Liberate city-states you conquer

Snuffleupagus

Warlord
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
167
It doesn't make any sense to me that you can liberate city states from other civilizations but you can't liberate them from yourself.

Sometimes city-states declare war on me because they are allied with a Civ I'm at war with. When I conquer these city-states I would love an option to liberate them, just as if they had belonged to a different civilization. I don't think this would create any kind of balance issue.

Perhaps it could help alleviate some of the ridiculously negative diplomatic effects of war.
 
Think of it as saying "We could've wiped you out but we never wanted to be at war with you." And you put people who are sympathetic to you in charge so you get plenty of influence. But there is of course the situation where you declare war on a city state, then I think you have to conquer them.

Scenario 1: Civ A declares war on you and so brings its allied city states with it, one of which is on your door step. You don't have an issue with that city state but because its right on your border and has just captured some of your workers you need to deal with it. Wham bam thank you mam you conquer their city, smack their wrist and now their on your side, you can get back to being at war with the main Civ.

Scenario 2: You declare war on Civ B because it was capturing defenceless city states, you recapture those city states and they are grateful for your liberation.

Scenario 3: You declare war on Civ C because it has allied itself with city states you had your eye on. As the aggressor you only have the ability to capture cities.
 
Scenario 4: you just "liberated" a city state, but you need to keep it as base of operation for 5-10 turns
so your badly hurt troop can heal before being kick out.
 
Scenario 4: you just "liberated" a city state, but you need to keep it as base of operation for 5-10 turns
so your badly hurt troop can heal before being kick out.

If you liberate the state you'll be allied with it and get the 'friendly territory' healing bonuses. Not the city itself bonus, but that's not that big a deal.
 
Then you would get a diplomacy bonus for concurring them. That wouldn't make sense.

If a city-state declared war to you, getting diplomacy bonus for releasing it after capture would make sense IMO. In case you declared a war to a city-state and captured it, it could be a special case, so you don't receive bonus for releasing it.

It would also make sense to be able to release a captured city-state not only immediately after capture, but also any time later you decide to do so.
 
Are you talking about converting an occupied city into a puppet after you have already decided to occupy it? Now that would be cool. Maybe it could just be a special building you build that makes the city into a puppet instead of just clicking a button.
 
I would love the option to liberate the cities of other conquered Civs just like you can liberate their capitals. I'm a player who loves to maintain the "balance of power" on a continent; I like to join wars against a power that is becoming too dominant and return lands that the aggressive Civ has taken from a defending Civ and return it to the defending Civ. To do this I have to annex the city and then go into diplomacy mode with the defending Civ and gift back the cities. I would much prefer to be able to have the option of liberating - by having it as a choice in addition to Annex, Puppet or Raze - at the time the city is conquered.

And another thing, giving cities back to defending Civs seem to have no effect on diplomacy. If you liberate a mere worker you are taken into the diplomacy screen and the Civ professes their thanks. But return entire cities and it seems to have no discernible effect.
 
I would love the option to liberate the cities of other conquered Civs just like you can liberate their capitals.

You can, can't you? Just last night, playing as America, I crushed the Ottomans, taking all their cities and their capital, but leaving two buffer cities between myself and the Romans. Two turns after making peace with them, the Romans decided to take the easy meat and conquered those two cities. I got the message about the Ottoman empire being destroyed. A few turns later, I invaded Rome through it's new border, razing the first of the old Ottoman cities. I took the other and to my surprise, it offered me the chance to liberate it, which I did by accident (I meant to annex it to use as a forward air base). Low and behold, the Ottoman empire, vanquished only a few years before, was reborn by my accidental generosity. They immediatly proceeded to make peace with all the city states that had been part of my Cabal back then.
 
You can, can't you? Just last night, playing as America, I crushed the Ottomans, taking all their cities and their capital, but leaving two buffer cities between myself and the Romans. Two turns after making peace with them, the Romans decided to take the easy meat and conquered those two cities. I got the message about the Ottoman empire being destroyed. A few turns later, I invaded Rome through it's new border, razing the first of the old Ottoman cities. I took the other and to my surprise, it offered me the chance to liberate it, which I did by accident (I meant to annex it to use as a forward air base). Low and behold, the Ottoman empire, vanquished only a few years before, was reborn by my accidental generosity. They immediatly proceeded to make peace with all the city states that had been part of my Cabal back then.

It's true that you can resurrect a Civ after they have been destroyed, but I mean the situation where Civ A is still in the game and you liberate one of their cities from Civ B; you are not given the option at the point you take over that city to liberate it back to Civ A. Rather, you have to annex, then go to the diplomacy mode with Civ A and gift it back to them. I find that process fiddly. I also get a sense of satisfaction from being able to choose to "liberate" as opposed to "annex". It feels like I'm fighting the good fight. :)
 
Well I don't think "Liberation" should be an option if you conquered them.
But you should have the option to Grant them independence.
The City State resets your influence to 0.
AND they don't auto vote for you (they don't count as Liberated)

This gives you the option of buying their allegiance.

And you should have the option to Liberate Any originally owned city of someone you have some type of Open Borders with.
 
I am all for this option. Its good to know there are others who want tools to for a protracted "world police sim" style of play. Not where you race for a victory condition , but , just keep a tight , tall , advanced , empire that has enough spare juice to meddle in the affairs of the rest of the world.
A reason for the "one more turn" to still mean something.

As for just a "liberate own cities option" , absolutely. Civ is far from a realistic simulation ,and , i don't think it was ever meant to be ,but , for those who default to the "unrealistic" argument :
Think about post WWII UK ,where they , literally , restored : India ,Egypt ,and , others to offset the IRL equivalent of an unhappiness penalty for , literally , being too wide.

"grant independence" instead of "liberate" is a good compromise to avoid gaming the bonuses.

Also , i agree that : its weird that the AI values a petty lux resource , or a cheap civilian unit over a whole city , and all the land and production it comes with.

I ideally would like to see even more to offer flexibility to get different types of game plays. As it stands now , it seems , you have to go , either : full blown world conquest (wide), or , strictly keep yourself to yourself ,avoiding war at any and all costs , and for that matter : really having as little interaction with the other civ's as possible (tall).

Like a few Civ fans , i have a wee bit of trouble immersing with the V AI. It would be nice to have a way to just completely reset an AI I FUBARed beyond normal diplomacy by playing the game weird.

I also have a few other things i would like to see for protracted immersed game play.

Spoiler :
- a mechanic to court UN votes on specific resolutions (not just world chancellor). When an AI civ has its mind made up to vote its nay ,either because they covet something you have (wonder,land plot,resource(s)),and are perma angered at you , or , they will lose an inch of v-condition ground ,and will NEVER vote yay.

You can steal a very small handful of votes in late game if you use all your spies , but , sometimes (usually) , its not near enough to close the gap.

Ideas for "UN courting" : if you wanted to repeal a lux resource ban , you could offer the other civ's a pre-approved RPT when the resource is restored.
If you had the only built nukes , and wanted "nuclear non-proliferation" ; which i agree , its completely unreasonable to expect to pass ; you could offer a solemn promise to never nuke certain civs
For the rest of them , you could offer large sums of saved gold (bribes)

-War pact treaty goals : if you wanted to help a civ that is close to being stomped ,but , wanted to curtail the inevitable pendulum swing where, they become the conqueror in turn, forcing your "world policing" to look like random warwongering ; which it pretty much is , when you are seen as : constantly turning on former allies , and , constantly being at war.

1. offering more "turns to prepare" options. Sometimes your totally not ready ,but , 10 turns ain't going to cut it. Sometimes i have my units scattered across the whole world clearing encampments and/or exploring/opening goody huts , and , i might need as many as 30 turns to gather and form them.
5 turns,10,20,or,30
2. Targets list : lets say your England teaming up with Carthage against Germany. Your offer might look like this....
cites: Essen (Elizabeth)
Carthage (Dido)
Hamburg (dido)
Munich (raze)
Force reduction : Bismark to 75% relative to Dido
terms: peace (90 turns) (dido)
peace (90 turns) (Elizabeth)
peace CS allies
Bismark GPT 2 gold to Dido (90 turns)
and, no matter who takes the city it will follow the proposal . Carthage WILL raze munich , even if it really wants it. If a Carthage unit enters Essen it would come under your control. If the terms aren't accepted ,after the war goals are achieved ,the allied civ would just hold the line until a turn limit on the pact expired , or , the pact could be reformed by diplo agreement.

I would , of course , also want UN vote agreements to be tied to war pacts or peace treaties.

3. I am also into offering a goals list to a civ you unilaterally DOW on , along war causes/rationalizations , settlements encroached on boarders , liberation of captured cities ,force reduction, etc....
I get that without severe AI tweaking , telling the AI why your doing something if : it was never given a reference to understand what your telling it is pointless. That would be more for human immersion and placation, and perhaps creates an auto face palm to silly "give me all your stuff" peace offers.

-turn any non capital city into a CS ,and raze any CS , or any own city besides capitals. Not being able to raze civ capitals is a rule i like, it leaves an obvious path for any civ to come back in at any time , without that rule , i think it would severely complicate the mechanics of reviving a civ.

I see CS's as a little looser than they are made out to be in the game core rules. Considering that in setup : you have the option of : having no CS's at all , or , having an insane amount , Also considering two of the BNW expansion civ's can turn any CS into a regular city , CS's obviously aren't adamantly integral , so , lets do away with the mismatch of a loose option with a severely rigid rule. CS' s are very one dimensional entities anyway ,so why not give the power to the player to create , or , dissolve/destroy CS's through military action , or , diplomacy as their needs/wants suit the situation.
 
It's true that you can resurrect a Civ after they have been destroyed, but I mean the situation where Civ A is still in the game and you liberate one of their cities from Civ B; you are not given the option at the point you take over that city to liberate it back to Civ A. Rather, you have to annex, then go to the diplomacy mode with Civ A and gift it back to them. I find that process fiddly. I also get a sense of satisfaction from being able to choose to "liberate" as opposed to "annex". It feels like I'm fighting the good fight. :)
I've gotten the "liberate" option in the scenario you describe.

As far as I know, you can't "liberate" cities that were obtained in a peace deal - are you sure the cities were conquered and not traded?
 
I can't liberate CS's from Venice?

I was playing a multiplayer game the other day where Venice had eaten 3 CS, so I thought why not liberate these city state and get some grateful allies and plunder Venice's trade routes!

I easily plundered his routes and battered his navy and army. But once I conquered the first CS(that I'm 99% sure he bought with a Merchant) I didn't have the option of liberating it, oddly enough I could raze it which I didn't thought possible with CS. I ended up conquering Venice itself(5 wonders) as a punishment for screwing with the basic rules of the game. And left him with one of his CS so he could still trade with me.
 
I can't liberate CS's from Venice?

I was playing a multiplayer game the other day where Venice had eaten 3 CS, so I thought why not liberate these city state and get some grateful allies and plunder Venice's trade routes!

I easily plundered his routes and battered his navy and army. But once I conquered the first CS(that I'm 99% sure he bought with a Merchant) I didn't have the option of liberating it, oddly enough I could raze it which I didn't thought possible with CS. I ended up conquering Venice itself(5 wonders) as a punishment for screwing with the basic rules of the game. And left him with one of his CS so he could still trade with me.

Venice and Austria are the exception to the rule. Once they take control of the CS, its considered one of their cities for the rest of the game.
 
City states can only be liberated when the other civilization conquers it.
 
Top Bottom