I am sharing a continent with the Indians. They declared war and I beat them. I completley wiped them off the continent, although they still had one city (about size 8) on a next-door continent.

Before I captured all their cities on my continent, the cultural borders of the cities on this continent had merged with the city on the other continent (very small sea gap between the continents).

After I captured all their cities on this continent I sued for peace and changed back to Democracy from Republic.
The next turn their ex-capital, which is in the middle of the continent!!, flipped back to India and the borders pushed between my (was "their") cities and merged with the city on the other continent!!

Now it was their capital and it did have Leo's Workshop, but it was in the middle of a ring of my cities, and my overall culture is bigger than Indias.
I though a city would only flip if it right next to a city with higher culture?!?!

Now I have to wait 20 turns to capture it again unless I want to take a rep hit.

It depends on what's going on. Was the city that flipped once (and recently) Indian? Did you leave a small garrison of soldiers? If so, it's very possible that the city could flip back to the Indians.

Yep, it was Indian about 2 or 3 turns ago (so VERY recent) but the resistance had ended and I had 2 or 3 Cavalry there.

What is a good number to use to quell resistance of a, eg, size 12 city?
Does the health of the garrison unit make any difference to it's efectiveness in quelling resistance?

I hate cities culture flipping on me after I take them. What I do is leave a garrison equal to the number of foreign citizens in the city, and set the populous so that they're starving to death (but happy). If necessary (becaus the AI cities are often bloated: population of 16, shield output of 9), you can always rush a settler, disband it for shields toward another settler, and so on, until the citizens are of manageable size...

Later!

--The Clown to the Left

Two or three units probably isn't enough to garrison a former capital. The citizens were probably all Indian and it wasn't far from the (new) Indian cap city - probably closer than to your capital.
These are all factors entering into the culture flip formula. The easiest for you to control is the size of the garrison. A few units would probably be enough for a border city a long way from the AI's capital, but not for the situation you had.

Thanks wilbill.
I've got a few other cities (formerly Indian) very close to their flipped city with 4 or so Cavalry in them.
I was moving all my available Cavalry (except for a few garrison units) to the opposite end of the continent to fend off another possible attack. I'd better stop that and garrison those cities to prevent any flipping.

If search was enabled, I could find/point to some very good discussions on Culture Flipping and the forumula to determine the chances of it happening.

FWIW, as a quick rule of thumb (and therefore guaranteed to not be correct for all situations), I generally leave twice (or more) ground units in a captured city than there are foreign citizens. Sometimes, you only need the same number as there are citizens, sometimes you need four times as many! But frequently, twice as many is enough to do the trick.

Here are a few CF calculators that might help you understand the whole business better: anarres' Flip Calc (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53157), Chieftess' Babylon II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53181), and DaveMcW's HTML Culture flip calculator (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53228).

i never capture cities , i usually keep some settlers standing by and as soon as i have razed the captured cities i move in my settlers and build new citys

its good coz of the following reasons

1. no aliens , so if you war with that civ in near future there will be no "stop agression against blablabla"
2. you can change the location of that city , sometimes the cpu builds hes cities very near your borders so if you cap. it the city you capped and the city that owns the borders would have several tiles common.
3. you get many workers , free labor , (and usually when i cap some enemy workers i move my own workers in the city i just build and join them)
4. NO CULTURE FLIP BACK TO ENEMY

Good points, but in a situation like Arturo was describing, you probably want to keep the city with the Wonder in it. Especially one as useful as Leo's.

true ... but ... this thing has two sides

1. keep the city - recive leo. (or whatever wonder) and a big chance of culture flip coz wonders add to culture rating and citys with wonders are usually the first cities that flip...

2. raze the city and destroy the wonder - if i cant have it no-one can. depends on wonder of course

When learning about the flip calc, you will find out, that the number of indian citizens and the number of 'shared tiles' matter. The latter must be zero, according to your description. The former could have size 16? It was their former capitol and probably full of culture! The most effective way to drop chances of flipping is starving the city. Every single turn, check the city and be sure food is a problem. Usually you should be able to bring it down by 1 each turn.. Make peace when the city has size 1!

In this partic'lar case, the solution would seem simple; redeclare war, retake the Leo city, and proceed to wipe the Indians out. No more flips.

This'll, of course, mean blackening your rep a bit.

This is why all of my wars are to the death! Veni-Vidi-Vici! (actually, Marlboros used to have that quote on their packs, but I notice that they have mysteriously removed it. Probably because of some liberal, tree-hugging history teacher somewhere.)

I can see how a city can flip due to resistance, but I shouldn't need to keep even a one for one ratio between citizens and units. If I have two units in a city it SHOULD NOT FLIP. No matter what. Maybe the people should be unhappy, but I challenge anyone to come up with times in the real world where a resistance culture flip actually happened. If you find any you'll reallize how rare it is.
My solution would be that a city in resistance will lower the defensive ratings of the units there making it easier for the regular army to take the city back.

Zeeter, explain India. The entire country flipped back from conquered by the English to an independant nation.

Egypt, 50 or so years after Alexander the Great conquered it flipped back as did Persia.

China flipped back after the Mongol conquest.

Arturo, in the game, build lots of culture yourself to reduce the odds of flipping. Temples, Libraries, Universities and Cathedrals produce lots of culture as well as have other beneficial side effects. If the enemy is in awe of your culture you should never lose a city back to them.

Adrian

Originally posted by AdrianE
Zeeter, explain India. The entire country flipped back from conquered by the English to an independant nation.

Egypt, 50 or so years after Alexander the Great conquered it flipped back as did Persia.

China flipped back after the Mongol conquest.

Adrian

Yes, these are four examples that you have given - and only one of them is modern. In all of history we've found four so far. Even if we make it to ten it will be a miniscual percentage when considering that written history goes back to the classic(Roman/Greek) age, and evidentiary history goes back only to the Neolithic age - about 10,000 BC. Yet it happens in Civ3 all the time.

If you take a city, don't count on garrisoning enough troops to prevent a culture flip. You must establish your own culture! The way I do it, I garrison enough troops to end the resistance, then immediately rush-build a library or temple. Establishing your own culture in a city populated by mostly foreign citizens, effectively cuts out culture flips.

The other thing I do though, is to starve the city. Say Madras is size 12 when I conquer it. I starve it down to size 2, allowing it to re-grow with my own citizens after that. There are benefits to this tactic: you can hire tax collectors each turn, for a total of 75 gold (for a size 12 city down to size 2). Madras will re-grow fairly rapidly, establishing your own culture. And those other 2 citizens will eventually become assimilated, once they have lived in your empire longer than they had lived in the Indian Empire. Also, starving the city reduces the resistance faster. You are removing citizens from working the land each turn, and making them into tax collectors, so the resistors starve first.

I rarely lose cities to culture flips with this tactic. ;)

Originally posted by zeeter


Yes, these are four examples that you have given - and only one of them is modern. In all of history we've found four so far.

5th example- Texas. Part of Spain in 1800, sparsely populated at that time. Became part of Mexico in 1821. American settlers arrived, keeping their language and customs. Texas declared its independence from Mexico in 1836, and was English-speaking, as most of its residents were former American citizens. Texas was annexed by the United States in 1845. So, it could be argued that Texas flipped culturally from Mexico, to the United States, in just 24 years. :) And this is a modern example.

I rarely lose them to culture flips either. Of course, with PTW I have culture flips turned off, so if I lose any I'll be scratching my head. Problem with that, though, is that another civ can plop a city on my high culture continent and I won't be able to culture flip it. I have to wait until or start a war to claim the territory.

Building a temple or something right away is probably the best strategy. In reality, though, it would be like us building a bunch of Christian churches in Iraq and trying to convert everyone. I would rather have the culture of that city existing with my own culture in harmony. Rather than changing my culture, I'd like to live freely with the culture of others to show that different cultures can live together with peace and love.

Either that, or I'll just raze the city and plant a settler there. Hopefully if I raze the city I'll get some slave workers out of it to help build the infrastructure.

Lousy Bast****. If your culture was so great I wouldn't have been able to conquer your weak-a** civilization.

Edit: In reviewing this, I found that my last comment may be offensive toward Iraqis' noted in the second paragraph. That was unintentional.

Originally posted by Quasar1011


5th example- Texas. Part of Spain in 1800, sparsely populated at that time. Became part of Mexico in 1821. American settlers arrived, keeping their language and customs. Texas declared its independence from Mexico in 1836, and was English-speaking, as most of its residents were former American citizens. Texas was annexed by the United States in 1845. So, it could be argued that Texas flipped culturally from Mexico, to the United States, in just 24 years. :) And this is a modern example.

I don't buy this one. Texas was never captured by the Mexicans from the Americans. The Americans more or less moved in and took it. What I just read, and it may not be entirely accurate, was that Texas was a Spanish holding at the time. Grants were given to Americans and Mexicans to settle there. Conflict arose between the two cultures, and then the Fredonian Rebellion which effectively granted Texans independance from any rule. It was anexed in 1845 - ten years after it was requested - because the American government didn't want to add a slave state without adding a free state to keep the balance.

Zeeter

There are literally hundreds of examples throughout history of culture flipping. The end of the Roman empire saw much flipping.

Some modern examples:
India flipped in the late 1940's IIRC.
Algeria in the 1950's (was a department of France)
Vietnam in the 1950's (another former French colony).
East Germany in 1988 flipped from Russian control back to Germany.

Quebec keeps threatening to culture flip (missed by 1% last time).

There are enough real history examples to justify culture flipping after conquest in my mind.


Adrian