When to build the Forbidden Palace with your first GREAt LEader?

[Artifex]

What circumstances lead you to use your first GL on a Forbidden Palace?

Lets say you are playing on a huge map with 16 civs on monarch, you get your GL around 70 BC. You are Germany. You are militaristic with a big army. You could build the great Library. You are missing republic, construction, Polytheism, and Monarchy. Thenm you will be in th emiddle ages.

DO you wait until you conquer the continent and have optimal site at the othger end of the continent?

When do you choose the FP over an Army or Great Library?

[cdinkle]

Is this example you gave us your current situation?

edit: spelt something wrong, its corrected now.

[Carver]

If you already have an optimal site I would use the GL to build the FP pronto. Otherwise (especially if you plan on more warmongering soon) I would use the GL for a wonder, more GLs will come. That said, I should tell you that one of my biggest problems is waiting for that perfect FP site thus hampering my income/production in the meantime. [ and I keep doing it, I just can't stop from wanting that perfect locale ] I would use the GL on whatever will give you the biggest boost right now. If you're behind and the Great Lib will let you catch up build it. If you were even or ahead in tech I would lean more towards the FP.

[Zachriel]

If the war will end soon, consider the Forbidden Palace.
If the war will continue, consider an army and play for a second Leader.

[Artifex]

I built an army, I'm at war with everyone. I hate it when the zulu get big and I have to cut them down to size. I favor horsemen and there Impi give me huge casualty rates.

Very Bloody/Costly

...but what am I to do? Swordsmen would take forever to reach their heartland...I did Capture Zimbabwe and the Oracle with my trusty army.


just at very bloody cost. The war with Zululand has cut a 35 horsemen army well down to 15.. but I like blitzkreig tactics (being the germans) so I blitzed into his heartland and took the big prize.

Now Russia is next. I despise Catherine with a passion. She keeps breaking peace treaties and being dishonest as usual.

That is where the real fun is going to begin. I really don't enjoy wars with the zulu for the above stated reasons.

Now the russians are gonna be my pleasure.

[Artifex]

Incidently, I just got 2 more leaders in the next 5 turns since I typed that last message which I built the great library and hanging gardens with. LOL, so it's a moot point now. But was an interesting diliema.

BTW, If you have the Oracle and Hanging Gardens I wonder if you can fight pretty much non stop war even under republic during late ancient early middle age period.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Artifex
Incidently, I just got 2 more leaders in the next 5 turns since I typed that last message which I built the great library and hanging gardens with. LOL, so it's a moot point now. But was an interesting diliema.

How is it a moot point? Does it have to be the first great leader? Have you built the FP yet?

Catt

[Artifex]

The first Great Leader built an Army, My second built the Great Library, I now have a third and I was thinking of building the hanging Gardens.

Maybe I should think about the FP. I have only Conquered about 35% of the continent thus far. I could build it in Zimbabwe... Although That city is not quite in the middle of the continent, might be still too close to my capital *shrug*.. I am still kinda on the lower right hand corner and expanded out to the middle part somewhat. Kinda hard to describe.

On second thought It occured to me that maybe I could try to build Gardens the hard way since it's a cheaper wonder..or just hope someone on my continent get sit and I capture it since I am warring constantly.

When it comes to the FP I have read 2 popular strategies. I usually do the 1st one.

1st way is wait and place it on the opposite end of your continent. SO your palace is on one end and FP the other, the "barbell" effect...if you will.

2nd option many favor is place the FP in the middle of the continent..not too far from your original palace (which is at the lower right hand corner in my current game). Then once you make landfall on another continent relocate your palace there and rush build it with another GL.

AN idea that occured to me is since I havent conquered enough of the continent thus far I could always try and sneak a settler into the middle of enemy territory and plop down a new city then rush the FP there...and in my ensueing wars I would be able to eventually start building around it at some point.

[Catt]

I am more and more coming to appreciate the power of building the FP close to home - near the original palace location (assuming it is a reasonable location - not, for example on an isolated penninsula), and doing so with a normal build cycle (i.e., no using a leader to rush an FP in a far off land). The palace becomes a completely mobile improvement and may be relocated (through a GL) many times during a game.

In contrast to the fixed "barbell empire" concept, I have been enjoying what seems to be three of four productive cores, one of which is the permanently located FP, probably near my original start location, and the rest of which represent former palace locations. A Palace for 50 turns usually means a pretty infrastructure-rich locality, able to produce improvements and units even long after a Palace relocation.

I'm finding that multiple Palace relocations, combined with warfare / improvements designed to stimulate WLTKD (luxuries!), means an incredibly productive empire.

Catt

[Theseus]

Catt,

I've been thinking / theorizing about this, but haven't had the chance to implement.

Especially with 1.29, it seems to me that if you sufficiently build up a city, and have supporting luxuries and GWs, that corruption, waste, etc., can be managed.

You are evidently achieving this with the support of a "wandering" Palace.

First, I'd like to say that this is an extremely sophisticated strategy... second, do you have a rule of thumb as to when you'll actually execute? I've considered palace-relocation, but I've always been wary of the impact on my highest production cities, and therefore haven't gone for it...

[Catt]

Originally posted by Theseus
. . . do you have a rule of thumb as to when you'll actually execute? I've considered palace-relocation, but I've always been wary of the impact on my highest production cities, and therefore haven't gone for it...

I don't have a rule of thumb (at least not one I can articulate, yet). WTLKD is so important in regards to waste that happiness issues become key to my early-game strategy (perhaps too much so). I find it important to get an FP up and running as soon as possible (i.e., when the opportunity first presents itelf - when you reach the OCN halfway-point), but too often either (1) I don't have a leader to make it happen, or (2) I don't have a good enough sense of the world map to know where to locate my FP. I've found that the FP location is actually far more important than my palace location - I can relocate my palace but I can't relocate my FP unless I abandon the city. Consequently, I look to build small wonders like the Military Academy and the Iron Works near my FP if at all possible - I know it won't be moving and thereby gutting my expected production advantages - which makes my FP location all the more important since I have to "guess" whether an Iron Works wil even be possible in the surrounding area.

In my last half-dozen games my palace has enjoyed 3 or 4 different home cities, and my impressions are that the this "moveable feast" has been incredibly powerful - more so, at least, than a few extra GWs might have been (had they been competing with the palace move as a GL use -- I am also perhaps too much focused on the inability to generate a GL if one exists - I like to use my GLs as soon as possible, after taking all relevant fatcors into account of course ).

As a practical example, in my last Emperor-level game, I relocated my palace to a former enemy's territory, and later relocated it again, around the later stages of the Industrial Ages, to another former enemy's territory. The first relocated palace area (first enemy) as a "core," continued to produce a significant number of shields and comerce following the second palace jump - most of the cities had factories, courthouses, and police stations. By the modern ages, these "core" cities were producing modern armor in 4 - 5 turns (and of course my current palace core and FP core were producing MA in 1 - 2 turns).

I was slow to adopt the "palace relocation" tactic, but I think it is a very powerful force in the game.

Catt

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Catt
The palace becomes a completely mobile improvement and may be relocated (through a GL) many times during a game.

There is historical precedence for a mobile capital during the Middle Ages. For instance, when Aragon and Castile were united with the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella, they would move, with their entourage, from city to city. They were the capital and this movement was essential for the unification and morale of the country.

[Galvatron]

Build up your army is always a good idea, this way you can keep the other civs at bay and than you have enough time for the FP. But always be the military dominant civ first than nobody will bother you and you can do all things without being disturbed by the other naughty civs.

[Arrian]

Catt,

Good stuff there on the mobile palace. I've done that as well (build FP straight-up, rush palace later) with great success. I still like the traditional "rush FP far away" approach if the geography allows for it.

A Tale of Two Empires

First, we start with Rome. A lovely city, both blessed and cursed. The blessing was bountiful wheat sources nearby and good land to the west/southwest. The curse was mountains & desert to the north, sea to the east/southest. And so, using a legion-powered GA, a FP was built west of Rome, in what was then the dead center of the Roman Empire. It also happened to be roughly centered in the E/W axis of the continent, in the southern half. Later, during a nasty little war with the Zulu, the Palace was relocated just south of Zimbabwe, which was also centered on the E/W axis, and was in the northern half. At first, this move hurt a little bit (but not much), but as time went on, the former Zulu empire became extremely productive. Corruption was low, and Caesar had more money than he knew what to do with (and that's saying quite a bit).

Second, we travel to Egypt. After been sneak-attacked by the perfidious English, Cleopatra's swordsmen captured London, a beautiful city far, far to the north of Thebes. Shortly thereafter, while capturing Salamanca to the south, a great leader was born. Though 2 more cities had to be built before the FP was even an option, Egypt's brilliant, glorious, blessed, god-like leader... well anyway, I saved the leader for the FP in London, switched over to Monarchy, and THEN used my war chariots. Oh my. Game, set, match.

-Arrian

[Artifex]

Catt-

Would building a forbidden palace right next to your Capital be an option in this situation?

1. There are equal hills , on a river, and grassland, and IRON. PERFECT mix of land for a capital and possibly Ironworks in the future.
2. City has a PERFECT ring of cities around it. great for corruption. Situated nicely.
Downside--- But 3 squares over from your palace city. I am thikingn way too close, but I coudl get the FP up and runnign quickly..say 10 turns or so.

Then again i won;t really derive much benifits of the fp since it is right nexct to my palace...so I am thinking maybe building it further away but there will be NO IRON...so no iron works will be in the city.

Then again I am wondering if this is a little too close to build a FP. The only reason I am considering it is because it has Iron. hills, and shielded grassland and is set up to be a super production city in the future..and perfect for capital...although it is right next to my capital any way...so wont have much corruption.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Artifex
Would building a forbidden palace right next to your Capital be an option in this situation?

1. There are equal hills , on a river, and grassland, and IRON. PERFECT mix of land for a capital and possibly Ironworks in the future.
2. City has a PERFECT ring of cities around it. great for corruption. Situated nicely.
Downside--- But 3 squares over from your palace city. I am thikingn way too close, but I coudl get the FP up and runnign quickly..say 10 turns or so.

Then again i won;t really derive much benifits of the fp since it is right nexct to my palace...so I am thinking maybe building it further away but there will be NO IRON...so no iron works will be in the city.

Then again I am wondering if this is a little too close to build a FP. The only reason I am considering it is because it has Iron. hills, and shielded grassland and is set up to be a super production city in the future..and perfect for capital...although it is right next to my capital any way...so wont have much corruption.

It's a tough question to answer because so many variables should factor into the decision-making process. Assuming that you have discovered a good chunk of the map (or at least your own continent) and the location really is a good site for a palace, your situation sounds like a great candidate for the FP build. I always look for both a centrally-located city, a good terrain mix (for shields, gold and enough food to support larger cities in the late game), and then also keep an eye out for "bonuses" like the possibility of getting lucky and having the opportunity for an IW nearby.

The key thing to remember is that once built, the FP will (likely) never move -- as long as you've got a solid "core" made or in the making, I'd say it makes an excellent location for an FP with the expectation that your Palace will move sometime thereafter.

BTW- another advantage of keeping the FP at home and moving the Palace to newly conquered areas is the influence of the Palace on culture flipping -- a capitol will not flip (or so I am led to believe) - building a Palace in a captured enemy capitol which contains a few prized wonders will ensure the loyalty of that city; in addition, the closeness of the Palace will reduce the chances of nearby cities (which probably contain a lot of foreign citizens ) flipping away from you (back to the enemy) and increase the chances of nearby enemy cities flipping to you. A city can flip with the FP built there (rare - but it happens - see alexman's thread in the Strategy Forum).

Catt

[Artifex]

When you talk about a centrally located palace. Do you mean in the middle of the continent? Or central in the fact that it is surrounded by cities.

After wiping out Russia, I am wondering what choice to make in my current situation. Zululand has the middle of the continent. But persia is on the other side and more powerful,. I want to try and take Persia out because they are the bigger threat. But if I take out the zulu I will capture the middle part of the continent thus clearing way for my forbidden palace in the middle. I am leaning to declaring on persia in the next turn or two. But I just got another great leader and have yet to build my forbidden palace, this has complicated the situation..now hmm maybe the zulu. I used my other gls on sistine chapel and built cathedrals in my city during the goldne age..gotta love it when it hits at such a sweet time.

If i don't use the gl on FP then I guess i could get invention and use it on Leo's.


I tend to go after the most threatening nation to cut down to size..I check the powergraph frequently. This helps me make decisions on my next war.

Do you favor putting the forbidden palace in the middle of the continent. Then relocating the palace to another one?

Oh well I know this is kinda tough not knowing my exact map layout and game situation. I need to learn how to post maps here.

[Catt]

I mean central in the sense that it is surrounded by cities that enjoy decent terrain.

I've attached an enlarged minimap below from my most recent game (minimap is taken from an earlier post, so it shows "my" territory as still being controlled by someone else ) - in it I highlight the location of my FP (built manually), and the four different palace locations I had during the game (including the original start position). This game was played on a small map, on emperor, which means the OCN is 9 - the 10th city starts suffereing from OCN corruption (all suffer from distance corruption). The small OCN of 9 is of course modified on a city-by-city basis, depending upon a number of factors such as the presence of a courthouse, police station, etc.

This game (and map) was by no means the most effective example of the palace relocation strategy, but it will probably do to amplify my point.

Locating a palace in a corruption zone for a long enough period of time to get solid infrastructure in place is all that is needed. I consider solid infrastructure in the industrial age to mean: courthouse, marketplace, factory, temple, police station. Cathedrals and banks are next in line, harbors if a coastal city. The Palace Relocation strategy is valuable primarily after Industrialization: not much other use for leaders that are generated, and the combination of factories and RRs mean great shield production once the corruption is tamed. The fact that all the desired buildings are available (i.e., enabling tech discovered) is obviously important as well.

A couple of points on the map below. I expect each palace relocation to allow full infrastructure development in 4 - 5 cities (represented by the "rings of influence"), with several key enablers like factories, courthouses, police stations in several others. I expect that, once I relocate the palace again, the "infrasturcture complete" cities will again suffer from significant corruption, but that the effect of the improvements will make the corruption levels seem more manageable. As a specific example, both the "Palace #2 city" and the city to its southeast (farther away and so not benefiting from the Palace #3 city or FP after the palace move) continued to generate substantial commerce and shileds after the Palace was moved away from that area of the continent (although the lack of hills and mountains crimped shield production in this area). Doing this from memory, but if I had to guess, I'd say that shield production went from 60 - 70 shields down to 30 - 40 shields - a pretty big hit but then again, how many times do you expect net shield production of 30 shields from a predominantly grasslands / plains city well outside the base OCN from the Palace or FP. The multiple palace relocations depicted here gave me +/- 30 productive cities on a small map - a really powerful powerful boost in a game in which I had a challenge on my hands even into the earl modern era.

Catt

[Artifex]

In my current game the designated FP city has a good mix of hills, some wine resources, 2 mountians, and an iron resource. So in the future there is a possibility of an Ironworks. it is right next to my first core group with palace, so build time is about 20 turns for the FP.

I am just wondering how much I should build up my core group of cities around my Palace before moving the palace for the first time with my next GL.

I built courthouses in all of them, libraries, harbors, marketplaces, cathedrals, temples. But I don't have the tech yet for police stations yet. I am right in the middle of the medieval period. (education).

I wonder if my capital and surrounding core need universities and police stations before the first palace move. I'm japan so universities are not cheap.