Excuse my ignorance

[Theseus]

Well, even though there are lots of issues and answers to the question, I think the easiest to play is generally 3-tile placement (i.e., cxxc).

This makes for easier sharing of high value tiles, and also a strong military network with roads. The general downside to it is that it limits the late-game growth of cities, but I do not find that to be so horrible.

Most of the other issues have to do with corruption, which is currently in C3C, uh, under discussion.

[Kuciwalker]

It varies. I remember there was one strategy where you placed cities 1 tile apart.

[Catt]

If only there were a simple answer . . .

Your question is often debated, and a whole series of styles and methods have emerged that are favored for different reasons in different circumstances.

A search for "placement" in thread titles just from the strategy forum turned up these results: click here.

Also see the "Must Read" threads (a topped thread above here in the strategy forum) which contains links to one or two threads on placement tactics including this one.

Catt

[pmaura]

I am sure this has been answered but I can not find a sufficient answer when I do a search on city placement.

In Civ 3 what is the optimal position for placing cities from each other three squares away four six etc.