Tight or Wide Spacing Around The Capital?

[megistatos]

Having read Pyrrhos' interesting thread dicussing CxxC versus CxxxxC (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=267177) , I thought a poll might be useful, to get the opinions of the wider community.

Go there to get involved in the heated discussion, but please use this thread only to list specific advantages/disadvantages of the two strategies.

Personally, I use tight spacing(and I don't play much other than GOTMs).

 

[megistatos]

I'll keep all points summarised here.

For CxxC:
Fewer unused tiles early on, and less time spent wasting worker moves.
Units can move between towns in one turn.
Towns don't need culture to connect borders.
Each city can be spaced to have exactly 12 tiles available to each(no hospitals needed).
Settlers settle faster.
Less distance corruption.
An advantage in the early game, which can then be turned into an advantage later.

For CxxxxC:
Less micromanagement.
More choice of tiles.
More territory early on.
Easier to build wonders in strong cities.
Less rank corruption.
Fewer city improvements required.

 

[Chamnix]

I voted CxxC (RCP 3) because it is closer to the way I play. I almost always use RCP 3 in PTW. In C3C, I use a mixture of CxxC and CxxxC so that every city has 12 workable tiles.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Same as Chamnix. I use CxxC on tighter maps and CxxxC for my first ring if theres more room, or I am going for a 20k win. Second ring is always CxxC.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

As a Vanilla player, my optimal city placement are two rings around the capital with the first ring at distance 4 with 8 cities. The second ring, preferably, comes at distance 8, or alternatively distance 7. In terms of the C's and the X's this is a mix between CxxC and CxxxC:

C
x
x
CxxxC
so to speak.

Here is a shot from an emperor game with Persia that uses this kind of spacing:

Spoiler :

An alternative pattern is to go for 5 cities at distance 3 and then place the second ring at distance 6. (And maybe even a third ring at distance 10 if map size and difficutly permit). Normally I would use this for something like deity, but the following shot is only from a regent game:

Spoiler :

Both patterns are however geared towards an empire with size 12 cities and intesive use of the land within the city radiuses.

And my vote I think will have to fall for CxxC.

 

[brennan]

First ring. RCP 5.5

Brennan - daring to be different

 

[bambam190]

I voted CxxC (RCP 3) because it is closer to the way I play. I almost always use RCP 3 in PTW. In C3C, I use a mixture of CxxC and CxxxC so that every city has 12 workable tiles.

that is what I do as well.

 

[Hasdrubal Barca]

13 CxxC vs 3 CxxxxC, the results speak for themselves.

 

[DWetzel]

If CxxxC isn't one of my choices, I'll vote for the tighter formation.

 

[Flak509]

i like my capital to have room maybe im just oldfashioned so CxxxxC(RCP5), but other cities can be closer togeather

 

[Xethorsiph]

My first set around my capitol always is in such a way that there is no overlap between my capitol and another city. the rest usually go CxxC

 

[ecuwins]

This seems to be quite the debate around here lately. I have read some good discussion on the topic. I am still convinced that tight placement is superior in most cases. It does not have to be strict CxxC, you know. My capital may have 3 CxxC cites around it with 2 CxxxC's or 1 CxxxC and a CxxxxC. It has a lot to do with terrain - mountains, rivers, and coast. The idea is to get as close to CxxC as possible while taking terrain into consideration. I can just about always get 12 tiles working in all my core cities and not choke any one city. Hospitals are just "eye candy", so I never plan on building them. I plan on having 12 tiles max in productive cities and 6 tiles in most non-productive cities.

 

[MAS]

@ecuwins

But keep in mind that RCP doesn't apply to C3C, only to vanilla and PTW. And the way you settle in C3C would make your core in PTW and vanilla a lot weaker. In vanilla and PTW, you'll want more cities in less rings.

In Vanilla and PTW, you'd also rely more on a strong core, and less on specialist farms.

 

[ecuwins]

@ecuwins But keep in mind that RCP doesn't apply to C3C, only to vanilla and PTW.

I know I had Vanilla for a year before I got C3C. I should have added that my comment pertained to C3C exclusively.

 

[megistatos]

In Conquests the whole ring city placement trick was stopped, so there isn't really any advantage to using full rings, as in PTW. What should be decisive is the terrain itself. CxxC and CxxxxC therefore just mean tight and loose city locations.

 

[Virtual Alex]

CxxC allows you to "work" more tiles quicker, and for a longer period of time than looser placements.

Early game is much more important than late game, and so this advantage is extreme.

 

[Tone]

Am I allowed to reply "it depends"?

If it's a tight start on a high level its got to be a close placement. Lower level and/or more space and I'll go wider, with maybe some temporary towns to utalise the unused towns until my towns grow into cities.

I'm quite tempted to play a PtW game with CXC spacing around my capital and then doing a palace jump to give the old core (with FP) greater space.

Variety is the spice of life (and civ). I've voted for close placement though because that what I do most often.

 

[Pyrrhos]

I'll keep all points summarised here.

For CxxC:
Each city can be spaced to have 12 tiles available to each.

This is not quite true. Take a piece of paper and draw the cultural boundaries of three rings of towns with 0 culture. Count the number of tiles, a square with the sides 21 tiles. This comes to 441 tiles. Subtract the 49 tiles occupied by towns and divide by the number of towns. The number of tiles available per town comes to no more than eight (8).

Furthermore, no matter which level you play at, your chances to build any wonder are seriously compromised.

Other than that, a good summary!

 

[Chamnix]

Furthermore, no matter which level you play at, your chances to build any wonder are seriously compromised.

You only need 1 town of size 12 to build a wonder.

 

[NickyH]

CxxxC, and occasionally tighter or wider in the first ring around my capitol. It depends on difficulty, the terrain, and what kind of game I like to try for the moment.

I usually use tighter placement further out in my empire. Beyond the second ring, it's usually CxxC and sometimes CxC, though I sometimes use a looser placement even beyond the second ring, depending on the terrain. I rarely use CxC on the diagonal axis (SW-NE) and use it more frequently in the cardinal directions. ( Straight South And North.)

The only thing that is certain, is that I never strictly adhere to a symmetrical pattern, but adapt my placement according to terrain.