hey, what rules do y'all abide by when conquering a foreign power, in terms of razing/occupying cities? I mean, on another continent? pop, distance, i haven't figured out what to do. usually, if the city looks like its in a nice place (resources, bonuses, etc) I keep it, and raze cities that look like 'losers'. every once in a while i raze a nice city if i have a settler to rebuild it.....what do y'all do???????
Capturing enemy cities....
- Thread starter shnishni
- Start date
Many things to consider. Most important is the game. If you play games at the highest levels, you have to raze them all, unless you expect to eliminate that nation in a turn or two or face a flip.
If you play at average or higher as an Always War game, it is close to the same thing.
So if you in fact play at a level where you can manage to have the higher culture and in fact go ahead and make that kind of culture, then you can choose.
So then it comes down to the value of the place to you. Lots of resister expected, but you want the place for what ever, then capture and hold. If not then do you even want a town here or not. If you do then raze and replace.
You may also just capture to hold while you move past it and then abandon it the next turn.
I play where I nearly always will raze the place.
If you play at average or higher as an Always War game, it is close to the same thing.
So if you in fact play at a level where you can manage to have the higher culture and in fact go ahead and make that kind of culture, then you can choose.
So then it comes down to the value of the place to you. Lots of resister expected, but you want the place for what ever, then capture and hold. If not then do you even want a town here or not. If you do then raze and replace.
You may also just capture to hold while you move past it and then abandon it the next turn.
I play where I nearly always will raze the place.
capnvonbaron
Democratia gladii
a theme I see here occasionally is the "bombard to death" strategy. If you have massive arty and bombers, keep on hitting the city until it is down to 2 pop. When you take it, one of the pop will die, and you have a lot easier city to control. Only works if you have the time to bombard it, though... not a viable strategy if you don't have a lot of extra bombard units.
But yes, I bring lots of settlers on overseas camaigns, and when I do take cities I rush settlers from them as soon as the resitance is squashed. If they seem like they're going to be a flip hazard, I'll either abandon them a few turns later, or if I really need the city for its harbor, wonder, etc., I'll leave a crappy/obsolete unit in the city and surround the city with more powerful units to take it back as soon as it flips.
But yes, I bring lots of settlers on overseas camaigns, and when I do take cities I rush settlers from them as soon as the resitance is squashed. If they seem like they're going to be a flip hazard, I'll either abandon them a few turns later, or if I really need the city for its harbor, wonder, etc., I'll leave a crappy/obsolete unit in the city and surround the city with more powerful units to take it back as soon as it flips.
I've never tested this, but I've always heard that if you build settlers from a foreign city, the settler comes out with the foreign nationality. That means that any city that it founds automatically begins with a foreign citizen. I'd suggest building workers instead.
As to the OP, I raze virtually any city that doesn't contain a particularly useful Wonder. I'd rather take slaves and replace the city with one of my own nationality.
capnvonbaron
Democratia gladii
This is true, but I try not to use the rushed settler until the war is over or nearly so. Build a city with him as far from the enemy culture-core as possible. Once the war is over he'll generally be content or better, especially if you have a favorable gov't or luxuries connected. In the later part of the game, usually after everything is railed, I have replaceable parts, and my workers are way more effective, I'll "retire" some of my extra patriot workers and have them join the city I found with the foriegn settler (that is... if food is available so they won't starve to death). This leaves the foreign dude outnumbered and much less likely to culture-flip.
culture flip chance is not dependent on the number of locals; only on the number of foreigners. In other words, adding your own citizens does not reduce flip chance.
del62
Deity
if you garrsion enough units you can prevent a flip, and if you starve, worker down eventually you only have to leave a few units (make sure no squares within city radius are in other powers city radius though
ecuwins
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2006
- Messages
- 1,315
Actually, adding your own citizens will increase the chance to flip.
Ex. a size 6 city is more likely to flip than a size 5. If some of those are foreigners then the chances go up even more.
capnvonbaron
Democratia gladii
even if the nationals are happy?? hrm... I've never noticed that... of course, we are talking regent/monarch levels, here. Can't say with emporer or above
CarthageFTW
Chieftain
I have this "historical" thing about some of my games. For example, I'll play the Japanese and face the Indians, Chinese, Russians, and Persians. Or I'll play the Egyptians, Baboylians, Persians, and Greeks. Etc, etc. in those games, if I'm japan for example, i'll conquer chinese cities and razed indian cities b/c japan conquered chinese cities in real life. But in just regular games, I tend to keep core cities and raze/resettle minor ones. But one rule I have is that I ALWAYS capture the capitol. I enjoy looking at my territory and owning Babylon, Kyoto, Beijing, Delphi, and Athens for example.
ecuwins
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2006
- Messages
- 1,315
All I can say is, use civ assist 2. Click on the cities tab and it will tell you how many units are needed to prevent a flip. If said number is inordinately high, then you station troops outside of the city in preparation of the flip. At some point, when the stack is big enough, you launch an attack on the closest enemy city.
bryanwallace
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2007
- Messages
- 311
easiest way is to turn the damn flip thing off
Is there ever a time when no amount of troops can prevent a flip?
I'm playing Deity for the first time and had my entire military (yes, every single unit) in a city and it still flipped.
Moving up to Deity, I've learned that if I want to keep a city I either have to pound it down to 1 pop with bombard units or starve it very quickly once I capture it. 1 pop cities are pretty easy to keep from flipping.
I'm playing Deity for the first time and had my entire military (yes, every single unit) in a city and it still flipped.
Moving up to Deity, I've learned that if I want to keep a city I either have to pound it down to 1 pop with bombard units or starve it very quickly once I capture it. 1 pop cities are pretty easy to keep from flipping.
Taras Bulba
gone
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2007
- Messages
- 1,442
if they are audacious enough to attack me, they die a most painful death in any way possible.
that's the only rule I follow... if you can really call that a rule
that's the only rule I follow... if you can really call that a rule
del62
Deity
Chrisman1 -
I beleive you need more troops than both the population and squares within the city's workable squares that are within the workable space of cities that belong to the other civilization and in the other cities culture.
This means if you capture a size 15 city and seven squares that when the borders are expanded could be worked then to guarantee no flip you need 23 units that are not artillary, workers or settlers, scouts, explorers etc.
This is how I beleive it works, could others correct me if I am wrong.
I am wrong this assumes you have the same culture and that there are no unhappy or resisting citizens, and you have no worse local culture
for explanation see http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53157
I beleive you need more troops than both the population and squares within the city's workable squares that are within the workable space of cities that belong to the other civilization and in the other cities culture.
This means if you capture a size 15 city and seven squares that when the borders are expanded could be worked then to guarantee no flip you need 23 units that are not artillary, workers or settlers, scouts, explorers etc.
This is how I beleive it works, could others correct me if I am wrong.
I am wrong this assumes you have the same culture and that there are no unhappy or resisting citizens, and you have no worse local culture
for explanation see http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53157
CommandoBob
AbstractArt
Several things determine the flip risks of a city. Size is critical, of course. Realtive culture strength is important and so is distance from each capital city. The number of units in a city serve to reduce and sometimes eliminate the flip risk, but often that needs more than 1 or 2 units.
There is a Flip-Calculator program here at the forum. CivAssistII and MapStat do a better job and do it automatically each turn (and a whole lot more).
I don't worry about the formula or how it is calculated. What I am concerned with is the flip risk these two programs show me. If it is high, roughly anything over 1%, I tend to evacuate the city as I try to starve it down/build slaves.
Razing vs. occupying, that is not so easy. I'll keep a wonder city. Keeping others depends on my plans for that turn or the next. Can I go on attacking or not? Do I need to keep this city to have faster movement? If I raze it, will the enemy's culture 'capture' the just occupied city tile? Can I deny the AI a resouce by keeping the city? And so on.
Like many others, I don't have a hard and fast, easy to implement rule on when I keep it and when I raze it.
There is a Flip-Calculator program here at the forum. CivAssistII and MapStat do a better job and do it automatically each turn (and a whole lot more).
I don't worry about the formula or how it is calculated. What I am concerned with is the flip risk these two programs show me. If it is high, roughly anything over 1%, I tend to evacuate the city as I try to starve it down/build slaves.
Razing vs. occupying, that is not so easy. I'll keep a wonder city. Keeping others depends on my plans for that turn or the next. Can I go on attacking or not? Do I need to keep this city to have faster movement? If I raze it, will the enemy's culture 'capture' the just occupied city tile? Can I deny the AI a resouce by keeping the city? And so on.
Like many others, I don't have a hard and fast, easy to implement rule on when I keep it and when I raze it.
More cities means more territory and a higher score, more units "free", more science, more taxes, more advances, more armies. It's the whole point of the game. I honestly don't know Sid's background, but it sounds like he went to college and studied his history and anthropology. A "civilization" has cities and writing {Rome, Greece, China}, while an archeological culture lacks one or both. Did anyone read "Saucer" a couple of years ago? The idea behind the plot is a kind of cultural evolution where discoveries and inventions lead to not only larger populations but higher percentages of "excess" population {not directly involved in food-getting} of experts, scientists, artists and leaders, who create ever-higher technologies which enrich and expand the civilzation further, in a kind of feed-back loop. The Civ games personify this philosophy. Or am I being obtuse? {and verbose} So if it's just a kriegspiel to you, go ahead and raze that city {you hun!}. But if you're like me; wise, godlike and just, than be responsibleto the little trons and build them a civilization to stand th.........
Hello all.
Recently in a game I am playing on Regent, I am employing a different strategy when I capture cities that are far from my main civilization... aka, those which are extremely vulnerable to depose.
I am playing on the Huge Earth map, with the max # of players. It is around 1200 AD. I am situated in eastern asia.
I have captured cities in the middle east that are between two civilizations (Greek and Iroquois) and sold them to other civilizations who are wealthy and far away (south africa or the Americas).
This way, I get lots of cash, can catch up in techs, and don't have to worry about holding the city. I also didn't sell it to anyone whose capitol city was near, so that they will have trouble keeping it. This way, I also create a bit of tension between the Civ I captured it from, and the Civ I sold it to.
In the meantime, I will use the money to hurry improvements and to equalize my culture. You can also use the money for espionage or to put your tech research to 100%.
Does anyone know however, if the city will have the same resisters after I sell it?
Thanks and good luck!
Recently in a game I am playing on Regent, I am employing a different strategy when I capture cities that are far from my main civilization... aka, those which are extremely vulnerable to depose.
I am playing on the Huge Earth map, with the max # of players. It is around 1200 AD. I am situated in eastern asia.
I have captured cities in the middle east that are between two civilizations (Greek and Iroquois) and sold them to other civilizations who are wealthy and far away (south africa or the Americas).
This way, I get lots of cash, can catch up in techs, and don't have to worry about holding the city. I also didn't sell it to anyone whose capitol city was near, so that they will have trouble keeping it. This way, I also create a bit of tension between the Civ I captured it from, and the Civ I sold it to.
In the meantime, I will use the money to hurry improvements and to equalize my culture. You can also use the money for espionage or to put your tech research to 100%.
Does anyone know however, if the city will have the same resisters after I sell it?
Thanks and good luck!
TheOverseer714
Overseer
You can only sell cities in Vanilla, last I heard. A valid tactic there. In Conquests, you can give them away. Oh, and the AI seems to have less problems quelling resisters than human players.
Lord Emsworth
Emperor
It has to be a very unpatched Vanilla where you can sell cities. It isn't possible in 1.29, and IIRC it wasn't in - what? - 1.17 either.
