When do you stop building cities?

[Mango201]

Obviously you stop if you have to (i.e. you run out of space). But given enough land/opportunity, is there a point in the game past which its just unwise to keep building settlers?

 

[Linklite]

Usually, I won't settlers if the number of turns to build them is too high or I need thebm city to be doing something else. So usually at around 10 cities, I stop building them, but that number is quite changeable depending on circumstances.

 

[Heyesey]

If in the later game I've got money, or production, coming out of my ears, I spam cities all over the place just because I can. I haven't done any sort of analysis as to whether this speeds up, or slows down, eventual victory - given Reyna and a huge income, you can drop a settler and have fully-built city centre and one district in the same turn. But if you're gong for conquest all that money is better pumped into more and better military, I would think ...

 

[kaspergm]

Start of industrial era ... can't pick Monumentality anymore.

 

[Socrates99]

It goes in spurts for me. I'll drop three or four in the ancient then spam them in the classical with or without monumentality. I might continue with a few more in the medieval if theres good spots nearby but sometimes I'll pause it there. Then late renaissance/early industrial I'll start filling in any reasonable spots left, including tundra and snow if resources are available to grow it. At that point you have cash/faith to buy districts/buildings so all you really need is pop to open district slots.

 

[Vargas1]

Close to never in most games. I’ll often end up setting a city in the last 20-30 turns because I need another resource (usually aluminum) or because it’s a spot I want for something like Amundsen-Scott or a spot for several national parks or somewhere with a bunch of chops for some other late game wonder.

 

[Futumch]

I'll try to build like crazy to stake out a "homeland", and find natural obstacles to help as boundaries. Once I have consolidated that area with as many cities as I can squash in, I will keep an eye out for empty areas that can accomodate a couple of productive cities. Satellite cities like that also allow me to trade with far-flung foreign cities, which is nice.
I usually have stopped settling new cities by the late renaissance era, but like Vargas1 mentioned, I'll grab spots if I am short on a resource or want to build a specific wonder.

 

[Warmoonger]

I'll try to build like crazy to stake out a "homeland", and find natural obstacles to help as boundaries. Once I have consolidated that area with as many cities as I can squash in, I will keep an eye out for empty areas that can accomodate a couple of productive cities. Satellite cities like that also allow me to trade with far-flung foreign cities, which is nice.
I usually have stopped settling new cities by the late renaissance era, but like Vargas1 mentioned, I'll grab spots if I am short on a resource or want to build a specific wonder.

Pretty much this.

It depends though. Given the choice I often prefer a few tight cities. Hold off from settling, and let the AI settle the area and then hit them hard.

 

[PiR]

I don't stop as long as there is one tile available without a lot of loyalty issues.

 

[aieeegrunt]

There is zero reason not to spam cities in this game other than literally not having physical space for more cities

Earlier editions of civ at least could pose a military threat if you neglected your army to spam settlers but that doesnt happen here

 

[Warmoonger]

There is zero reason not to spam cities in this game other than literally not having physical space for more cities

Earlier editions of civ at least could pose a military threat if you neglected your army to spam settlers but that doesnt happen here

Sadly this is true.

 

[Archon_Wing]

There is zero reason not to spam cities in this game other than literally not having physical space for more cities

Actually no. Please stop spreading this dead meme. At a certain point, you're better off pivoting to your victory condition after the proper critical mass as settlers keep increasing in cost. If you're 5 turns away from victory, are you going to produce another settler?

Wide being superior is due to a certain other reason that I really shouldn't have to spell out to y'all that find this game so easy, but here we are.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Actually no. Please stop spreading this dead meme. At a certain point, you're better off pivoting to your victory condition after the proper critical mass as settlers keep increasing in cost. If you're 5 turns away from victory, are you going to produce another settler?

Wide being superior is due to a certain other reason that I really shouldn't have to spell out to y'all that find this game so easy, but here we are.

Sigh

By the time you are “pivoting” or whatever you’ve passed the point where basically all the useable land has been settled

 

[Heyesey]

Sigh

By the time you are “pivoting” or whatever you’ve passed the point where basically all the useable land has been settled

I have a suspicion that, if we delved deeply enough into spreadsheets and formulas and all sorts of boring rubbish, that he might actually be right. But it's boring, so I don't care enough to find out. I just keep sending out settlers even if my culture victory is seven turns away - unless there's nowhere left to put them.

 

[Aristos]

When I start taking them.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I have a suspicion that, if we delved deeply enough into spreadsheets and formulas and all sorts of boring rubbish, that he might actually be right. But it's boring, so I don't care enough to find out. I just keep sending out settlers even if my culture victory is seven turns away - unless there's nowhere left to put them.

Sure maybe if you want to be a pure miminaxing numbers munchkin over having like any sort of narrative to your game, which I find absolutly boring as well

The sad thing is that the AI is so anemic that you hardly need to powergame at all anyways

 

[Archon_Wing]

Sigh

By the time you are “pivoting” or whatever you’ve passed the point where basically all the useable land has been settled

Eh lol, nah, why wait for that when...

I have a suspicion that, if we delved deeply enough into spreadsheets and formulas and all sorts of boring rubbish, that he might actually be right.

Nah, no spreadsheets. I mean also this is an advice thread, so save your rants.

Sure maybe if you want to be a pure miminaxing numbers munchkin over having like any sort of narrative to your game, which I find absolutly boring as well

The sad thing is that the AI is so anemic that you hardly need to powergame at all anyways

But sure. You can also win the game with one city too, but that's not the point here. Read above.

When I start taking them.

The winner here. (And also everyone thing wrong with this game)

 

[Leucarum]

Well. I tend to stop at 8-12. Just because micromanagement is hell. It's not optimal but I enjoy it more.

 

[racha]

I stop building them when the victory screen comes up.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

I almost always play on Terra, so I know to beat the A.I. to techs that allow for transoceanic sailing and settle the New World before they have a chance to. I usually do most of my Settling with Monumentality, but will continue as necessary to keep other civs of the New World. I relocate Magnus to the New World to facilitate this.

That said, I wish there were a way to have City-States only spawn on the Old World continents.