Sid Meier's Civilization V

Sid Meier's Civilization V

View Stats:
Claes Feb 2, 2013 @ 6:55pm
Quick Questions Thread
I thought I would start a thread for quick questions that can be answered in a reply or two so to unclutter the forum a bit. This thread is for anybody to use for questions and to answer.

I'll start it off. In early game is it a good idea to settle cities a bit farther apart to have more land or closer together to reduce upkeep costs on roads?
< >
Showing 1-15 of 52 comments
Mr.Tangtuan Feb 2, 2013 @ 7:36pm 
As a pacifist,I especially like to have a culture victory.I always choose the policy of tradition first,which makes my expansion rather slow and of course,just 4 or 5 cities.So U see,generally,I'd like to settle cities a bit farther to get more resources in order to make sure that my country will not be smashed from the planet in one simple attack...Anyway,making a huge empire or not,settling cities father or closer largerly depends on the unique situation in the game and in which way do U want to win the game.
Last edited by Mr.Tangtuan; Feb 2, 2013 @ 7:38pm
bloodline271 Feb 2, 2013 @ 7:46pm 
Hi I am new to civ 5 and played my first full game on normal. I had a stratergy to lay low avoid all wars until I unlocked the atom bomb. Around year 2044 i had 7 atom bombs and was ready to attack. I attacked a capital city and used all 7 bombs ,the city didnt fall. it seemed to be impossible to defeat. Being a newb i thought that 1 bomb would extinguish a city . Epic Fail My question is Where did i go wrong????? and would a nuclear missile have the affect i am looking for.
Mr.Tangtuan Feb 2, 2013 @ 8:22pm 
Certainly nuke can not totally destroy cities,it's not a city,it's a kind of symbol,from 4000BC!The capital stands for the civilization itself...Well,seriously speaking,your nuke can only slash the population and defence of the city.One nuke can make a captal of 30population reduce to about,say,10,immediately,which means a great damage for your opponent,his economy,culture,and every aspect of development will be defered,not to mention the radiation it's created.So next time if U had 7 nukes,use them into 7 different cities-but surely,good guy will not do,even consider that...
Last edited by Mr.Tangtuan; Feb 2, 2013 @ 8:54pm
Biskwik Feb 2, 2013 @ 9:28pm 
Originally posted by Claes:
In early game is it a good idea to settle cities a bit farther apart to have more land or closer together to reduce upkeep costs on roads?

If your on a coast, just make sure you have explored the coast line fully between cities.. When you get your harbors your trade routes connect.. It also costs less then roads in upkeep.. Carthage is a good civ for this strat as you get a free harbour in every city.. Trade routes will not open however untill you research wheel..

If your inland or playing an all land game, Don't found outside of the 4 hex min for your first 3 to 4 cities.. After that, it better be well worth it to found further away then 4.. I still don't recommend it though.. If you do, try to make it in multiples of 4 so you can fill the gap later..
Last edited by Biskwik; Feb 3, 2013 @ 7:40am
Strandly Feb 3, 2013 @ 12:29am 
Why cram cities close together like that?
bloodline271 Feb 3, 2013 @ 6:46am 
thanks for tbe feedback
Maelstrom Feb 3, 2013 @ 10:44am 
Hey, this question may not fit here, but I downloaded Civ 5 yesterday, but it won't let me play it. It installed perfectly, but nothing starts when I try to open it. It asks me what DirectX to use, (9) then a black box will flash on the screen and disappear, that's it. Does anyone know what is wrong here? Anything will help.
ipark Feb 3, 2013 @ 11:09am 
Early game I seldome settle where I won't get a new luxury resource unless its for a strategic resouce I can use immediately. If I'm spread out and roads will be expensive I don't research them until I get a better cash flow.
Biskwik Feb 3, 2013 @ 5:23pm 
Originally posted by Strandly:
Why cram cities close together like that?

Before I answer, I should give you my, more often then not, game settings..
I almost never play all land maps, but when I do I follow the 4 hex strat..
Usually I play one of three map types..
Large islands, Continents plus, or tiny islands plus, map sise large or huge.. 5 to 7 ai's, usually 7, and 10 to 12 city states.. Marathon..
Because of my choice in maps, there is usualy a coast line near by if not right there at the start..

I play my new found love now, Carthage..
When founding on coast lines, you don't have to worry about hex gap between cities as long as you have completely explored the coastal routes between..
Carthage amplifies this as you get a free harbour in every city..
trade routes will not activate however untill you have the wheel tech..
Thier ability to pass over mountains once a great general appears is nice to..
If I do have to found inland from the coast I will do it in 4 hex steps..

When I do play land based maps, I pick any civ that suits my fancy that day, and all the same settings..
When founding in these maps, I like to start with a 4 or 5 city core where any one city is within 4 hexes of another..
I tend to stay away from strings as it is to easy to cut off trade routes..
The game is hex grid, this means that any incursion into your lands will most likey have to endure two city strikes a round..
The 5 face of a single die, with your capitol in the middle, is the ideal pattern for this.. As the intruders head in, they potentially face 3 shots a round if this your pattern..
Double those shots if you have a good ranged garrison in each city..
Now your melee units are free to wander far from home without worry..
Add to that, that 1 or 2 archers you have garrisoned for free can move city to city in one turn.. This is good not only for the penny saved is a pennny earned theory, it also drasticly reduses the vulnerability of your archers while maximising there effect..

Once I have my growth rate pumping, and a good deal of the map revealed, I start to look for future interests around 12 to 16 hexes away..
If I find a really good site, I will found, but I will take care to make sure it is in any multiple of 4 hexes away from an existing city..
Not hard to do if you take the time to think before you click..
What this does is it allows you to back fill the gaps later as future resources open up, while still maintaining mutual city support..

Crowding is'nt a problem, as there is plenty of specialist slots to fill and I strictly micro manage all citizens in all cities..
Doing so allows me to controll my growth while maintaining good happiness levels during the growing pains stage.. I never run deficits in any catagory unless Im playing as Germany..

Getting up around 7 to 10 cities, things have started to steam roll by now, good gold, happy, science, culture, and religion..
I've picked up enough later stage resources by back founding from my farthest, but not to far, flung cities..

1 1/2 to 2 ages ahead in the Tech tree now, 1880'ish..
Found away, you've grown so huge, no one can do a thing about it..

So good early defence is the largest reason, but small things like a few extra gold saved early can still mean huge things later..
Most every game I play, and well before end game, I take and hold top slot in all demographic catagories..
I never have problems with aggresive civ's.. Ever..

This is a solid player vs AI strategy..
This is still a sound strategy in multiplay early to mid game..
However, you will have to be far more flexible and willing to change tactics, as with any stategy in a multiplay setting, should the need arise..
Last edited by Biskwik; Feb 3, 2013 @ 6:24pm
SirCanuck Feb 3, 2013 @ 9:02pm 
Originally posted by Claes:
In early game is it a good idea to settle cities a bit farther apart to have more land or closer together to reduce upkeep costs on roads?

Myself I like to build 3 cities close to each other withing the 4 hex limit, after however i go and build near resources that are close to other civs. building roads comes after I am ready for war.
Espresso Feb 4, 2013 @ 5:50am 
There are times when you want cities close together, and times when they need to be far apart.

Close together pros:

Don't have to go into dangerous areas to expand.
Easier and cheaper roads.
Faster troop movement.
Major cities can produce soldiers and them them to defend the other cities faster.
Religion spreads faster.


Competing tiles.
Limited territory.
If attacked and a city is taken, the enemy will be close to your other cities.

Distant pros:

More territory.
Makes accessing distant areas easier.
Can build troops further from your captal.


Long, expensive, time-consuming road building.
Slower workers (travel time added to improvement).
More susceptable to other religions.
Increased tension with other civs.
Settlers must go into unclaimed territory to settle, leaving them open to attack.


If you plan to have a bunch of small cities, close together is fine. A city can work any tile within three tiles of the city, but only one city can work a tile. So when cities are too close, they fight over tiles. If you have a large city, that limits growth and output of the city. So if you want an empire of small cities, this is not a problem. If you are playing tall, you want each city to work to its full potential.

Instead of distance, you should consider what a city's tile will bring. Coastal cities are very valuable (especially if there is a sea resource nearby), so I encourage building on the coast when possible. Build close to resources, plan your city within one or two tiles of a luxury or strategic resource so that you can work that resource early on. If a city is within 3 (or even 2) tiles of a resource, another civ can settle a city near it and claim it. So plan to claim resources as soon as possible, because if the AI can take it, they will. If there is a good luxury 8 tiles away, don't be afraid to settle there before the AI.

Every city you start brings your happiness down by 3 plus population (4 for new cities). If you spread out more, you have less cities and more population, so that 3 unhappiness won't exist. So playing tall with a few cities with large borders is a good way to play, it limits unhappiness and gives you good production, and doesn't slow down your social policies. It can slow down your science, though.

So decide which way to go based on your needs, the map setup, and whether you want to play tall or wide.
Claes Feb 4, 2013 @ 7:23pm 
Why do other Civs declare war on you? Or rather another way to ask is how can I reduce the possibility that another Civ will declare war on me so that I don't get myself involved before I am ready? I am finding that the higher I go in difficulty the sooner other civs declare war on me and I haven't even close to built an army yet. ?????? Thanks in advance :)
Biskwik Feb 4, 2013 @ 9:36pm 
Originally posted by Claes:
Why do other Civs declare war on you? Or rather another way to ask is how can I reduce the possibility that another Civ will declare war on me so that I don't get myself involved before I am ready? I am finding that the higher I go in difficulty the sooner other civs declare war on me and I haven't even close to built an army yet. ?????? Thanks in advance :)

Lots of reasons why.. Simple answer is a question. What other Civ's are you including in your games? Some are highly aggresive.. I think there is another thread that talks a lot about this.. lots of interesting info on How the different aI civ's react..

For the most part, another civ will attack you if you are seen as weak.. Even Ghandi will, but it will take him longer to make his move..

If you want time to grow, but your finding the game a little to aggresive, you can fix it with settings.. Play at least a standard sised map, then reduce the number of civs untill you reach what your looking for.. Another good thing to try is to play marathon.. In a marathon set, every thing takes longer to get, and time passes in shorter spurts after end turn.. The only thing that doesn't slow down is unit movement.. This means you can explore the map much quicker in relation to game time passed.. Founding is easier because of this.. Mistakes are not as criticle in marathon games either
Last edited by Biskwik; Feb 4, 2013 @ 9:41pm
Claes Feb 4, 2013 @ 10:56pm 
I always randomize the other Civs, to be honest I never thought about selecting certain ones to play. But you bring up a lot of things for me to try. Thank you I'll try them tonight :)
Synavix Feb 5, 2013 @ 3:12am 
What do people tend to take for their first social policy? I've read differing things about always taking either Tradition or Honor regardless of which route you actually plan on going down, just for the base bonus they provide. I've tried both and I can see their merits, but I'm never sure if its really the right choice.

I often play fully randomized games (including my own civ) on King or Emperor so I play all different playstyles. Adopting the base Tradition policy first and then going into (usually) Liberty has proven to be really helpful on larger maps where spacing your cities out a bit more can be strategically important, but still lets you gobble up the land around it quickly enough that you don't need to worry about an AI encroaching as much. I've also tried going the base Honor policy first, and it seems pretty helpful on larger maps (especially with raging barbs) at the start of a game to get a few extra policies out there quickly, but later into the game it really falls behind once the whole map has been largely claimed, and I'm not sure it's really worth having a slightly useless policy late game when I generally don't fill out much of the rest of the Honor tree. I also generally play "Epic" speed games, so being able to kill barbs 33% easier is really just a quality of life thing, and not really necessary since I have plenty of time to move and heal my troops around.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 52 comments
Per page: 15 30 50

Date Posted: Feb 2, 2013 @ 6:55pm
Posts: 52