 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Code Monkey
|
|
I expand all the time if there's a reason. In my current game I conquered the French and the English, who were sharing a small continent, for the sole reason of gaining a monopoly on ivory and silk. While under a democracy, the only city there of any intrinsic worth was Paris (closest to my major continent) with about 75% corruption, it's not an issue.
If you are under a democracy, you can afford to rush build the basics: temple, cathedral, marketplace, and maybe a granary and library. You don't really need more than that for a colony city under democracy since it's not going to produce any merchandise or gold to justify the upkeep. Ship in the military from your mainland production centers.
If you are under a communism, then these cities can be every bit as productive (relatively speaking ) as your mainland cities. Key upgrades are the temple, cathedral, and marketplace to keep people happy plus the granary for producing extra people/shields ("Yes, get out my whip!"). If you want, build the courthouse and police station; they make a measurable difference under communism.
A city is always worth something because:
1. It secures territory which buys you respect from the AI (if you've got the military to secure it) and bumps your score if you care about that.
2. It secures territory which keeps the AI from getting any use out of it and might potentially yield a resource down the road if there isn't already one.
3. It produces citisens irregardless of corruption which can be used for making workers and/or boosting the population in more productive cities.
4. More happy citisens means a higher score if you care about such things.
You can't just think of a city as a production center, Civ3 makes them a lot more than that. They're also culture and power generating centers. Alot depends on your ultimate strategy for victory. If you're going for cultural, conquest, or domination then by all means, expand anywhere or everywhere so long as you have the military to defend and the money to afford development of the new cities. If your goal is to win by diplomatic or space race, then you need to evaluate the benefits/costs more carefully. Depending on your strategy, those "worthless" cities aren't so worthless and might even be key to winning the game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mr.buddylee
|
|
I expand quite a bit, and even if a city is only producing 1 shield, its still a city that can give you something. I am a big fan of expansion, whereas some people on the boards thing expanding is a waste. I always use communism as a government when it comes available, and my corruption isn't too terrible. Remember that you can also replace your palace if you need to.
One other thing, how far away is the other continent? Also, maybe you should try building another city over there. I THINK (but I don't know for sure) that having 2 cities near each other makes them a little less likely to convert to another culture (which is nice to know).
I've successfully grown cities on other continents on Regent, and it just took some time and good palace/FP placement.
Early in the game before Communism, I have a few cities that only produce 1 shield, but after they build a temple, marketplace, library, granary, I turn them to wealth and get a little extra cash until I can control corruption better.
Good luck
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16. Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|