Do you build every advanced structure when available?

[bigmilt16]

do you guys just build every advanced structure when finances become available or when the city is big enough, or do you wait and roleplay (allowing better characters with certain skills to build certain things)? I just ask because by 200 BC it is easy to have Rome be an imperial city with a colesseum and highways all over the place. is that how you guys do it.

[Olaf The Great]

do you guys just build every advanced structure when finances become available or when the city is big enough, or do you wait and roleplay (allowing better characters with certain skills to build certain things)? I just ask because by 200 BC it is easy to have Rome be an imperial city with a colesseum and highways all over the place. is that how you guys do it.That's an interesting way of doing it, QS might have something to add to that.


Although I usually try to get advance as quickly as possible.

[Ibrahim]

I only build abvaced barrcks and sewers..and the occasional markets and mines..

[Megas Methuselah]

What about roads? And temples? And ports? And Governors' Palaces?!
:smash:

[QuintusSertorius]

I never build guard posts or hospitals. They didn't appear til the Augustan era, so I shouldn't have them at all.

Otherwise I tend to just queue stuff all the time, finances permitting. I usually hold off on the latifunda for a while, though.

[konny]

I roleplay "grand of land", otherwise build everything that is available; either the next cheapest, or something that the settlement is somehow "required" to build or something that best suits the character of the governor.

[Ibrahim]

What about roads? And temples? And ports? And Governors' Palaces?!
:smash:

barraks is used here for any building with military significance, including roads..
temples? the romans didn't make any really big temples till the late republic (yes, they had respectable temples, but not awesome over the top ones)

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

I'll often roleplay the buildings. I won't build things like the advanced ports, games/festivals, health structures, or various buildings until I have a given reason to. I also won't ever build the highest level of temple, educational buildings, or large walls in most towns, only those few that deserve them.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I build up my infrastructure as I consider prudent given the current and likely near-furture situations. Which usually means I focus on military infrastructure/economy on the first few turns upon conquest (to enable myself to at least recruit militia type units locally) and then move onto economy/public order. I try to limit population growth as much as possible because of two reasons: one I usually can't afford explosive populations (requires a lot of careful management and money which I usually can spend better elsewhere); two I don't like the idea of all-hughe cities throughout my realms after merely 10-30 years. So that means now sewers and the like (unless its the cheapest most building and there aren't any other 'best-buys' available anymore, or the public order demands it).

[Lysimachos]

This is an interesting thread. I never even thought about this before. Maybe i'll have a look at selfrestriction concerning buildings in the future (not that i had the money to build advanced structures anyway :laugh4:).

[tapanojum]

I usually try not to build too many sewers or other health buildings as to keep my population in check. I started a new game on HUGE settings, and now I am doing everything I can to pump my population up. Playing as Epeiros and it seems I'm running out of population to maintain my army!

Damn Romans need to stop sending near full stacks at Taras!

[Hax]

Build Askleipieia. Those things do wonders.

[Ancyrean]

When I'm not playing a rapid-expansion game but rather take my time in letting the AI factions develop, I can make do with fewer troops for defence than I would otherwise need for offence. The resulting savings in unit upkeep often leave me with a lot of money in the bank and I can't help but use that money to build higher levels of buildings.

Markets, ports, roads, are always worth your investment particularly in your homeland provinces.

For health buildings, I like to have my cities grow to the largest extent possible as allowed by the "distance-to-capital" penalty. So, second down my priority list are large granaries and hospitals, as well as higher level aquaducts. In my experience, if you choose not to restrict your population, it becomes feasible to invest in these buildings as the increased population generates more taxes (the effect is more pronounced if you have higher level markets and ports).

In terms of education, I take the schooling of my FMs seriously. In practical terms, I appreciate the ancilliaries you can get from schools; at higher levels they can turn even the most mediocre FM into a decent administrator. So, I take care to build the highest level of school available, usually at my capital. On a related note, if I'm playing a faction which can make use of the Agoge, building the highest possible level of academy in Sparta is a good idea, as youngsters have to spend a total of 4 years in town to graduate from the Agoge anyway.

In general, my playing style is more in the way of remaking the world in the image of my own faction so generally I prefer having ever-better structures all over my empire as a material manifestation of my ownership of conquered lands. :2thumbsup:

[Swordmaster]

Yes, I build everything I can, except the governor's mansions. I only upgrade a city when it's reasonable to do so. Most towns get to large town level because I need the population, but from there on, it's role-playing. Of course I'm more pragmatic when necessity demands it.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

On a related note, if I'm playing a faction which can make use of the Agoge, building the highest possible level of academy in Sparta is a good idea, as youngsters have to spend a total of 4 years in town to graduate from the Agoge anyway.
In theory yes, but not role-playing wise. The youngsters are there to become tough soldiers, spending their time in the countryside or as junior soldiers... No way for them to become couch-potatoes in an Akademia. I restrict myself in that regard.

[Nachtmeister]

In theory yes, but not role-playing wise. The youngsters are there to become tough soldiers, spending their time in the countryside or as junior soldiers... No way for them to become couch-potatoes in an Akademia. I restrict myself in that regard.

Depends on how you look at it - having a high-level academy in Sparte is not necessarily a contradiction
as "laconic" does not mean "stupid" - the Spartans were tough guys but not "un-smart".
Of course the FM would not be directly studying at the academy while undergoing the agoge - but then again, neither would they start at age 16 but instead something around 6-8 years although game engine makes that impossible.
But maybe their "teachers" at the agoge got an education at the academy which would reflect on the training; the agoge was not just simple muscle-training with the occasional beating but rather a bit more complicated - for instance, a "paides'" survival depended to some extent on forming a "special relation" to one of the teachers, something to do with "platonic love"... Wikipedia says it was not Pedophilie (greek-german word, don't know english expression) but it sure seems strange by modern customs. Anyway this would also give some room for the occasional delectation in math ^^
=> the main point is, I think placing an academy in Sparte is a good idea and very feasible, even with young governors actually gaining benefits from it.

[AntiochosMegas]

I usually not roleplay but built in all the regions if I have the amount of money neede, that provide good economy and make affordable a good full stack army (thsat is my basic army, with few other smaller ons for secondary fronts/campaigns) and a strong navy.I don't built walls to some settlements, I also built last in que the health buildings just to have time to build the city before it grows to next level

[Lovejoy]

Usually I dont develop my "barbarian" cities too much when playing as a civilized faction. I HATE it when they get the "civilized" city model on the camp. map... I even use the "add_population" command to drain people from AI-barbarian settlements, who is taken over by a civilized faction, so they wont build the next government building. :dizzy2: God Im silly.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

I HATE it when they get the "civilized" city model on the camp. map.
Lol, I LOVE it when a conquered settlement gets upgraded to my own Western Greek city model! It's really one of my primary tasks to do everything to get them as fast as possible to my city-model.:grin:

[Zradha Pahlavan]

This thread makes me sad that I can never afford anything but a yurt upgrade for my nomadic settlements.

[TWFanatic]

When playing as the SPQR my answer to your question is yes--I like to take my time expanding and fight wars/launch invasions in phases (Punic Wars, Gallic Invasion, etc.). No Alexander-the-Great type conquests. During the intermediate phases I accumulate a lot of cash--have to use it somewhere and endless conquest is off the table. I also like to launch preemptive strikes on any neighbors who are growing too powerful by destroying their field armies and promptly returning home and disbanding my armies (when they are militia, that is). Sometimes, if a city is becoming overpopulated, I'll train a legion or two and send it off on a hopeless venture with an incompetent family member to be decimated (hopefully weakening my enemies' forces in the process).

[Tyrfingr]

Everything to keep public order in check, I build...