What turn to stop building cities by?

[Scipio1]

I know there’s no one answer to this question because it depends upon the unique circumstances of the current game, but GENERALLY what turn should you stop expanding by? Obviously you’re not going to build an new settlement at turn 450. But what about turn 200?

 

[OmegaDestroyer]

Why build when you can take?

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I know there’s no one answer to this question because it depends upon the unique circumstances of the current game, but GENERALLY what turn should you stop expanding by? Obviously you’re not going to build an new settlement at turn 450. But what about turn 200?

I think it really depends on the size of the map. You want to grab as many of good city locations as possible on your continent. So if there is more space and more good city locations within reach, you should build more cities. Only stop building cities once all the good spots on your continent, within reach, have all been taken.

 

[Vandlys]

I know there’s no one answer to this question because it depends upon the unique circumstances of the current game, but GENERALLY what turn should you stop expanding by? Obviously you’re not going to build an new settlement at turn 450. But what about turn 200?

Does not depend on turn whatsoever. Turn only comes into play if the variables still stay the same. Am I playing on tiny islands with lots of water? Then rather quickly. Two players on a huge pangea map? Then it might take a while.

 

[criZp]

Why build when you can take?

Because I wanna decide on the location myself and role play as a good guy

 

[Tech Osen]

If you lack late game strategic resources and there are spots to settle that have them then I see no reason not stop at some arbitrary number of turns.

 

[bite]

In the late game I would only build a new city to snag a luxury/strategic resource I don't have

 

[MrRadar]

I know there’s no one answer to this question because it depends upon the unique circumstances of the current game, but GENERALLY what turn should you stop expanding by? Obviously you’re not going to build an new settlement at turn 450. But what about turn 200?

It depends on what turn approximately you're planning to win. If building a new settler, settling a new city and getting it up and running no longer speeds up your victory or gives some essential resource which is very necessary, then it becomes kind of pointless to settle further. That is if you play for efficiency and speed.

Otherwise, nothing stops you from expanding as long as there is some space left and you have enough determination to manage all those cities and make all those clicks.

 

[blackcatatonic]

I... don't really stop

I know I should, but I love building as many cities as I can get away with. Also there are legitimate use cases for late-game cities if there are resources you want to acquire or you want to settle a Natural Wonder for a quick era score boost. Then again, I don't really play games through to the end these days very often, so YMMV.

 

[tiamats4esgares]

When you have as many as you want....

Turn number generally has nothing to do with it.

 

[Isengardtom]

A consensus you hear a lot on the streams is around turn 100
Unless you have a very isolated start and can expand further without interference

Settling past 150 adds very little value unless there’s some interesting spot left with great growth potential and lots of production, a district with great adjacency or some luxury or strategic you really need (like coal if you focus on IZ)

 

[Galvatron]

Because I wanna decide on the location myself and role play as a good guy

If you're the good guy then you are justified whenever you take stuff.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I don't think there is a easy hard cutoff Point in which it don't make sense to get Another city. Let say you want to maximize science, once a city have built up its campus, you have basically 3 choice to increase science even more, grow the city but that is not effective, build Projects but again not effective or build a setter and get Another city which will give you alot more science if you can get its campus up, which you can do with 3 chops and then you can purchase its buildings.

With a few thousand gold, a few builders and somewhat decent terrain you can get a city from 1 pop to like 10 pops in maybe 20-25 turns in the later game.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I have done a lot of testing regarding this and my results boiled down to this:

Settling a city for an important strategic point or ressource is worth it throughout the game. That being said, there is a point where you should stop settling cities without a specific purpose, if you want to achieve fast win times. The exact turn is dependant on your expected win. A formula could look like this:

Expected turn to win E(t). R is the production time of a Settler, the ability to rush-buy a Settler with faith or gold.

The exact turn where you should not build any more new settlers: E(t) - (75-R).

To put it in words: You should stop settling around 75 turns before your expected victory. If you think you're going to be winning the game with a Space Victory at around t200, you should not build any new settlers after t125, unless you can rushbuy them. Of course, some factors change this, primarily how good the city is and how many chops it has.

I arrived at this conclusion for two reasons: I played a lot of games where I peacefully settled more than 20 cities at around t105. Settler costs were absolutely escalating, we're talking about 30-40 turns of production for one Settler outside of the capital. That is with the policy card slotted in. Second, I don't think having 23 or 25 cities over 20 cities helped me very much in winning. There is a point, for example in science victory, where science is not the bottleneck anymore, but centralized production and chops. That point is imho at around 2500 science. Having 5000 science per turn over 2500 rarely benefits you, since with both you are just 1-turning every tech. And 5000 science doesn't help you build your parts much faster either. It's similiar with other victory types.

I think mathematically it just makes more sense to build military units instead of settlers after 20 cities. Those units are cheaper to produce than 30 turn settlers, give you Eurekahs, and don't stop after just one city. They have lots of upward potential with pillaging, getting peace deals and getting cities. I'm sure you can peacefully expand up to 25 or even 30 cities and still get decent win times, but I don't think it's "optimal".

So the rule of thumb is: Stop building settlers at around 75 turns before you expect to win, or if you've already settled more than 20 cities. If you still want to grow your empire, building military might be a better investment.

Settling past 150 adds very little value unless there’s some interesting spot left with great growth potential and lots of production, a district with great adjacency or some luxury or strategic you really need (like coal if you focus on IZ)

If you regularly win your games at around t300, then settling on t150 is definitely worth it, it would probably be worth it to settle up to t200 or later. As @Denkt said it often doesn't need more than 25 turns to get a city online, and for your investment to pay off.

 

[Scipio1]

I have done a lot of testing regarding this and my results boiled down to this:

Settling a city for an important strategic point or ressource is worth it throughout the game. That being said, there is a point where you should stop settling cities without a specific purpose, if you want to achieve fast win times. The exact turn is dependant on your expected win. A formula could look like this:

Expected turn to win E(t). R is the production time of a Settler, the ability to rush-buy a Settler with faith or gold.

The exact turn where you should not build any more new settlers: E(t) - (75-R).

To put it in words: You should stop settling around 75 turns before your expected victory. If you think you're going to be winning the game with a Space Victory at around t200, you should not build any new settlers after t125, unless you can rushbuy them. Of course, some factors change this, primarily how good the city is and how many chops it has.

I arrived at this conclusion for two reasons: I played a lot of games where I peacefully settled more than 20 cities at around t105. Settler costs were absolutely escalating, we're talking about 30-40 turns of production for one Settler outside of the capital. That is with the policy card slotted in. Second, I don't think having 23 or 25 cities over 20 cities helped me very much in winning. There is a point, for example in science victory, where science is not the bottleneck anymore, but centralized production and chops. That point is imho at around 2500 science. Having 5000 science per turn over 2500 rarely benefits you, since with both you are just 1-turning every tech. And 5000 science doesn't help you build your parts much faster either. It's similiar with other victory types.

I think mathematically it just makes more sense to build military units instead of settlers after 20 cities. Those units are cheaper to produce than 30 turn settlers, give you Eurekahs, and don't stop after just one city. They have lots of upward potential with pillaging, getting peace deals and getting cities. I'm sure you can peacefully expand up to 25 or even 30 cities and still get decent win times, but I don't think it's "optimal".

So the rule of thumb is: Stop building settlers at around 75 turns before you expect to win, or if you've already settled more than 20 cities. If you still want to grow your empire, building military might be a better investment.



If you regularly win your games at around t300, then settling on t150 is definitely worth it, it would probably be worth it to settle up to t200 or later. As @Denkt said it often doesn't need more than 25 turns to get a city online, and for your investment to pay off.

Great post, thank you. That’s what I was looking for. There is a math to the whole thing when it comes to weighing the cost of producing a settler, and sending a military unit with him, versus the cities production until the end of the game. The benefit of the latter needs to outweigh the cost of the prior. Unless you really don’t care, then of course have it.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Glad it helped. Judging when exactly you will finish is also not easy. For Science it's pretty feasible, for Domination, Culture and Religious less so. But you do get a feeling for it after playing a few games. I almost always think I will win 5 turns earlier than I actually do

 

[The Highwayman]

Some great advice here. The general rule for faster victories is to have the core of your empire settled by T100, but that's just for a frame of reference. For example if you have 8 or so cities settled at T100 but have 4 to 8 settlers en route to quality spots, it can be just as good. If you see a great city location at T125, or simply can't get over there before then, still settle it. Move Magnus over there and have 2 5+ charge builders awaiting his establishment and go crazy. Some of my best, most productive cities were settled well after T100 and got online so fast due to harvesting. Some city locations are needed late game due to not knowing where strategic resources will spawn, such as aluminum, oil, and uranium. So late colonizing has its place. Of course settling the same spot is more beneficial the sooner you can do it, but if you do the math and it helps your empire, grab it.

In regards to over expanding, your cities could be working on eurekas and inspirations or feeding your new expands instead of hammering out 20+ turn settlers and that can be more beneficial than additional cities. 16-20 cities can easily produce 2,000 science per turn, which is way more than enough for a quick science game, but the difference in improving my game is efficiency and the timing of when milestones are met.

 

[gqqnbig]

By turn 2 as I'm playing single city.

 

[RealHuhn]

I agree with the others. However, if you focus on high faith per turn income and Moksha, you can extend the usefulness of new cities a bit longer simply because you can rush buy districts with faith. Just get a city to size 4 and buy a harbor/CH and a campus/theatre depending on location and victory type. I'd say most useful for culture victories because you often gain additional spots for seaside resorts as well.

 

[Basajaun]

I rarely stop settling if there is room for it, but by midgame or a bit sooner, I stop hard building them. If I have good economy, I might settle a couple more odd places if I want to block an AI advance or grab a specific resource.

For an epic speec game (750 Turn limit), I stop hard building settlers around T175, and stop settling alltogether around T250, From that point onwards (usually by the time I have built a couple Industrial zones) I focus mainly on victory condition. A Peaceful SV/CV usually ends for me around T400, or a couple turns later. Domination or religious I finish around 250 with easy opponents, 300-350 with hard ones. If my games start going into the 500 turn zone, I know I settled too much, or I built too much randomly. Or the victory condition Im chasing doesnt go well with the Civ in question (like my T500+ peaceful SV with Shaka )