Cities are instantly razed

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Like in all games but civilization V cities are destroyed instantly if razed, even the improvements are gone. In just a button press and a once magnificent city disappear without a trace with only the wonders are left untouched.

In a few turns you could have bulldozed an empire, if you just lose a city for one turn you could have lost if forever, this mean you need to be very careful then at war.

 

[Krajzen]

Well, this is one of very few new features I actually strongly dislike.
I makes no sense from realistic point of view to be able to completely annihilate a city very fast, and it sounds very gamey and unfair in-game to be able to erase opponents progress so easily.
In civ5 razing took some turns, thus giving a previous owner the chance to retake it (which sometimes happened).

Besides, I still think city razing should be completely disabled once you enter industrial/modern era, there are simply no instances in modern history of industrial states annihilating entire cities to the ground, the outrage would be unreal. It wasn't even happening in as extremely evil circumstances as Third Reich conquest of Soviet cities because it's unfeasible on the scale of modern cities. The last instance of total big city razing/sacking I can think of are fall of Ayuthaia in 18th century.

 

[Big J Money]

I think it's great. Without global unhappiness, there's no reason to require the wait IMO. A nice convenience feature.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Actually with modern technology it is very easy to raze cities, and at that point you also have nukes. The diplomatic penalty for razing cities should raze and later on it could cause alot of war wearinessin your own cities but I do not know if that is how it work ingame.

You need to be very careful in war, you should try to bring the war to the enemy thenever it is possible otherwise you may lose the whole game.

It would be nice if the game made growth and production alot better in the late game so you could found decent cities in the late game.

Mechanized agriculture is pretty huge change and you can plant forest (I wonder if you can chop them after) to help new cities.

 

[Jabulani]

Is still an option in civ vi to gift cities ?

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Yes there is such an option but I do not think you can gift conquered cities because you have to wait for the peace treaty before you become their "rightful" owner.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

Seems weird given how much more importance has been placed on city development with the whole "unstacking" mechanic and districts...I hope this will be changed.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

If you protect your cities well you should not have to worry much about it.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Sounds like a good change to me. Capturing cities is a multi-turn process anyway, so it's not like you'll ever have a city deleted without some warning.

 

[CaptainUnknown]

It makes sense that they are instantly razed(early game) if you take in account the years that pass per turn. In civ5 the razing was way too slow when compared to the clock and it's just as gamey as instant raze. Perhaps just make the raze take 1 or 2 turns, not 1 pop per turn.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

It makes sense that they are instantly razed(early game) if you take in account the years that pass per turn. In civ5 the razing was way too slow when compared to the clock and it's just as gamey as instant raze. Perhaps just make the raze take 1 or 2 turns, not 1 pop per turn.

It works for realism, but is bad for gameplay. It is good to have the opportunity to reclaim a city before it is totally destroyed.

Having it be 1-2 pop per turn works well...especially if it gives bonus war weariness (to other cities) during that time.

 

[Jaybe]

I anticipate an option in game setup:
CAPTURED CITIES ARE RAZED: Never / At Player Option / Always

 

[Cerilis]

Do the districts stay? If yes (and unpillaged), most of the infrastructure could still be used even after the centre is razed.

 

[Zanteogo]

Instant raze is an odd choice for them. Unexpected for sure.

I guess with the return with local happiness they assumed they would have to give more power to the raze option.

I don't like instant raze myself. It's really unrealistic, other than from the use of nukes, to be able to do it with full size cites.

 

[playshogi]

There is a triple warmonger penalty for razing cities. Furthermore, I don't think there is any disadvantage to keeping every captured city, except possibly a misapplication of amenities. There is no anarchy after capture, so it is immediately useful.

 

[joncnunn]

Everything has it's price:
Since it's now instant from the conquest screen, you won't be getting gold from selling any building that survived the conquest.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

There is a triple warmonger penalty for razing cities. Furthermore, I don't think there is any disadvantage to keeping every captured city, except possibly a misapplication of amenities. There is no anarchy after capture, so it is immediately useful.

The captured city operates under a penalty until you end the war and officially control it. Also, that city permanently has more war weariness. Instant is not good, maybe make it 2-4 pop/turn, but there should be the possibility of recapture

 

[Xur]

I usually never raze a city, and I rarely see the AI razing a city so I dont really see a problem. Firaxis is obviously putting more instant action into the game and I like that. You could also argue that burning down a village is something that happens in a day - not years. Like bombing a town today can also happen in a day. So if you really want to keep your city, then defend it like it actually matters.

 

[SMcM]

annihilating entire cities to the ground, the outrage would be unreal.

Obviously that is if excluding the use of nuclear weapons- Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't very alive after that.

Anyway, during the great war, many cities were destroyed. They were generally rebuilt later, but there is no denying that some of these had pretty much ceased to exist. What about the bombing of Dresden? I realise there is a lack of certainty about the death toll (some put it at only around 25,000), but if the higher estimates are to be believed, there were between 200,000 and 500,000 killed. Also, the city of Jülich was completely destroyed in the war.

 

[Magil]

I rather like it. Defend your cities or prepare to lose them.

Though, one concern I'd have is with the whole "don't have to destroy units in the city to take it, just have to reduce city health to zero". This means there's very little you can do in order to make a last-ditch effort to defend a city, if it gets low then it may just be gone (if your opponent is inclined to raze it). It made more sense when you could stack units in the city and have them actively defend the city. So hard to say one way or the other.