Eventual annex vs. raze & resettle

I realize there's a ton of raze vs. puppet vs. annex threads out there but I can't find one that addresses this situation specifically.



I like this spot. Two sources of whales, two source of fish... with the desert area i can make trading posts and turn this into a real money making city, especially with a lighthouse. Do settled cities increase the cost of great people like annexed ones do?

Reasons to puppet and annex later:

- I'm on emperor so city spamming is a concern.
- I'm building the National College right now and I'm not putting it at risk to get a settler out there before Darius decides to sneak in there. I'm 3 in soldiers with Haile Selassie in first, I don't know if Darius is 2 or not, but that would be an unpleasant surprise.
- I do not have the funds to even think about buying a settler for many turns [ 34 (+1) ]

The things that are making me consider razing are:

- Puppets build a lot of crap, I'm concerned about them spamming non-essential buildings while I'm trying to maintain a military, but they don't have a lot of hammers anyway.
- I will not have micromanagement until i can afford to annex. (all luxes currently exported) Is it necessary with a city this simplistic?
- I can't find info on if founded cities increase great person cost like annexes do.
- Since I won't be able to annex for a while I can only hope they'll be smart enough to prioritize a lighthouse when i research the tech. (coming up next)

I have a founded coastal city next to Tenochtitlan that can pump out fishing boats so that's no concern.

derp..

beestbijnacht said:

Do settled cities increase the cost of great people like annexed ones do?

Click to expand...

What do you mean? If you get a GP from puppet, yes, it will increase the future costs.

Razing and resettling the exact same spot is silly, IMO.
If I like the spot and my happiness can handle a new city, I'd keep it. If city location is bad or my happiness is too crippled, I'd raze it.
AI has a very annoying habit of settling 1 tile from a real good spot, in this case I may consider resettling, but only if it's early enough in the game. From certain point on settling new cities is a waste of effort.

This is not a prime location, but since you only have 2 cities in total, I'd keep it.

The Pilgrim said:

What do you mean? If you get a GP from puppet, yes, it will increase the future costs.

Razing and resettling the exact same spot is silly, IMO.
If I like the spot and my happiness can handle a new city, I'd keep it. If city location is bad or my happiness is too crippled, I'd raze it.
AI has a very annoying habit of settling 1 tile from a real good spot, in this case I may consider resettling, but only if it's early enough in the game. From certain point on settling new cities is a waste of effort.

This is not a prime location, but since you only have 2 cities in total, I'd keep it.

Click to expand...

Well it says that annexing will increase the cost of social policies and great people. I assume that means that the empire wide cost of each type of great person rises just for annexing a city, but does this happen if you settle one yourself?

Also, would you raze and leave a spot on higher difficulties (emperor+ i guess) where sometimes someone else will settle in that exact same spot just because they can?

I'm taking over the world here so this decision will be popping up a lot (as we speak Darius is finished)

beestbijnacht said:

Well it says that annexing will increase the cost of social policies and great people. I assume that means that the empire wide cost of each type of great person rises just for annexing a city, but does this happen if you settle one yourself?

Click to expand...

No, annexing or settling cities do not increase GP costs. Only GP themselves do.

Also, would you raze and leave a spot on higher difficulties (emperor+ i guess) where sometimes someone else will settle in that exact same spot just because they can?

Click to expand...

Depends. If it might be settled by strong AI, I'd rather keep it. Resettling by the same AI opponent is less concerning because I'm unlikely to make peace before it's completely crushed and after I'm done with it it can't pose any threat anymore with that city or without it. Strategic location is a bigger factor as I don't want a city that will mess up with my troops' movement.

The Pilgrim said:

No, annexing or settling cities do not increase GP costs. Only GP themselves do.


Depends. If it might be settled by strong AI, I'd rather keep it. Resettling by the same AI opponent is less concerning because I'm unlikely to make peace before it's completely crushed and after I'm done with it it can't pose any threat anymore with that city or without it. Strategic location is a bigger factor as I don't want a city that will mess up with my troops' movement.

Click to expand...

Thanks! It's this type of stuff I need to learn to think about to win emperor (I've only won science on emperor before, going for domination now)

The thing here that confuses me, is if cities don't increase the cost of great people, then what is this about?



Will not as opposed to what?

I'm guessing that at release, CiV had increasing GP costs for each owned non-puppet city, like with social policy costs. However, this was likely found to be a bad idea.

tomtom5858 said:

I'm guessing that at release, CiV had increasing GP costs for each owned non-puppet city, like with social policy costs. However, this was likely found to be a bad idea.

Click to expand...

I would second that. Puppets are only bad when they end up producing GM but if your prime cities have many worked GP slots, this shouldn't happen.

If you can get a work boat over there within a few turns I'd puppet it. On the other hand if your not going to be getting any more happiness for quite a while I would puppet also because your going to become unhappy in 1 population increase unless your tradition and your capital is at an odd number population. Otherwise raze.

That early in the game it can be hard to get additional happiness sometimes. I actually like the city location and think it could become a decent money maker, ideal as a puppet. A good +20 gpt it looks like. But I think in this situation I would raze that city.

Depends:
1) You could potentially annex it if you're willing to spend a liberty GE to build petra there, in which case puppet it till you're ready. Otherwise the land tiles are not very good, and the only reason for keeping it (even as a puppet) is to stop the AI settling there and messing you up. However, you're on emperor so it's not going to happen so quick, and you're the Huns, so just go take some land elswhere while you still can.
2) The problem with the resources is that you already have the whales is your other city, and even though it's a puppet, you can build work boats elsewhere and move them. The 4 sea resources causes a problem because it'll make a puppet grow (and eat up hapiness which could be used detroying cities) while not increasing hammers for markets etc. If it was me I'd just destroy it.
3) Why did you take it to begin with? You already have their capital and have crippled them. You only have a short period to exert your Hunnic advantage, go find someone else to kill. Also you now have a diplo hit for destroying them completely and you didn't get gold from suing for peace. Actually did you take it yet? If not sue for peace and go north to kill Darius. He can be a real pain later on. See if you can bully lisbon on the way.

Reason to raze and re-settle on same spot; city is going to be tiny post conquest anyway (and probably have no buildings survive as well). Such as on OP original screen shot showing size 3 about to be cut to either 1 or 2. (I forgot which way it rounds; either way it's too tiny to be worth keeping.)

But if you do raze and resettle, I'd consider the tile east of current depending upon what is causing that desert tile to have a hammer and resource off the coast causing it to have 2 food.

Evenually annex: That is for very good production cities that can easily build buildings needed for missing national wonders. (Such as a former capital)

Puppet forever: That is most of the kept cities; they bring in something useful but have a hard time justifing slowing down national wonders & social policies over.

Raze and DON"T resettle (along with raze 2 cities and refound one city between them): This is getting rid of junk cities that don't have anything justifying their happiness cost.

You have enough happiness to puppet it, so I'd puppet it. I only raze if I can't afford the happiness hit.