Upgrading Walls

**Spartan90** · September 11, 2008, 06:07 PM

Just a question I've always wondered:

When you have the opportunity to upgrade your settlements, are there any PERMANENT side affects if you don't upgrade them straight away? For example, you may not have enough money to upgrade into a Huge City for maybe 4 or 5 turns.

I know that it decreases population growth and increases squalor, but does it have any permanent effects if you postpone the upgrade for let's say 10 turns?

**Azim** · September 11, 2008, 07:41 PM

There are no permanant effects. However, if you take to long to upgrade a settlment, you will fall behind in advancing theough the tech tree. Also, I see the population hit as a (nearly) permanent effect. It can really set a city back.

**Silent Assassin** · September 12, 2008, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by Azim

There are no permanant effects. However, if you take to long to upgrade a settlment, you will fall behind in advancing theough the tech tree. Also, I see the population hit as a (nearly) permanent effect. It can really set a city back.

Like He said this will slow down your developpment, but also:
1- Your population will increase by building them
2- You will have a chance to have more free upkeep units for that givin city
3- It will help your income to grow aswell as the population
4- You will have a bonus to reduce rebellion.

I dont think that I have forgotten anything but still
Hope this helps.

Rebel

**RedEye** · September 12, 2008, 03:44 PM

When playing a campaign with the objective of trying to maximise reputation, which involved not sacking or exterminating, I found that the frozen populations of undeveloped cities were often useful in maintaining order in that phase of the game where you're seriously running short of Governors.

**Double A** · September 12, 2008, 05:47 PM

Or you could lower taxes you fascist scum!

**RedEye** · September 13, 2008, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by Double A

Or you could lower taxes you fascist scum!

Tried that but this encouraged population increase which either led to increased unrest or the same equilibrium at lower tax level.

And I'll have you know my "tax 'em til they squeak" policies are those of the expansionist Socialist Republic of Denmark, whose workers' heroes have resisted facism with their lives wherever it raised it's ugly head. Mind you, it has been difficult squaring this ideologically with kow-towing to the forces of reaction in Rome!

**Dead Sun** · September 13, 2008, 03:00 AM

i normally get a problem wiv over population. That causes the citizens to revolt if you dont change it soon.

**Double A** · September 13, 2008, 02:56 PM

try "normal" and stop building farms past 3.

or, in huge cities, let em rebel and then exterminate em.

or get a spy with the plague and send him in (after you take your generals and valuable units out...)

**Sargon_of_Akkad** · September 14, 2008, 06:05 AM

I play hotseat with my flatmate, and we play remarkably differently when it comes to this sort of thing.

I opt for a low-tax, high growth strategy, whereas he virtually has a "raise tax" answer for all questions.

In our Anglo-German campaign, he hasn't actually achieved a huge city yet, whereas I have at least three that I know of, and I probably have more.

**courbet** · September 14, 2008, 07:23 AM

or get a spy with the plague and send him in (after you take your generals and valuable units out...)

That is the best solution. Always work good for me. And upgrading walls is useful because it it more fun to defend settlement with huge walls and cannon towers (just relax and enjoy) than, let`s say ordinary stone walls.