing money at a city-state that they want to ally with.

This makes a straight up trading post strategy pretty risky sometimes.

You can fight a proxy war instead. Rather than outright declaring on the aggressor(s), just set a wall of your units up in front of the city state. The aggressor won't be able to move past your wall to attack the CS unless they DoW on you (which you can avoid anyway). Also, gift advanced units to that city state so they can use them to defend.

 

[taltamir]

You can fight a proxy war instead. Rather than outright declaring on the aggressor(s), just set a wall of your units up in front of the city state. The aggressor won't be able to move past your wall to attack the CS unless they DoW on you (which you can avoid anyway). Also, gift advanced units to that city state so they can use them to defend.

both of which are very expensive... and an investment of your time and effort that you might not want to make.
How is this cheaper than conquering them and leaving them as puppets?

 

[milk steak]

both of which are very expensive... and an investment of your time and effort that you might not want to make.
How is this cheaper than conquering them and leaving them as puppets?

I just use units gifted from Military CSes. Doesn't cost me any production at all. Depending on the terrain of the defending CS, you can effectively blockade a CS with 3 or so units.


Edit- But yes, there is of course an opportunity cost associated with this strategy. However, it's far cheaper than the alternative: Declaring all-out-war with one, possibly multiple civs.

 

[taltamir]

I just use units gifted from Military CSes. Doesn't cost me any production at all. Depending on the terrain of the defending CS, you can effectively blockade a CS with 3 or so units.

Edit- But yes, there is of course an opportunity cost associated with this strategy. However, it's far cheaper than the alternative: Declaring all-out-war with one, possibly multiple civs.

all out war is great... it gives you all out victory
conquer conquer conquer

But good strategy, getting the units from same CS is a nice touch... but what about the increasing maintenance costs of units? wont that drain your coffers?

 

[Show]

With the current AI, just getting rid of anybody that gets in your way, even on immortal/diety is nothing too difficult.... At least before industrial era. But you should own most of the map by that time.

 

[milk steak]

all out war is great... it gives you all out victory
conquer conquer conquer

But good strategy, getting the units from same CS is a nice touch... but what about the increasing maintenance costs of units? wont that drain your coffers?

Nothing beats a good world war.

Maintenance cost is covered by the thread topic: Lots of TPs. I'm a TP whore.


Edit -- And here's the city state blocking strategy in action (pics): http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=384601. So awesome.

 

[Shillen]

I agree with the OP. I build all farms to start and when my cities are large I switch to trading posts.

 

[MkLh]

both of which are very expensive... and an investment of your time and effort that you might not want to make.
How is this cheaper than conquering them and leaving them as puppets?

Conquering a city state is a terrible idea.

 

[taltamir]

Conquering a city state is a terrible idea.

yea, I see now that in the higher difficulty levels the penalties to happiness from owning more cities and citizens are ridiculous, and you can abuse the heck out of city states (free great persons for perpetual golden age, +massive amounts of food for EVERY city you own, etc).

There are some advantages to it though, you are getting science, money, etc from them... if you leave them as puppets they will eventually build enough +happiness buildings to stop being a drain.

 

[AlienFromBeyond]

Perpetual war with a CS is also good for farming XP for your units from the ranged attack of the city.

 

[Monsterzuma]

@ OP
Keep in mind that the massive worker army you would need to constantly tailor and retailor your improvement layout costs a lot of gold per turn. It is questionable whether what you gain from doing what you describe weighs up to these costs (or to the hammer investment of building said workers, or to not taking the gold lump sum you'd get for disbanding them instead, etc...).

 

[effexop]

Conquering a city state is a terrible idea.

Not always, friend. If Rio de Janeiro wants belgrade out, and belgrade is near me, I get for pwning belgrade:

1 maritime CS ally, or almost ally.
1 free luxury
1 good spot city.
and train my military.

In return I might piss off some AIs.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

 

[cheetah7071]

Conquering a city state is a terrible idea.

Not strictly true under all circumstances; if the city-state is small enough, immediate access to the happiness resource can be worth the unhappiness it generates if you don't have the money to become an ally, especially if you're at -8 or something (i.e., just below the threshold for severe unhappiness).