Awful mechanic Razing city states

pietro1990

Prince
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Messages
553
So i recently resinstalled civ 6 and i noticed some wierd behavior from the AI. It raises city state when its captures.I have no idea why it is possible to raise a city state.

They create unique causic bellies to declare war on AI to defend you're city state like liberation war but you are not able to recapture the city state.

is it just me or is this really a stupid mechanic?

You should allways be able to recapture a city state.

share you thoughts. I hope it gets removed this mechanic.
 

Widdershins

Warlord
Joined
Dec 1, 2022
Messages
103
In one game recently Japan razed a city-state on my border. I have no idea why, but I think it was a location outside of Japan's home continent, and maybe Hojo wanted to found a city there for the era score...?

In any case I plunked down gold to get a settler on the spot and found one of my own cities. Thanks, Hojo!
 

Noble Zarkon

Elite Quattromaster - Emperor (BTS)
Super Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
7,137
Location
Gibraltar

Leucarum

Emperor
Joined
Dec 21, 2018
Messages
1,460
I played a game this morning where this happened. Couldn't remember the last time I'd seen it happen either. Would have been a perfect city spot for the AI too. Instead I was quickly able to drop in my own settler.
 

pietro1990

Prince
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Messages
553
I played a game this morning where this happened. Couldn't remember the last time I'd seen it happen either. Would have been a perfect city spot for the AI too. Instead I was quickly able to drop in my own settler.

thats the thing they even raze good cities with lots of luxuries and strategic resource it doens't ad up.

Doesn't ad up for game purpose also so much causic bellies for city states wich are now worthless.
 

Leucarum

Emperor
Joined
Dec 21, 2018
Messages
1,460
I don't know how commonplace it is. That's the first time I've seen it. Trying to think what might prompt the AI to raze a city.

I didn't control it and I doubt the AI would have found loyalty to be a reason to raze it as they were in a golden age and it was close to some of their cities...

A bigger sample size is needed
 

MrRadar

Deity
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
2,109
I agree - City states should be treated like Capitals and not allowed to be razed.
They were iirc, and they couldn't be razed originally, until after some update or patch, they suddenly became razeable. So now if AI captures a CS and can't keep it with loyalty, that's a raze. Think carefuly if you you want to snatch the Suzerainty in somewhat distant CS, as this tends to prompt AI to attack it and possibly raze it. And think twice if you want an Emergency to liberate your own captured city, because if your allied AI gets to capture it first, that's a guaranteed instaraze, no questions asked. And it also ends the Emergency as a success!

This sort of AI behaviour indeed seems flawed and probably even bugged, but it does add some spice and keeps you on your toes :) From my point of view this is one of the lesser concerns.
 

pietro1990

Prince
Joined
Oct 3, 2016
Messages
553
They were iirc, and they couldn't be razed originally, until after some update or patch, they suddenly became razeable. So now if AI captures a CS and can't keep it with loyalty, that's a raze. Think carefuly if you you want to snatch the Suzerainty in somewhat distant CS, as this tends to prompt AI to attack it and possibly raze it. And think twice if you want an Emergency to liberate your own captured city, because if your allied AI gets to capture it first, that's a guaranteed instaraze, no questions asked. And it also ends the Emergency as a success!

This sort of AI behaviour indeed seems flawed and probably even bugged, but it does add some spice and keeps you on your toes :) From my point of view this is one of the lesser concerns.

I get that it spice things up.
But it doesn't ad up on the game mechanics that there are like causic bellies and envoys.
 

James_Champagne

Warlord
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
196
It's funny, I used to feel that the AI didn't raze cities enough, but now they seem to have gotten bolder. Frankly, I like it, adds a bit of excitement. Hell, I even like to use the "zombies can raze capitals" mod sometimes, which can make the early game very dramatic for everyone involved.
 

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,195
I think an AI Germany will always raze a city state it captures..
 

IvoryPavane

Prince
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
440
I think it’s important to have the option, especially for Civs who care about their own city placement like Maya and more recently Japan.

If I’m LadySixSky and there’s a city state within 6 tiles….they are usually not long for this world.

That being said, the AI is doing it far more than I remember recently
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Messages
572
Location
Macedon
I completely sympathize with and understand the complaints about the AI's overuse of this feature. Plenty of Civs are encouraged to interact with city-states, and removing them from the game entirely denies players opportunities.

At the same time, I think @IvoryPavane made a great point about this being a necessary feature. Though, the amount of Civs that are harmed by a city-state being razed far outnumber the two that benefit from it.

I suggest a compromise that keeps the city-state in the game while also eliminating them as a city planning obstruction. Instead of having the option to raze a city-state, you should have the option to force the city-state to relocate. This would raze the city-state itself but give them a settler to keep them in the game and give them the chance to settle somewhere else. Additionally, forcing the city-state to relocate would automatically make peace with them in order to prevent players from stealing the settler.

Additionally, instead of leaving the job to the city-state's AI, you could give the player control of where the city-state settles, allowing them to control the settler like one of their own, or at least give it a destination it would follow. This would be to prevent the city-state from settling in a similar nearby location (in a manner much more intuitive than blocking it off with troops).
 

steveg700

Deity
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
3,838
They get in the way. Sometimes they gotta go. If a civ has abilities that interact with CS's, they need to protect them or accept their potential loss as cost of doing biz. If I contend for a CS that's knee-deep in some other civ's territory, I know what I'm risking.

To me, the real problem is that the player doesn't have the diplomatic tools needed to protect them in a non-military capacity. As far as I can tell, once an AI declares war on a CS, the CS NEVER makes peace, and cares not a whit whether they are friendly with the CS's patron. No diplomatic option exists to ask, demand, or deal for peace on behalf of a CS. Fix that. Don't remove risk. Add tools to manage it.

Remember in Civ V, it was possible to declare that a CS was protected. And it was possible to send them troops, rather than levy them. Also, giving them gold was an option. As is, they hang by a thread, and I have no idea what governs their ability to manage their defense. The qualify of their military varies greatly.
 

Brixter

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 18, 2022
Messages
87
I made a mod to give the city-states all walls, flood barriers and bonus loyalty. It should be good enough to protect them from the AI.

 
Last edited:
Top Bottom