Capture or Burn

[ExileBlue]

Title says it all. I'm beginning to eliminate Catherine and taking over her cities - it's 1982 BTW - so anyone have any thought on what are the pro's and cons of either ? TIA

 

[Wodan]

1982... your game is almost over.

If you're close to domination or conquest victory, then do what you have to, in order to win. e.g., if you need only 5% more territory, then keep all the cities (burn none). You also may want to pay cash for a few temples or something so that your cultural borders expand in those new cities.

If you're close to conquest, then you probably want to burn them all. Any city, even quite tasty ones, will slow down your military machine for a few critical turns, and lower your economics so you can't pump out as many tanks or whatever.

Otherwise, if you're high score and nobody's close, then all you really need to do is get to 2050 AD and you'll win. So, keep tasty cities and burn the rest. Don't waste your time, though, trying to manage a lot of conquests. It won't affect the outcome so why bother.

Also, look at the Info screen to see which ones have wonders. Keep those.

Wodan

 

[ExileBlue]

Thanks. Can you shed any light on the factors influencing the rate of "suppression" for newly acquired cities - eg. increased number of troops ? It seems to take forever to overcome revolutionaries.

 

[Byrath]

The only way I know to speed up the revolt time in a newly captured city is to have a great artist create their great work in it.

 

[Wodan]

Agreed with Byrath.

There are things you can do to minimize future revolts, but once a revolt has started, the only way I know of to stop it or speed it up is to use a culture bomb (great artist).

On the other hand, while the revolt is going on, it doesn't "appear" that having a lot of units as garrison has any beneficial effect. So, you can leave just one unit there, and send everybody else onward to the next city to conquer.

Wodan

 

[aoshi]

Agree with the two persons above. The culture bomb is the only way to stop the revolt.
Garrisoning troops in a city only tend to prevent it to revolt or flip.

 

[sandman_civ]

Garrisoning troops in a city only tend to prevent it to revolt or flip.

WRONG - read the culture section of the civipedia - cities taken over militaristically can never culture flip - yes they can keep revolting but they will never flip.

I also would not waste offensive units in captured cities, that's why try and take defensive units with your army, and of course workers to join captured cities.

Note be careful of revolts as they greatly weaken your defensive units - sometimes if you're surrounded by culture it might be better to raze the city.

 

[Viper Daimao]

I saw burn them. Taking over cities is too slow if its on their base continent. I've pumped captured cities for all kinds of culture, but they were still suffocated by the boundries of other cities on the continent. If you want to capture a cities, you'll need a buffer zone or something to give you room for your borders to expand. In late game, its much easier to burn them and exterminate the nation and then fill in with your and your allies settlers. Also, if you're just going to burn them, nuke the city a time or two to soffen them up before you attack.

 

[Wodan]

One time I gave this punk city to Asoka, it was nothing, and my culture was way overrunning its location anyway.

It kept revolting for the rest of the game, but never flipped back to me. So yes, the game is definitely programmed to prevent flips for this, (and I presume cities conquered militarily too).

BUT, it was in an almost constant state of revolt. This happened for something like 200 turns.

Wodan

 

[Smirk]

The flipping in the custom game options is most likely the annoying flip while in revolution that annoyed warmongers (in Civ3) to no ends and in effect had no overall effect but annoyance. Since miltary units tended to be around the flip only required a recapture.
The difference is that they would only ever flip back to their original civ, in Civ4 culture can and will flip any city at all. Not all revolts result in a flip but any revolt can.

 

[alanschu]

WRONG - read the culture section of the civipedia - cities taken over militaristically can never culture flip - yes they can keep revolting but they will never flip.

I also would not waste offensive units in captured cities, that's why try and take defensive units with your army, and of course workers to join captured cities.

Note be careful of revolts as they greatly weaken your defensive units - sometimes if you're surrounded by culture it might be better to raze the city.

I know that this isn't true though. I played a game where I captured a Persian city close to the Chinese border. A bit later, it eventually did flip. I bet after a bit of time it's no longer called a "captured city" any more. This was probably done to stop the annoying "you've captured a city and it instaflips back" in Civ 3

 

[sandman_civ]

I know that this isn't true though. I played a game where I captured a Persian city close to the Chinese border. A bit later, it eventually did flip. I bet after a bit of time it's no longer called a "captured city" any more. This was probably done to stop the annoying "you've captured a city and it instaflips back" in Civ 3

Hmm I guess when it reached 100% of your culture it become your city. Strange that if it built your own culture over the years that it would flip. This is annoying as the civilopedia blatantly states that it will never flip.

 

[alanschu]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was because it was a 3rd party.

I captured it from the Persians, but lost it to the Chinese (after the Persians were dead too).

 

[LordTerror]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was because it was a 3rd party.

I captured it from the Persians, but lost it to the Chinese (after the Persians were dead too).

Correct, a 3rd party is the reason it happened.


There is an option called "City Flipping after Conquest".
It's hover text is "Cities which have been captured via conquest can convert peacefully back to a previous owner".

Unless this option is on, the Persains can not retake thier city using culture. The Chinese can because they are not a "previous owner".

 

[Drakcul]

i check up the buildings and no of citizens in the city before deciding.
if there r good bldgs and only abt 5-6 citizens then i prefer to keep it.
also it depends upon whether i can hold it - like in this one game i had attacked romans and raised down rome, despite it having pyramid and many improvement bldgs, becos i had very few units left and could not continue the attack - so it was better than it falling back into enemies hand