I have hard times justifying map scales in Elemental. On one hand, there are the continents in the order of a few thousand squares extent. This and the slow movement suggests large distanced. One the other hand there's the the current city sprawling. With move 1 it could take ~10 turns only to go around a bigger unfiendly one. If it is a 'city', then it should not take more than one square. If the cities represent "provinces" and countryside, then one should not be able to build a Limes/Great-Wall-of-China around wast tracts of farmland (well, all 4-8 small squares of it), but only around the 'city' itself.
Of course, city building is rewarding on its own. But if the game is going to focus on it, much larger maps are needed (to get the scale a bit in the right direction), and to find a balance between the extent of cultivated land vs. the cities themselves. In pre-industrial times, there were like 3-10 farmers for every "specialists" (Nobles/priests/merchants/artisans) depending on land fertility/climate conditions/agricultural developments. In Elemental Beta 2, the Farmlands are Within the City Limits, which is somewhat absurd. Gardens might be inside the city limits, but their food production is negligible compared to the surrounding lands.
Accepting this cities should not occupy more than one tile, so any citybuilding micromanagement should be done on the "city screen" not the main map. If one does not want to slavishly copy Civilization, then the surrounding land could be managed from the "city screen" - like cutting down forests to increase arable land, building farms/lumber mills/mines. But these 'out-of-city' buildings should not occupy tiles in the city itself.
A few structures could still be built outside of city limits but within the borders - like forts and harbors.
