Discussion Colonize or conquer

DeletedUser

Guest
in my opinion the only reason to colonise is to get the heroic tactician award, other than that... eugh
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Up to preference at the end of the day, but most players you ask will say they value conquests more; as there is greater risk in attempting to take another players city, and there is also a greater payoff if you're successful.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Hmm, I'd say start of colonize, one for, like Pythagorus said, for the HTA, second, there is a higher risk and at starting of the ability to conquer and colonize, you aren't as technological, as in not the best soldiers, while if you wait to conquer you could have that technology, like build up your armies for conquest, third, you could fail in conquest, fourth, you loss soldiers although that happens alot in this game so thats a minor concern.

But if you want to go for conquest, try a ghost city. It's much easier to take those since no one is running them, hence the 'ghost' part and I doubt someone is going to know your attacking it and send support, which why would anyone do, unless maybe they wanted it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser20429

Guest
My personal opinion is if there is no one that you could conquer around you just colonise. But if there is a decent ghost town within 2 islands from the 1st city then I would take that. Back in Rho my second town was a 2.5k ghost.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Yep, ghost towns or colonizing is my way, although if someone is bugging me, I'll go for conquest. Rho used to be my main but then my computer came down with a virus and it took about 2 months to get it back up and I didn't put vacation mode on so I lost it :(.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Definitely colonize if you are just starting that chapter of grepolis.If you make people around you that are behind you think you are just colonizing they will let their guard down.Then when you have 2 to 3 4500 point cities which may take some time but you dont have to build your troops back up from conquesting you just take over their cities and still have troops coming in from the other cities.simple as that.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
hmmm, i dunno...

I will advice you to colonize first city near your first,not far than two islands

On all worlds I have played on my first city has always been colonised unless I can find a decent ghost town

for your second city u should look out for ghost [...] sometimes to found a city is better then conquering... :)

I would really think it depends on location. For example, in one world, I am literally hours away from anyone else in my alliance. In order to offer myself some degree of mutual support, colonizing a city on a nearby island would help. It may not be the best answer, but it would help serve as a location to help fortify my position. Even if you colonized a city on an island that didn't have any FV, it's not entirely too bad. Yes, I would lose out on a ton of resources, however, with a city on that type of island, you have less pressure to sit there and demand resources.

Colonizing is basically starting fresh from 1 on everything but it's really easier and you'll save a lot of troops and time.

Hmm, I'd say start of colonize [...] But if you want to go for conquest, try a ghost city.

My personal opinion is if there is no one that you could conquer around you just colonise. But if there is a decent ghost town within 2 islands from the 1st city then I would take that. Back in Rho my second town was a 2.5k ghost.

Yep, ghost towns or colonizing is my way

Definitely colonize if you are just starting that chapter of grepolis.
 
Top