Next beta release they are removing prestiege from the hero techs. Don't know how much that will impact growth...

[duplicate post]

I disagree too. Prestige is about the only mechanic which benefits small empires of big cities over large empires (and it is only a small counterbalance, large empires are generally still far superior). If you reduce the effect of prestige then you are comparatively increasing the benefit of the growth spell and saying the player may as well settle as many cities as possible to get the most growth spells active.

I have to say, either the logic of ddd888 and mqpiffle escapes me, or they are playing a very different game than me.

I can never have too much growth.  Usually by turn 100, I have 10-15 cities of level 2-3.  Usually 2/3 of them are towns, there's at most one native fortress and the rest are outposts and conclaves.  At that point, my towns build wells and inns like crazy, second only to the grocer line, and all conclaves have a growth spell.

I think that even my worst enemies won't accuse me of having too low of a prestige, but I never see that 'too much growth' situation.

Now, if you guys (ddd888 and mqpiffle) expand slowly, and have two-three cities with prestige in the 20s, that is just your style of play.  I do not see why you insist on slowing down the game for those with a different style.

And, because I do not want to be accused of exaggerating, here are sample points from my playthroughs, Note that some of them had house rules restricting expansion, number of cities or use of sovereigns...  By the way, N~G [P] means N cities with average growth G and prestige P

1. House rule - single city                 Turn  56:  1~8 [7]     Turn 98: 1~19 [18]

2. Everything goes                           Turn 47:   2~6 [8]     Turn 73:  10~5 [36]      Turn 84 19~4 [43]

3. House rule - pacifist                     Turn 47:   6~3 [12]    Turn 59:   8~4 [17]

4. House rule - heroes stay home        Turn 43:   6~1 [5]      Turn 66:   10~3 [15]

5. Standard Resoln                           Turn 23:   3~2 [6]      Turn 57:   7~2 [13]

So tell me, where is the out of control growth? Note that I have been posting these playthroughs for months, and I have not been designing them to prove you wrong.  Except for the first one, at any time my cities have an average growth of 2-5, and are mostly growing slower than I would like them to.

It might be that you misunderstand each other because you are talking about different phases of the game.

In the first turns, growth is great because it lets you reach level 2 pretty fast. But then you usually hit the food barrier, and that actually encourages city spamming, since you don't lose so much growth with every additional city you got. The punishment for having too many cities only kicks in at mid-game.

In the mid to late game I never can have enough growth (my last game e.g., I tried to take it a bit slower on a large map to actually research the whole tech tree, around Turn 300 I had 34 settlements with an average growth of just about 1 by prestige. My capital (a town!) got level 5 around then, and it was my only level 5 city).

The whole prestige is a bit unbalanced in the tech tree imho. Right now, you gets lots of it with the early civ techs, and those actually mean something then, since your whole prestige isn't that high yet. So you actually notice a +1 prestige. Later, you basically only get prestige by building wonders and by leveling your sov (if you aren't heroic...). And with a prestige of 20 or more, +1 doesn't do much anyway. So I would move some prestige increases to the later techs, and actually make them matter (so not just +1, but +3-5 or even more).

34 ? 

ok now i get whats the difference i never get so much stuff, unless i conquer a big enemy ai

yes you are right in your analysis, moving some early prestige to late and  buffing it might be even better

well ok but then, after you conquer more than 50% of your opponents is pretty much game over

yes this is exactly my normal playthrhough

i dont find more than 3 4 spots for cities and they are always full pop, so i dont care of prestige

then i start exploring questing and killing monsters gaining even more and not needed

i try not to fight war because i consider it exploiting at this stage

after only dragons and epic quests are left i make some war (but usually they declare on me sooner)

at this point i might have 10 cities after war but i dont care of their growth really, doubling your cities improve so much research and money that the rest is irrelevant

Even still, you must have been playing on a large map.

Imo, normal map should have an approximate maximum of 30-40 cities to be shared by all factions.

if you follow the whole thread someone proposed to move it from starting tech to end game tech and increase and i agreed with him it seemed the best solution

but anyway ill update the first post so newcomers can have a TLDR

Sorry but this is definitely a problem.  If you want to have 10 -15 cities by turn 100, then they should not grow without infrastructure. 

I don't have a problem with buildings, traits, city level-up options, or city enchantments that offer solutions to this issue because they are a choice to be made.  Getting easy prestige from techs you would otherwise research and/or sovereign levels is absolutely ridiculous at the current rate.

Just to be clear, the problem I have with this unmitigated expansion is that it is always better to have more cities in terms of research, taxes, and production (queues.) Prestige and growth are the natural limiters to overzealous expansion.  Currently this mechanic is deeply flawed, as in there is basically no mechanic at all.

Says who?  These are villages spread out in a large area.  My sovereign is kicking ass, getting famous, and survivors are flocking to the settlements that have sworn fealty to him.  They will flock more when they hear there's grub, education for the kiddies, and a town watch.

And who says that my settlements do not have infrastructure anyway? They grow because of a combination of city quality, demonstrated civic capabilities,  and sovereign fame.  I.e. buildings, research and sovereign achievements, i.e. infrastructure and prestige.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread.  The mechanic works, it fits the fluff, and different play styles seem to work with it.  I do not have any interest in discussing how someone feels that X cities by turn Y is "too much", "too little", or "just enough".