... or available land size?
In Civ2, I preferred to be alone on a large isolated landmass (played Huge world); develop my infrastructure and then branch out.
Getting to Statue of Liberty and switching to Communism took care of the corruption/waste problem (which is a joke in real-life).
Civ3 tends to favor small, compact city-states otherwise corruption and waste become a problem (or so it seems). Which begs the question(s):
1) how big is too big? I ask because in one game I had to go to hell-and-gone to obtain a horse resource even though I was able to deny the Persians iron - they were killing me with their horse asaults. In that case I established a city but would a protected colony have been better? At least this way I had a steady supply of horsemen even if the road should get cut. So - how many cities is too many?
2) what's the maximum distance before nothing happens in a city due to C&W? This question goes to landmass size as well. It takes time to build FP - especially in a small city that happens to be spaced about the right distance. Which brings up:
3) how far away from your principle city should the FP city be for maximum efficiency? Is it worthwhile to build FP in the principle city and then move your Palace?
