Is it feasible to just conquer every city, maintenance wise?

[Beltz]

Hi, I recently started playing Civ4 and I am wondering, if, late in the game, it is feasible to just take over every city in the game.

I am currently at war with the evil Americans, and taking over every city... but my cash flow is decreasing as well. It might be because of increasing war weariness and the 400 gold per turn I have to pay for oil... but I wonder, when the war will end, will I get a huge disadvantage from going from 8 cities to about 22? And if I took over my whole continent of about 40 cities, would that be bad due to maintenance destroying my economy?

Is the old idea of just conquering every enemy city possible (and everyone is an enemy when I play as Kublai Khan) or is it no longer feasible at all?

I am worried about this simply because of my bad experience in my first few games of over-expanding and going bankrupt, losing 20+ units due to cash.

Also, is there a maximum amount of cash per city to pay, so that there isn't for example a bigger disadvantage in having 100 cities instead of 50? Or does it keep increasing?

[Nugog]

Maintenance costs are increased in Civ4, in order to kill off infinate city sprawl (ICS).

So in general the answer to your question would be that it is not overly feasible.

Maintenance is even worse over water.

But on one land mass, not too big a map, and on lower levels, yes it is possible.

If aiming for a conquest victory, it is IMO better to raze as you go, having a secondary clean up force to mop up any new cities that the AI may pop up behind you.

[Cort Haus]

It would probably be a good idea to point that army in the direction of some oil, so that you have your own supply. The 400gpt will go a long way to paying for the new cities.

[Nugog]

Excellent point.

[Beltz]

I actually have the Americans surrounded. My main land is at the top of the map, and I have 3 smaller cities taken from barbarians under them. One of the American's oil field is next to my smaller colony but I failed many times over in capturing or destroying it because they really understood it's importance and railroaded units at me whenever I got near. Yet, they did not defend a nearby town nearly as much, so I took it and the oil will be mine in about 10 turns I guess.

Their second oil field is between their 4 major cities, so although 6 of their cities have fallen, I will still be unable to take it until the war is over.

This is all in one continent so I'll finish capturing the American's towns but I will call it quits after that.

Thanks

[Theben]

Are you playing vanilla, Warlords, or BtS?

I would conquer every city unless they were small and in bad locations. As for lowering your costs:

Oil is your main target. Focus on getting that. 400 gold/turn is too much to let go of, let alone paying an AI.

Switch to State Property. YOur maintenance costs will drop dramatically if on a large continent.

Build Versailles if it hasn't been built yet well away from your capital, or the Forbidden Palace.

Switch to Police State, Vassalage or Nationalism, State Property, and Theocracy. Get the war over with ASAP.

[Jaybe]

Particularly if you have (or conquer) a religious shrine of a large religion, you could probably take every city while only somewhat reducing your research. Of course, if you take all the other civs out, WHY THE BLEEP DO YOU NEED TO RESEARCH anyway!!? State Property not even required. Having some (appropriate) corporations (in BtS) would be nice.

[Beltz]

Thank you for the advice guys.

I am playing vanilla by the way. I have now solved the Oil problem. I remembered when I got home that I was waiting to discover plastics to build an offshore oil platform so that problem is solved. I am also happy to report that I have linked my lower and upper colonies, captured 3 more cities, destroyed one of USA's oil field and will soon finish them off.

I also see what these forums meant about Montezuma, who declared war on me out of the blue. But the loser is behind in tech so his cavalries and canons were easy to kill on the offensive using merely infantries and a few old cavalries that I kept for happiness bonuses.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Beltz
I also see what these forums meant about Montezuma, who declared war on me out of the blue. But the loser is behind in tech so his cavalries and canons were easy to kill on the offensive using merely infantries and a few old cavalries that I kept for happiness bonuses.

The thing about Monty is he's lousy at teching, so he's almost always way behind everyone else by the end of the game. So he may be a threat during the first part, but by the second part he's just easy pickings.

[Chemical Ollie]

Regarding maintenance cost, it's usually horrible if you expand too fast in the early game. I try to get Code of Law as soon as possible, and build some courthouses in my main cities. Then I can expand again.

I have never given away colonies, ever. You lose money on them in the beginning, but with courthouses, marketplaces etc, they can even become profitable. Also, the Civ Jewelleries Inc corporation is a great for your economy, I always try to get it in the late game.

[Blaupanzer]

Beltz, Welcome aboard. Given the situation you laid out, your question is bold. In conquest, according to the warmongers, you burn a lot of cities, keep only Wonder and very rich cities. It is apparently very difficult to avoid domination victory if you keep too many cities.

We have a good make war thread here every so often. A series of references on "how to play" this strategy as well as others usually comes up in these threads. Hopefully one of our deep reference types will show up here shortly.