The other thing about playing wide is that when you boil it down; in almost all cases, cities grow WAY faster at low population levels. This is critical because pop directly controls your district capacity and district yields are one of the most important keys to Civ 6. Easiest example; your capital most commonly is on fresh water so it starts with 6 housing (non-capital is 5) and your housing surplus massively determines what % of food growth you get. +2 or more open housing gives 100% growth from food, +1 is 50%, 0 to -4 is 25%, below that is 0%. So if your capital is at 5/6 housing, creating a settler changes that to a 4/6 city and a new 1/5 city. You’ve made 5 FREE housing and you now have 2 cities that can now gain a total of 4 more pops while staying at 100% growth, vs 1 city that’s already down to 50%. Critically, you’ve also created 1 additional district capacity out of thin air. In practice making new cities gives you free extra district capacity.
@@k15gg74 Yep, when you create a settler it takes 1 current population away in that city and when that settler settles a new city, the game magically creates more housing for the new city out of thin air (by default, 5 if you settle that new city on fresh water). So if you currently had a city with 5 population and 6 housing, the city would go to 4 pop, 6 housing when the settler is created, then that 2nd city would be 1 out of 5 when you pop the settler in place. So basically you're just moving population that you already have around... except the game also creates massive amounts of free housing out of thin air (in that already existing city you'd otherwise have to spend many turns building granaries or tile improvements like farms that give more housing). That is a huge benefit since cities grow much faster the more empty housing they have AND you can build additional districts in cities at 1,4,7,10, etc. population. Many of the buildings and tile improvements that give housing also aren't the greatest IF you don't need the housing so not having to build them gives you more turns to build better stuff.
Tile's yield are important but since I'm a builder who like it "wide", when I plan my cities, I'm always looking at the surrounding landscape and place them in a way that will create chokepoints. Once those chokepoints are established, I either place an encampment or a commercial hub in it. My goal being to make it as difficult for an enemy army (or barbarian) to reach my cities and or force them to go where I want them to go. Work every time!
Have to pay attention to loyalty and what i call the exclusion zones in proximity to the enemy. A forward settle may cut off Gaul, but you may lose it to Gaul through loyalty in a dark age, or you could loyalty flip a city from Gaul if they try to settle too close to your loyalty zone.
I purposely left loyalty out of the video as a major factor because I feel like most games it’s more of a era score management issue than a city settling issue if you’re having major loyalty problems. However, you’re definitely correct in bringing it up! It’s just about as limiting as water in giving you options for forward settling, especially with the Gaul banana settle example in this video! The big thing to watch out for is settling a city way out on its own and then losing it in a later age when things have changed! Thanks for bringing it up, cheers! 🎉
Love this type of video that gives insight into decision making as there is no correct answer for all games and that is what makes the game so fun! Keep up the good work.
Most of the time you can fit 20 pop within the first 2 rings of your cities, in my view the third ring is extra. Also, for most of the game you won’t have access to the third ring anyway and general you only tend to get 15+ pop in the late game. So for me settling cities closer together is a more efficient way of using the available space. Land is scarce, you’re always competing for it with other players, a tight knit empire allows you to have more cities. Also having two or three cities as close together as possible is the only way to get decent industrial zones, using aquaduct adjacency.
My rule of thumb is 4 tiles between each city. This gives each city 2 rings of tiles to work, and if you need a singular super productive city you can steal tiles from neighbors. There are places I break this (many you mention in the video), but this is just the target I try to hit.
Usually I plan so that my capital has a full 3 rings free for building things like wonders and lots of districts, other cities are not suited for all these purposes so I choose which 3 districts I want to try to optimize in my other cities. Also using geography to cut off enemies expansion, or lay claim to an area are also very important.
I'm actually really appreciative that you did the video the way you did because sometimes rose a thumb can get you caught out. But reasons to consider for each type of example is you
My gameplay revolves around stealing an early settler(quite easy in deity mode). Then settle it with terrain defensive features in mind cause that lone warrior isn't really going to stand up to 5 of his with +4 bonus if you don't choose the battleground well, also make sure it's close enough that the second warrior arrives just in time to help the first. Then there's also the matter of iron, I prefer settling where iron is likely to be, the earlier you have the swordsman, the better. Then if there are two neighbors, I'd be busy letting one neighbor borrow my land, then build a district for me. Letting them build for you is nice in deity since it costs them less to build a district. Soon as one war is over, I swing the troops in the other direction to claim my birthright. If possible, I deliberately leave a certain lucrative area unsettled. This would lure my neighbor to send settlers in that direction instead of to some far corner where I can't get it. I also make sure to prepare an ambush for that settler. With the brutal increase in construction cost of settlers, it's actually a lot cheaper to build troops to capture settlers than to keep building settlers.
I have been watching your videos since 2020 lockdown and must say that your Civ content has kept me alive through this tough period. Thank you for your help and explanations. Best wishes to you for 2022 👍
24:43 in my science games, I usually just win with a few cities that are ridiculously big, some with every single district (excluding some due to incompatibility with other districts) and still have a bunch of wonders. I abuse Democracy trade routes in combination with exceptionally large cities to create those monstrosities of cities
My approach is always settle close unless your civ specifically benefits from playing tall. You can share farm triangles, get better district adjacency, can more easily defend and have less loyalty issues. I play on deity.
My strategy has always been to settle the best spot I can find within 9 tiles of another city of mine. Sometimes that means there's going to be a huge gap between my cities, sometimes it means my cities might be extremely close and they'll be competing for tiles. Only time I make a conscious effort to settle cities close to one another is if I'm playing as a civ whose bonuses encourage a compact empire (eg. Japan and Germany). By that same token, playing as Russia, you should probably make use of its bonuses and settle as wide as possible and claim as much territory as you can.
I managed to win a domination game with zombies enabled by placing cities evenly spaced at minimum distance in a sort of ring with encampments in the middle between each city. Played as vietnam. Maybe not the best, I wouldn’t normally build this way, and I’m never going back to zombies again. The late game was absolutely painful 😆
Yeah, Vietnam allows for that sort of strategy and it's a good civ to pick if you're doing zombie mode. That said, zombie mode really could use some tweaking. Some games, zombies are a minor nuisance and easily dealt with, others (particularly marathon games on large maps), zombies mutate too quickly and will make you rage quit.
I played civilization a lot as a kid on ps1 (i think it was civ 2), and I never touched it again until a few weeks ago with civ 6. I've really been missing out. This game is really great!
Actually in civ 5 the meta was pretty much to go tall every game. It is interesting how this game is the complete opposite. Coming from civ 5 I have to unlearn some of those habits, since in that game you always did want to go for the full 3 tile radius around your cities but in this game it's the opposite
@@samuelhakansson6680 Nonsense. In C5 tall was the go to as it was generally stronger, but wide was actually possible, had it's strengths and was competitive in most contexts outside of NQ lobbies etc. In C6, not going wide is just a handicap, and you may as well just forfeit the game before it starts. Not the same thing at all.
I prefer to space them out a little bit but I usually prefer huge maps. More people means more tiles worked n more production. It's always good to have a couple good cities that can produce units right away just incase you are low on gold or faith.
What about the settle for defense? At your 27:50 mark you have the city to the left of Rome. It is up against a mountain, not the best for defense, which let’s face it, you are forward settling Gaul on deity your going to war! If you move it to the right one tile and across the river you now have two tiles blocked two spaces away from your potential enemy from ranged attacks and it also means you can control how they will approach that city by the units and districts that you place down. Just something else like you said just a minute for that explanation if you didn’t think about something
My worst Civ habbit is I play every game (In each version of civ even) basically the exact same way. I like to start with a coast city BUT I basically settle on the nearest resource that has an aquaduct position- having NO fresh water gives you a BETTER aquaduct so you end up with a few more housing in the end! So I actually PREFER to setle off of fresh water... maybe not so much with my first settle but all the same. You kind of have no choice as to districts- I really let my civ decide which district I go for first IE phoenicia has a cheap harbor so I go for harbor first- actually I almost always go Holy Site first but. Anyway I ALWAYS play 'tall'- I can't find myself playing small it just doesn't feel right! On my following cities (70% of them are coastal- unless the map is one big continent or something- and whenever possible and not too far away I want to settle NEAR a river, remember I like to settle OFF fresh water) I will ALMOST ALWAYS start with a aquaduct -> industrial zone. I also LOVE the Harbor -> Commercial hub combo, money buys you EVERYTHING in this game! I also play 70% of my games on Prince and tend to lose 70% of the rest of the (usually Empire lvl) games :) so. This is why I say this is my worse civ mistake xD
Im kinda sad how my Russia tsl game has gone and thwarted my plans of building a Constantinople to get access to the Mediterranean. My own cities have squeezed the region too tightly to fit another one. Russias extra tiles come back to haunt them lol.
Why does the AI always settle three tiles apart from other cities, and the advisor suggest you do the same? My default distance is 4, although I can accommodate for more or less depending on the circumstances. Generally speaking though, I don't really like 3-tile apart.
I am pretty new to the game but sometimes the suggested city locations that pop up when a settler is produced don't seem like the best. How seriously should I take the suggestions? Thanks, I really appreciate your videos!
I'm in a really long game. My capital has 7 rings and is starting to work on the 8th, cuz I left space for it... I don't know how I feel about it though. 😅
It’s a mod called “Enhanced Map Tacks” on steam! That is what will enable the pins to give you the adjacencies. For the other players resources it’s just part of the game. If you go to options, preferences, and then click “Show yields on HUD ribbon” and click “Always show” it should work for you!
Its just easy go to Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization VI folder, or wherever the game is stored on your PC, and find the AppOptions.txt file. Open this in a text editor, then scroll down to the entry which states "EnableDebugMenu 0" and change it to "EnableDebugMenu 1", before saving your changes.
You would need a population of 36 to work the full 3-tile radius of a city. Ask yourself whether you plan on having even NEAR that many citizens in each city!
Thanks for all your advice, I decided after beating this game once via science victory that took 300+ turns... that the game is too slow paced for my tastes, I'm uninstalling it and finding something else.
Probably not directly related to this topic..I'm on a game of civ playing with the Zulu...things are going pretty good, but during my 2nd war none of my cities can build any districts...they all show 999+ turns...why is this?
Widening your cities as much as possible is always more advantageous in controlling as much territory as possible - albeit in the early game. Mid and late game is all about controlling resources and strategic outposts for guarding key city-states
the way this game generated maps make the game shit.restart the game few time until have a decent capital city not mentioned that the rest of the citys will be shitty also
In early game turns, don't settle your city near (3~4 tiles) to other civs' cities especially in other continents. Try to achieve your era score normal or gold. If you get enough loyalty bonus policy cards in mid game, maybe you can start planning into settling near other civs.
![Kodak Black - Versatile 4 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VcP_1Ua__vY/mqdefault.jpg)
You plan 100 turns ahead for your Petra only to have the AI build it first.
The other thing about playing wide is that when you boil it down; in almost all cases, cities grow WAY faster at low population levels. This is critical because pop directly controls your district capacity and district yields are one of the most important keys to Civ 6.
Easiest example; your capital most commonly is on fresh water so it starts with 6 housing (non-capital is 5) and your housing surplus massively determines what % of food growth you get. +2 or more open housing gives 100% growth from food, +1 is 50%, 0 to -4 is 25%, below that is 0%.
So if your capital is at 5/6 housing, creating a settler changes that to a 4/6 city and a new 1/5 city. You’ve made 5 FREE housing and you now have 2 cities that can now gain a total of 4 more pops while staying at 100% growth, vs 1 city that’s already down to 50%.
Critically, you’ve also created 1 additional district capacity out of thin air. In practice making new cities gives you free extra district capacity.
Im kinda newbie. Can u explain how a settle can make 5/6 pop city to 4/6 and 1/5 city?
@@k15gg74 Yep, when you create a settler it takes 1 current population away in that city and when that settler settles a new city, the game magically creates more housing for the new city out of thin air (by default, 5 if you settle that new city on fresh water). So if you currently had a city with 5 population and 6 housing, the city would go to 4 pop, 6 housing when the settler is created, then that 2nd city would be 1 out of 5 when you pop the settler in place.
So basically you're just moving population that you already have around... except the game also creates massive amounts of free housing out of thin air (in that already existing city you'd otherwise have to spend many turns building granaries or tile improvements like farms that give more housing). That is a huge benefit since cities grow much faster the more empty housing they have AND you can build additional districts in cities at 1,4,7,10, etc. population.
Many of the buildings and tile improvements that give housing also aren't the greatest IF you don't need the housing so not having to build them gives you more turns to build better stuff.
@@brianhum8765 Thanks for your great advise! The growth of pop always make me feel out of control :)
@@brianhum8765 Also, when you settle a new city, the city tile doesn't take population to be worked, this effectively creates a free citizen as well
Tile's yield are important but since I'm a builder who like it "wide", when I plan my cities, I'm always looking at the surrounding landscape and place them in a way that will create chokepoints. Once those chokepoints are established, I either place an encampment or a commercial hub in it. My goal being to make it as difficult for an enemy army (or barbarian) to reach my cities and or force them to go where I want them to go. Work every time!
Have to pay attention to loyalty and what i call the exclusion zones in proximity to the enemy. A forward settle may cut off Gaul, but you may lose it to Gaul through loyalty in a dark age, or you could loyalty flip a city from Gaul if they try to settle too close to your loyalty zone.
I purposely left loyalty out of the video as a major factor because I feel like most games it’s more of a era score management issue than a city settling issue if you’re having major loyalty problems.
However, you’re definitely correct in bringing it up! It’s just about as limiting as water in giving you options for forward settling, especially with the Gaul banana settle example in this video! The big thing to watch out for is settling a city way out on its own and then losing it in a later age when things have changed!
Thanks for bringing it up, cheers! 🎉
Love this type of video that gives insight into decision making as there is no correct answer for all games and that is what makes the game so fun! Keep up the good work.
Most of the time you can fit 20 pop within the first 2 rings of your cities, in my view the third ring is extra. Also, for most of the game you won’t have access to the third ring anyway and general you only tend to get 15+ pop in the late game.
So for me settling cities closer together is a more efficient way of using the available space. Land is scarce, you’re always competing for it with other players, a tight knit empire allows you to have more cities.
Also having two or three cities as close together as possible is the only way to get decent industrial zones, using aquaduct adjacency.
My rule of thumb is 4 tiles between each city. This gives each city 2 rings of tiles to work, and if you need a singular super productive city you can steal tiles from neighbors. There are places I break this (many you mention in the video), but this is just the target I try to hit.
Usually I plan so that my capital has a full 3 rings free for building things like wonders and lots of districts, other cities are not suited for all these purposes so I choose which 3 districts I want to try to optimize in my other cities. Also using geography to cut off enemies expansion, or lay claim to an area are also very important.
I'm actually really appreciative that you did the video the way you did because sometimes rose a thumb can get you caught out. But reasons to consider for each type of example is you
Can you make a video on what bad settles look like? I like that you pointed it out at the end. Very helpful to see examples of what NOT to do 😅
This sounds like a very fun idea!
Just watch the AI settle ;)
My gameplay revolves around stealing an early settler(quite easy in deity mode). Then settle it with terrain defensive features in mind cause that lone warrior isn't really going to stand up to 5 of his with +4 bonus if you don't choose the battleground well, also make sure it's close enough that the second warrior arrives just in time to help the first. Then there's also the matter of iron, I prefer settling where iron is likely to be, the earlier you have the swordsman, the better. Then if there are two neighbors, I'd be busy letting one neighbor borrow my land, then build a district for me. Letting them build for you is nice in deity since it costs them less to build a district. Soon as one war is over, I swing the troops in the other direction to claim my birthright. If possible, I deliberately leave a certain lucrative area unsettled. This would lure my neighbor to send settlers in that direction instead of to some far corner where I can't get it. I also make sure to prepare an ambush for that settler. With the brutal increase in construction cost of settlers, it's actually a lot cheaper to build troops to capture settlers than to keep building settlers.
Tag a preserve at each spot around Pantanal that has 2 adjacent Pantanal tiles and then figure out where to settle each of the Preserve cities.
I have been watching your videos since 2020 lockdown and must say that your Civ content has kept me alive through this tough period. Thank you for your help and explanations. Best wishes to you for 2022 👍
My rule of thumb is: If I focus in District then short settle; if instead, I focus in unique Improvements, then long settle.
24:43 in my science games, I usually just win with a few cities that are ridiculously big, some with every single district (excluding some due to incompatibility with other districts) and still have a bunch of wonders. I abuse Democracy trade routes in combination with exceptionally large cities to create those monstrosities of cities
How big are you able to grow em?
@@morgenstern4.669 I've reached I think 50 without any civ growth buff
@@vascofernandes295 Holy shit!
@@vascofernandes295 That's insane!
My approach is always settle close unless your civ specifically benefits from playing tall. You can share farm triangles, get better district adjacency, can more easily defend and have less loyalty issues. I play on deity.
My strategy has always been to settle the best spot I can find within 9 tiles of another city of mine. Sometimes that means there's going to be a huge gap between my cities, sometimes it means my cities might be extremely close and they'll be competing for tiles.
Only time I make a conscious effort to settle cities close to one another is if I'm playing as a civ whose bonuses encourage a compact empire (eg. Japan and Germany). By that same token, playing as Russia, you should probably make use of its bonuses and settle as wide as possible and claim as much territory as you can.
Please make a video on how to effectively flip cities. Thanks for the great videos!
I managed to win a domination game with zombies enabled by placing cities evenly spaced at minimum distance in a sort of ring with encampments in the middle between each city. Played as vietnam. Maybe not the best, I wouldn’t normally build this way, and I’m never going back to zombies again. The late game was absolutely painful 😆
Yeah, Vietnam allows for that sort of strategy and it's a good civ to pick if you're doing zombie mode.
That said, zombie mode really could use some tweaking. Some games, zombies are a minor nuisance and easily dealt with, others (particularly marathon games on large maps), zombies mutate too quickly and will make you rage quit.
I played civilization a lot as a kid on ps1 (i think it was civ 2), and I never touched it again until a few weeks ago with civ 6. I've really been missing out. This game is really great!
The fact that going wide instead of going tall is pretty much always better in civ 6 kinda bums me out.
Hell yeah, civ 5 did this better in making both options viable.
its why i uninstalled
Actually in civ 5 the meta was pretty much to go tall every game. It is interesting how this game is the complete opposite. Coming from civ 5 I have to unlearn some of those habits, since in that game you always did want to go for the full 3 tile radius around your cities but in this game it's the opposite
@@mysteriousstranger9496 Civ 5 enforced tall much more than civ 6 encourages wide. Don't talk shit please.
@@samuelhakansson6680 Nonsense. In C5 tall was the go to as it was generally stronger, but wide was actually possible, had it's strengths and was competitive in most contexts outside of NQ lobbies etc. In C6, not going wide is just a handicap, and you may as well just forfeit the game before it starts.
Not the same thing at all.
I prefer to space them out a little bit but I usually prefer huge maps. More people means more tiles worked n more production. It's always good to have a couple good cities that can produce units right away just incase you are low on gold or faith.
I was thinking about this last night, thank you for posting
400 hours and I'm still a big noob lol
Place them 12 spaces apart so you can place a city inbetween later🙂
What about the settle for defense? At your 27:50 mark you have the city to the left of Rome. It is up against a mountain, not the best for defense, which let’s face it, you are forward settling Gaul on deity your going to war! If you move it to the right one tile and across the river you now have two tiles blocked two spaces away from your potential enemy from ranged attacks and it also means you can control how they will approach that city by the units and districts that you place down. Just something else like you said just a minute for that explanation if you didn’t think about something
Thank you for this I wasn't sure to do far or close settlements.
My worst Civ habbit is I play every game (In each version of civ even) basically the exact same way. I like to start with a coast city BUT I basically settle on the nearest resource that has an aquaduct position- having NO fresh water gives you a BETTER aquaduct so you end up with a few more housing in the end! So I actually PREFER to setle off of fresh water... maybe not so much with my first settle but all the same. You kind of have no choice as to districts- I really let my civ decide which district I go for first IE phoenicia has a cheap harbor so I go for harbor first- actually I almost always go Holy Site first but. Anyway I ALWAYS play 'tall'- I can't find myself playing small it just doesn't feel right! On my following cities (70% of them are coastal- unless the map is one big continent or something- and whenever possible and not too far away I want to settle NEAR a river, remember I like to settle OFF fresh water) I will ALMOST ALWAYS start with a aquaduct -> industrial zone. I also LOVE the Harbor -> Commercial hub combo, money buys you EVERYTHING in this game! I also play 70% of my games on Prince and tend to lose 70% of the rest of the (usually Empire lvl) games :) so. This is why I say this is my worse civ mistake xD
I am quite happy with 4 tiles between my cities.
I build 4-6 apart. Since i can only really build three away from a city so that allows me too kinda build wide and tall
This discussion is completely contingent on who you play as. Japan, Maya, and Germany need cities as close as possible. Gaul should be farther apart.
Now this is a really helpful video!!!
Did you forget barbarians? Thise are big problem on high dif
Great video, loving your content!
Im kinda sad how my Russia tsl game has gone and thwarted my plans of building a Constantinople to get access to the Mediterranean. My own cities have squeezed the region too tightly to fit another one. Russias extra tiles come back to haunt them lol.
Can you do a short video, or a tiktok, on the Map Tacks? your map tack option UI looks different than mine.
The difference being at the start of the game you can see like 8 tiles, you gotta work fast and hope it doesn’t screw you over by being shit
Settling that city east of Rome over the bananas and not on the coast upset me way more than I'm willing to admit. Is it because I play Carthage?
Why does the AI always settle three tiles apart from other cities, and the advisor suggest you do the same?
My default distance is 4, although I can accommodate for more or less depending on the circumstances. Generally speaking though, I don't really like 3-tile apart.
I am pretty new to the game but sometimes the suggested city locations that pop up when a settler is produced don't seem like the best. How seriously should I take the suggestions? Thanks, I really appreciate your videos!
How do you have so much visibility, without many settled cities?
I've tried to reveal all but don't have the app option file. I'm running it through steam. Any help?
I'm in a really long game.
My capital has 7 rings and is starting to work on the 8th, cuz I left space for it...
I don't know how I feel about it though. 😅
Thank you VanBradley
When you talk about getting 12-15 cities, is that settled cities, or do you count conquered cities?
I always try to make a tall ruhr valley city for my space port
Are the other players resources and the pins displaying adjacency bonuses a mod or in game option? Couldn't find it in game.
It’s a mod called “Enhanced Map Tacks” on steam! That is what will enable the pins to give you the adjacencies.
For the other players resources it’s just part of the game. If you go to options, preferences, and then click “Show yields on HUD ribbon” and click “Always show” it should work for you!
How did you reveal the entire map? Noob question? Love your content btw.
Its just easy go to Documents\My Games\Sid Meier's Civilization VI folder, or wherever the game is stored on your PC, and find the AppOptions.txt file. Open this in a text editor, then scroll down to the entry which states "EnableDebugMenu 0" and change it to "EnableDebugMenu 1", before saving your changes.
But theres only 2 commands u can use that is
•Reveal all (it will reveal all map no fog)
•Explore all (it will reveal all map with fog)
To unlock command in the game just click ` this symbol in your keyboard and type "reveal all" or "explore all"
Thanks for the information!
(Only my personal preference, prolly not meta) I like them 6 tiles apart so they don’t have cross over. But that’s just me.
Wow. You wasted the city governor bonus effects like Victor and Amani or wonder like colosseum.
You would need a population of 36 to work the full 3-tile radius of a city. Ask yourself whether you plan on having even NEAR that many citizens in each city!
Thanks for all your advice, I decided after beating this game once via science victory that took 300+ turns... that the game is too slow paced for my tastes, I'm uninstalling it and finding something else.
I noticed you are settling your second city right next to a volcano? Is this a mistake or is this acceptable? Anyone?
how do u reveal the map fog?
Why was the whole map visible?
Very good guide!
Ok so how the heck do we reveal the map now?
The default answer is 4, but circumstances sometimes dictate more. If you go for a long-settle, at least plan out how you're going to back fill.
Now i want to play that map
Thank you
Here's my short answer. Where are the valuable resources and strategic locations?
how do you remove fog of war like that?
A mod probably.
Probably not directly related to this topic..I'm on a game of civ playing with the Zulu...things are going pretty good, but during my 2nd war none of my cities can build any districts...they all show 999+ turns...why is this?
Posted this question to reddit n got the answer...apparently there is a bug with dramatic ages when you use the Culture Industry policy card
Can anyone tell me a TL;DR version?
Widening your cities as much as possible is always more advantageous in controlling as much territory as possible - albeit in the early game.
Mid and late game is all about controlling resources and strategic outposts for guarding key city-states
Y
the way this game generated maps make the game shit.restart the game few time until have a decent capital city not mentioned that the rest of the citys will be shitty also
Did anyone else think this video is about farts? The look The Look on his face the little particles in the air the word fart.
Hot damn. Whats with this game and everybody making 30min to 2 hour videos on one subject. It really isnt that deep.
How fart
*me playing lady thicc thighs every game only every placing cities in the sacred geometry* interesting.
I lose a city in the early game every other game to loyalty 🥲
In early game turns, don't settle your city near (3~4 tiles) to other civs' cities especially in other continents. Try to achieve your era score normal or gold. If you get enough loyalty bonus policy cards in mid game, maybe you can start planning into settling near other civs.