Hey everyone. Been lurking here since I picked this game up a few months ago. I have learned a ton so thanks for that.
Something I have not been able to get my head around is when to Puppet, Annex and Raze. I read that most puppet but I always find myself annexing.
Can anyone break down when is the best time to use each of the three options or list the pros and cons of each. Thank you so much!
First things first, the main benefit to conquering cities is to deny their use to the enemy.
However, the question of what to do with conquered cities after they have been conquered is largely a tradeoff between increased production/gold AND the increased unhappiness/the increased cost for social policies.
Increasing production and gold in captured cities generally increases the amount of unhappiness and the cost for new social policies.
Here are the specifics. Important points are all in caps.
Puppet:
Pro: Gives conqueror the captured city's cultural borders, culture and benefits of World Wonders in the city, and the captured city's trade route income.
DOES NOT INCREASE THE COST OF SOCIAL POLICIES.
Con: Conqueror does NOT have direct control over captured city's production or citizenry. Higher unhappiness than an annexed city of the same size with a courthouse.
Annex:
Pro: Gives conqueror the captured city's cultural borders, World Wonders, and trade route income.
GIVES DIRECT CONTROL OF CAPTURED CITY'S PRODUCTION AND CITIZENRY.
Con: Increases cost of social policies. Higher short term unhappiness compared to puppet cities of the same size, can be eliminated with Courthouses.
Raze (on capturing city):
Pro: When the captured city is gone,
IT WILL NOT INCREASE THE CONQUEROR'S UNHAPPINESS IN THE LONG TERM. DOES NOT INCREASE THE COST OF SOCIAL POLICIES.
Con: If the burnt city had World Wonders, they are gone forever. Conquering empire loses the cultural borders and trade route income from a city that has been razed to the ground. Razing has the highest short term unhappiness of all three options.
Raze (after annexing/puppet):
Pro: When the city is burnt to the ground,
IT WILL NOT INCREASE THE CONQUEROR'S UNHAPPINESS IN THE LONG TERM. Can be reversed before city is burnt to the ground.
Con: If the burnt city had World Wonders, they are gone forever. Conquering empire loses the cultural borders and trade route income from a city that has been razed to the ground. Razing has the highest short term unhappiness of all three options.
RAZING A CITY AFTER ANNEXING OR PUPPETTING WILL PERMANENTLY INCREASE THE COST OF SOCIAL POLICIES.
So, when should one annex a city? When should one puppet a city? When should one raze a city?
If a captured city is worth having direct control over its production and citizens, then it should be annexed.
If a captured city has lackluster production/commerce value AND the conquering empire has lots of excess happiness, the captured city should be puppetted, so that Social Policy costs stay low.
If a captured city has lackluster production/commerce value AND the conquering empire does NOT have lots of excess happiness, the captured city should either be puppeted and sold to another empire OR razed immediately when captured. For example, I've been playing the Mongolian scenario a lot recently, and I raze the majority of the cities I conquer, because their unhappiness outweighs what they provide.
I rarely raze cities after I annex them or puppet them. I don't really see the point.
