Buildings?

new player


Hello, I've played about 9 hours so far so I'm not that experienced yet.

 

Is there any reason to not build every building that a city has access to? I like games that make me weigh the positive and negative effects of what I'm building. From what I've seen so far there is no downside to any building which makes me think, "why don't I just put all the buildings in the queue and forget about the entire city building mechanic of the game?".

 

Am I missing something here or is the only relevant factor in city building the order in which you build things?

 

Thanks :D

8,987 views 4 replies
Reply #1 Top


the only time i dont have buildings being built is because i need troops built. the order depends on what is important to your traits and style of play. then after you are out of things to build you can pick continuous research or gildar. i have done what you describe when i get sick of micromanaging a huge empire toward endgame and i cut into cities production chains if needed.

Reply #2 Top

I will usually avoid building Black Markets as an Empire in the early part of the game, since those carry an unrest penalty.

The only time I might not build everything in the city that I can is when I place a city in a spot that has limited space (very close to another city, or pinned between a river and a mountain, or things like that). But I tend to get rid of cities like that unless I for some reason really needed a city there.

Generally, I prioritize basic production structures (workshops, logging camps, possibly their first upgrades), then basic unrest reduction (bell towers, clerics), then whatever I feel my empire needs at the time. I also generally avoid placing everything all at once, because I like to shape my cities to control passage through parts of the map and to protect world resources. Forcing unfriendly armies to fight the city garrison or go the long way around, or to march through the forest/hills/river rather than across the plains, can be very helpful when defending an empire or keeping wandering monsters out of a safe heartland.

Reply #3 Top

The brilliant design Derek has created with buildings is that the real costs to building a building is the opportunity cost it creates, like Ipisko mentions. If you build a building, you can't build troops. Also, there tend to be multiple things you can build at a given time. You're forced to make tough choices:

*Should I increase my mana per turn by building on a shard?

*Should I increase my income per turn by building a Merchant?

*Should I build a pioneer to found another city/outpost?

*Should I build troops to support my city/champions?

etc.

The other component in the mix is research. Research will unlock new buildings and troops, sometimes which will impact the other. For instance, in my most recent game I held off building troops until I built a War College for my Fortress. In the interim, my city was vulnerable, but that was a risk I took in exchange for a longer term investment.

The more you focus on building buildings, the less you focus on the short/near-term. If you do this too much, you get destroyed. If you don't invest enough, you'll also get destroyed. A very delicate balance there, especially with the mechanism of using the city on idle to generate growth, mana, money, or research. Depending on your goals, you'll choose different things at different times to exploit the resources and advantages you have.

Reply #4 Top

it takes a while to actually finish all those buildings. it's not so much about whether you eventually get them. the real decision is the priority - and there are actually situation where it makes more sense to put that town on "build gold" or "build growth" instead of wasting 20 turns upgrading the school to a college etc.

so yeah, there's no real restriction that stops you if you want to ignore the building aspect, but there are somewhat important decisions that will impact the performance of a city significantly.