1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

When to stop founding cities?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Art Morte, Sep 30, 2017.

  1. Art Morte

    Art Morte Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2017
    Messages:
    494
    Gender:
    Male
    My preferred play style is peaceful expansion. I enjoy forward settling and blocking other civs into their peninsulas and other corners of land while rushing to expand myself. Fractal and shuffle maps are my favorite as the landmasses you tend to get suit this style well. Plus finding those uninhabited islands late into the game is nice.

    However, what I'm finding - to my disappointment - in Civ 6 is that the point seems to arrive too early when it makes very little sense to settle new cities any more. Playing standard speed and size, it pretty much feels like anything settled after turn 200 will never have time to grow to anything meaningful. And if the city does not have much production from terrain, that point comes even earlier, as you'll be forever building that first district.

    It doesn't really make sense that you're in, say, the industrial era, building factories and stock exchanges, while your new cities will only complete their first district 50 turns into the future. The disparity between your old and new cities is simply too big. The obvious answer is "don't found but conquer your new cities", but that's not how I normally like to play.

    So, what are the experiences and opinions of people here, what would you say, on standard speed, is the point when you probably should stop founding new cities, when the benefit you get from them until the end of the game becomes minimal?
     
    Lugh and KumaChan like this.
  2. Siptah

    Siptah Eternal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2016
    Messages:
    5,202
    Location:
    Lucerne
    I disagree, I never stop settling in peaceful games. Especially when going for a cultural victory, more coastal tiles and more TS are always worth it. I also don't seem to have that 50 turns problem, maybe because I'm playing on epic and it translates differently. One or two trade routes, chop a forest, invest in improvements and many new cities founded in the second half of the game are useful (=have 2 districts) soon.
     
    Ivan Hunger likes this.
  3. Turrdy

    Turrdy Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2016
    Messages:
    391
    Location:
    CH
    or just play aztec and rush the districts with builders.

    but you're right, it isn't very motivating to found cities if everything you want to build takes an entire era to build. I'm not very concerned about that though mostly, since I'll have enough cities by then anyways. Just the occasional "Oh right, i founded that city an hour ago, almost forgot" when the first production reminder pops up :lol:

    on the other hand, sometimes you have to found cities in late game, just to get the oil, aluminium, and uranium you so desperately need to exterminate your enemies...
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2017
  4. Ivan Hunger

    Ivan Hunger King

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    630
    In way, I think you answered your own question. There are various ways to help get a newly founded city up on its feet. If it's within range of your trade network, then domestic trade routes are an obvious solution. If it has hills or forests nearby, then you can build mines and lumber mills. If it's on a river, you can use gold to buy a water wheel. But if you can't find any settlement locations that meet at least one of these criteria, that's when you know it's time to stop expanding and focus on other things.
     
    Buckets likes this.
  5. Art Morte

    Art Morte Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2017
    Messages:
    494
    Gender:
    Male
    I may not be as good and/or efficient player as you, but if I've founded 4-6 cities around the industrial era, I don't seem to have all those resources - trade routes, builders, gold - to really boost my new cities through all those means.


    Yeah, those later strategic resources are a reason for founding later cities, but that's usually a matter of founding just one or two new cities. My problem is that in most of the games there seems to be good, enticing land unoccupied in mid-game (and even later) that can fit several cities. Initially I get excited about the possibility of settling there, but my excitement turns to disappointment when the production times make it feel like those cities will start to contribute something meaningful only very late in the game.
     
  6. Siptah

    Siptah Eternal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2016
    Messages:
    5,202
    Location:
    Lucerne
    I don't think it is about good or efficient. It's more what you prefer to do in your games. All 3 of those boost options are related to CHs and Harbors (since I often buy Builders). I build quite a lot of them, every city has at least one. And I love the double adjacency for harbors card, and the +4 gold from trade routes card. I build less campuses and encampments than most other players do, which means I'm advancing slower and am more vulnerable. And I don't have large armies in my peaceful games, which also increases gold per turn. I rarely spent gold on Great People. Notice that I usually play on King or Emperor, higher difficulties need different strategies, and I would need more other districts and a larger army.
     
  7. Ivan Hunger

    Ivan Hunger King

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    630
    Try to alternate between expanding and supporting your new expansions. Too much expansion with no support will result in a lot of worthless cities.

    Social policy cards can help you with this. Equip the colonization/expropriation policy and expand like crazy. But when you discover a new civic and get to swap your cards out for free, equip the ilkum/serfdom/public works policy and focus on improving your new land. The next time you discover a new civic, switch back again. Keep alternating, and you'll get a lot more out of your expansions then you will from just spamming them all the time.
     
    Frostburn and Siptah like this.
  8. Rosty K

    Rosty K King

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2017
    Messages:
    961
    Gender:
    Male
    I usually take good spots in 'my' territory, then fill the gaps (so that the AI can't settle in that only available tile in the middle of my lands. Well, if it's just one tile, I'll rather put a unit there), and then only expand if I get a free settler from AI/barbarians, or if there is a spot somewhere with the resource I need.
     
  9. PYITE

    PYITE Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2016
    Messages:
    395
    Gender:
    Male
    Sending a worker or 2 to your new city is the key to quick late game city development.

    Harvest and chop. Found late cities that have ample resources and features to make your city grow. The farther advanced you are in science/civic (greater of the 2) the more production/food you get from chop/harvest.

    Don't waste a worker charge building a pasture for sheep or cow, just harvest it and quickly up the city population. Same for rice and wheat. Any stone or woods that is harvested should complete a significant portion of a district.

    At around 2/3 of game completion you should start harvesting and chopping every feature/resource available that gives production in every city. The exception is saving things to chop in your spaceport cities.
     
    KumaChan likes this.
  10. bladex

    bladex Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,358
    never keep building

    unless your Australia CULTURE BOMB ROCKS
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2017
    KumaChan likes this.
  11. UWHabs

    UWHabs Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,740
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yeah, a worker is big to helping a new city get set up. A mine will be 4 or 5 cogs, and a trade route will give the city another 3-4 as well, so you're already talking about a size 1 city with about 10 production. Especially if you have a quick district that you can lay down (ie. cheap navy dockyard for England), my new cities were only taking about 15-20 turns to build one once that basic infrastructure is up. And if they happen to already be in range of a factory, that helps as well.

    No, the new city will never be one of your main production centers, but it can still be a useful addition at the cost of a settler and a builder.
     
  12. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    5,126
    Gender:
    Male
    Run the settlers card when you want to expand. Then run the builders card. I often have a city or two with production that just spend most of their times building workers/settlers.
     
  13. FlyinPhil

    FlyinPhil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2017
    Messages:
    46
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Centrally located
    There is another benefit to founding cities besides resourcing and production and all that. Someone above mentioned denying territory to rivals. One settler is a small price to pay relative to the military and diplomatic investment/penalties of dislodging a rival city from favorable territory. I will build entire lines of cities to keep rivals from expanding to an area immature not necessarily need, but I don't want them to occupy, either.
     
    Frostburn likes this.
  14. Kyro

    Kyro Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    Messages:
    599
    Hmm...when you win? There's no two ways about it, more cities is ALWAYS better. Of course at some point you will realize you're already winning and founding more is just redundant in the context of winning.

    Use a couple of internal trade routes to jump start that CH and you'll have 3 trade routes for the next district. I agree that new cities shouldn't need trade routes to survive though; it's not supposed to get more difficult to start cities later on because that favors early warmongering too much and makes the early game too important. If anything it should get easier...

    If you hate district costs like I do play as the Aztecs and you can ignore that entirely...plop a city, buy a builder and there you go 1 district in 5 turns. No need to worry about unnecessary inflation, no need to redirect trade routes, don't need to make sure your new city is near the rest. Freedom from bad design.
     
  15. Guandao

    Guandao Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,657
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City
    I'm spamming cities now in my recent game. I used to build around 4-6 cities in Civ5 and was able to win the game. Now, I have an incentive to settle more cities.
     
  16. UWHabs

    UWHabs Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,740
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yep, Aztecs certainly have a big edge in setting up crappy cities. As well, anyone who has a cheap district too, since then one chop is enough to get almost all of the district complete. Especially Germany, where your first district will be a Hansa, so if you plan them right you can finish it quick and that gives you an immediate +4 or +5 production, and then more if you have industrious city-state allies too. Especially since the commerce hub bonus (accidentally) gets applied as soon as you place the commerce hub, not even when it's complete, which means you can immediately pop it down to get the full Hansa bonus as you build the commerce hub.
     
    KumaChan and Siptah like this.
  17. Frostburn

    Frostburn Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Gender:
    Male
    Agree. When I am settling cities around turn ~200 as OP suggested, usually I am not expecting it to be very productive and am mainly doing it for some strategic reason which doesn't necessarily require that city to grow fast. They can also be great decoys or "walls" against approaching enemies. Enemies will often stop to conquer the first city in sight, and this can buy you time in a pinch while your army makes its way back to protect cities which are actually valuable.
     
  18. Lee Duane Fitzsimmons

    Lee Duane Fitzsimmons Full-time Cat Lover

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    190
    Gender:
    Male
    It depends what you want to do with the cities. It also depends on how you design your empire. There are numerous options available.
     
  19. agonistes

    agonistes wants his subs under ice!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,498
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Vermont
    Stop settling when you don't want any more cities.
     
  20. genyl

    genyl Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    38
    As much as civ6 favours going wide I rarely build cities at industrial and later. They are useful even if they have only a few tiles of quality land but my point is that if there is decent terrain available you should grab it sooner than later. The earlier you build a city the more return you get from your investment.

    The exception to this is if you need and can grab a strategic/luxury, then I always go for it.

    It is worth mentioning that , even if minimal , there are still penalties for every new cities: worst luxuries distribution, escalating cost of settlers , 1 less pop and defensive needs.

    Because of the bonus 50% card I try to build settlers in batches

    Ancient - Build 1 settler without the bonus and grab the juiciest spot

    Classical- get the 50prod bonus and fill any decent spots in your continent

    Reinassence - just before you get caravels build a few settlers and send them to colonize the new discovered land. Often the AI leaves juicy land empty. At this point I will also fill poor spots too as only now I start building entertainment districts
     
    KumaChan and KyivanRusCivPlease like this.

Share This Page