Thread is under the process of updating!
A Foreword before I start
After exactly 497 turns on standard game speed, on a tiny map set to 2 vs 2 North vs South settings, I finally got a size-50 population on my Capitol.
I started out on a land with a significant amount of desert and plains, with not much grassland around me, and I wasted a few precious turns building troops to defend myself against Elizabeth, who was grabbing land and resources using settlers right next to my Capitol. Had I started out on an area with lots of grassland, and not spent so much time on war, a size-53 city might be achievable. In my opinion, I think size-55 should be the theoretical maximum for my city, but if started on a good piece of land, size-60 cities might be possible. On a huge map with 15 or so allied maritime city-states with the appropriate Patronage policies, I think size-70 might even be possible.
I got every single one of the Tradition, Piety and Freedom social branches (in ascending order) to boost food production and happiness in my Capitol, while keeping unhappiness levels low. Civil Service and Fertilizer provided a tremendous boost to my food production, while Hospitals and Medical Labs accelerated my growth rate. In addition, I had 4 allied maritime city-states giving me food every turn.
Now for the actual purpose of this thread.
1-City Puppeteering Infinite City Sprawl Strategy
Anyway, I found a pretty good strategy while trying to get my size-50 city: Simply focus all your resources in just your Capitol alone, max out Tradition as soon as you can, then grab Honor once you ready and build a Heroic Epic in your city. You will be able to build a small elite army capable of making puppets out of 10 or so enemy cities. After that, just get workers to build trading posts around them (effectively Infinite City Sprawl strategy). Use that gold to buy troops, city-states, buildings and upgrades, especially in your Capitol. You will never have to worry about tile maintenance costs, unhappiness levels, soaring social policy costs etc, but still have your 10 or so puppet states tribute you gold, culture and research points each turn.
My social policy cost was very low since I had only 1 core city (my Capitol), and I was getting up to 500-700 culture each turn. I completed 8 out of 10 social policy branches and still had lots of culture to grab Autocracy and Rationalism if I had wanted to (but I did not, since doing so would get rid of Piety, Freedom and Liberty), way before my 500 turns was up. I also had 220 happiness each turn, giving me golden ages every 5-10 intermittent turns. Great people were spawning everywhere and I used them to give golden ages, rush wonders, technologies and build manufactories and merchant outposts around my Capitol.
Due to Honor, all +XP structures in my Capitol plus Heroic Epic and +500 gold/turn, I had a very large army which was pretty much invincible.
If played well, this "1-city Puppeteering Infinite City Sprawl Strategy" can be a very good and viable alternative to the standard "Expansionist Infinite City Sprawl Strategy", since it gives you the best of both words, from typical ICS strategy, and 1-city peaceful strategy:
While a 1-city peaceful strategy gives you the utility of being able to build up a powerful enough city at the start so that you can rush important wonders such as Stonehenge and unlock social policies fast, you will not be able to compete militarily or technologically with other civilizations.
Also, an ICS strategy gives you the exact opposite. You can get a very powerful economy to build up a vast military soon, however there is a set-back. From the start, you will be focusing on expansion, which makes it difficult to capitalize upon the construction of a powerful Capitol that you can use to rush wonders. Such continued expansion causes your rate of required cultural points for the next social policy to fall and scale behind your rate of production of cultural points. While getting a cultural victory with ICS is possible with many cities, because social policy cost increases linearly and not geometrically with the number of cities, you will be slow in unlocking them if you cannot keep up by building monuments to keep up with the pace of expansion.
Justification of the Strategy
A 1-city puppeteering ICS strategy not only combines the best of both worlds, but also augments each of them, and results in new emergent and beneficial properties that far outstrips either one strategy. Here is the explanation:
1) Having 10 or so puppet states which gradually build up monuments, temples and other culture producing structures, while only having 1 Capitol, will in effect allow you to unlock policies at a rate that is proportionate to the number of non-controlled cities divided by your controlled cities. In this case, that factor is 10, which means that ideally, you will unlock policies 10 times as swiftly.
2) Since you are having only 1 city, the effectiveness of your culture-producing wonders become very powerful. If you were to own 10 cities, your Stonehenge will be producing only an average of 0.8 culture per city. However, with a throng of wonders around in just 1 controlled city, you effectively gain a (culture from wonders + culture from monuments/temples/theaters etc. / ulture from monuments/temples/theaters etc.)% speed in acquiring social policies. The more cities you own, the more the amount of culture from wonders will decline, therefore diminishing the percentage gain, which can be stripped down very quickly even with the addition of just 1 new city.
3) The effect of your social policies will scale with the number of puppet states which you have, and since you are unlocking them up to 15 times as fast, you will in effect experience a tremendous multiplier to your empire's economy, for every single puppet city that you own. +5 production to all of them will contribute significantly to your economy. Neither a pure 1-city peaceful strategy nor a purely expansionist ICS strategy can have both the speed of acquisition of social policies nor the size to benefit from this multiplier that mutually augments each other. This is the main "emergent" property that arises from a hybrid vigor between the 2 strategies.
4) With the rate of acquisition of social policies, you can quickly unlock both Commerce and Patronage, and get many maritime city-states to supply food to your all puppet states, while still getting the -25% gold purchase from Commerce. Adding this to Big Ben will increase the purchasing power of your gold by 100%, allowing to get so much gold that you quickly buy anything you want in your Capitol.
5) This hybrid strategy augments the power of capitalizing upon indivisible forms of labor, where quality triumphs over quantity. Having 30 barracks in all your cities is not as good as having just 1 city with a Barracks, Heroic Epic, Arsenal, Forge, Military Base and Armory. With 1-city peaceful strategy, you can have that, but you will lack the gold to buy elite units from the city on demand. With the power of ICS and puppeteering, you gain enough liquidity to force a Just-in-time manufacturing sector in your Capitol that produces the highest quality of a good at the lowest possible cost. The quality? Troops with +45 XP, +15% morale strength bonus, about +100% to unit production speed. The cost? Only 1 city has to build all these instead of 30. Furthermore, using a 1-city Puppeteering ICS strategy requires you to have as big of a population in your Capitol as far as possible. My Capitol was size 50. This meant that the multiplier multiplied by the total production of the city, which is proportionate to your population (especially if you have the Statue of Liberty), becomes very high. This applies to all your modifiers as well. Having a single research lab with a +100% to science in a size-40+ city is better than having the same in 4 size-10 cities. You need not even bother if vertical growth starts to taper off later, because of point (5).
6) This strategy allows you to take advantage of the initial economic boom caused by the vertical growth of 1 super-city, while still enabling you to catch up with other civilizations by utilizing the tremendous horizontal growth of having many puppet cities. In either pure ICS strategy, or 1-city strategy, you can only fixate yourself on one, but not both. I do not need to explain this as it is already self-evident.
7) This strategy enables to mince the offensive and defensive nature of tactics, as well as take advantage of the parallel development of other cities owned by other civilizations or city-states at a very low cost. In typical pure ICS strategy, early military expansion is traded for early city expansion, creating an opening for enemies to exploit. In 1-city strategies, this is the case as well, where enemies will take advantage of your late-game weakness to assault you. This hybrid strategy eliminates the weakness of both strategies. By being on the offense and having a large military due to its mechanism, you will be less likely to be bullied; having an offensive force that is always in conquest mode means that offense is the best defense. Next, what of enemy civilizations that have well-developed cities? Consider them yours right from the start as well. Think of this analogy: a quad core CPU is better than a single core CPU because 3 other cores can produce things parallel and simultaneously on top of the first core. Treat your enemies' cities as the other cores. They are merely there temporarily ... until you use your military to take it back. With such a powerful military elite in this strategy, it is not difficult at all. The enemy has in effect contributed to your overall economy. Building an elite army that can conquer 4 cities is better than developing 4 cities yourself.





. Lower building maintenance costs!! Drool. Seriously, I should have read it over 3 times before laying out my picks this game. Autocracy was meant for this strategy.
didn't think about it that way. luckily, I'm not a game developer so I don't have to come up with good ideas. but I'm fairly sure that ICS and "puppet ICS" could be nerfed relatively easily without redesigning the whole game. Obviously it's not my job to come up with a good solution, but I still think the key element why the expansionist strategies are so powerful (/overpowered) right now is that the unhappiness and culture penalty are not enough - if expansion slowed down your tech progression significantly this might be the missing element that makes the player really think twice whether "horizontal" or "vertical" progression is the better solution in any given situation. and imo the best model would be a balance where you are penalized for doing it too exremely. this works well for the "vertical" progression already - if you just build a few large and well developed cities you will run into all sorts of problems- lack of money - lack of science - missing resources etc.. the missing element would be an increasing penalty for getting too many un- (or under-) developed cities and i believe adding a science penalty based on number of cities could solve that.




