City Improvements are destroyed??

[kornhulios83]

Hi, it is damn annoying that the city improvements are destroyed after I conquer an enemy city, or recapture my old ones!? Am I the only one who I sick of that?? Isn’t there a mod or something which makes the city improvements stay?

 

[Chieftess]

City improvements such as culture improvements will always be destroyed, since you have to start over on culture buildings. If you don't want them destroyed, then mod them to not produce culture.

 

[yoshi74]

@Chieftess

This would cause the question: How are temples form a former civ are handled? A wonder don't gives you any culture when conquered? How about a temple conquered from an enemy? Not getting culture from it would make the temply quit worthless, because cultural borders won't expand.

@Kornhulios83
I think you should arrange with that. Build up again. At least most other buildings stay in the city.

 

[binyo66]

Well, if you recapture your own city, at least your culture point will not lost. If you capture other cities, you better build the temple so that you get the culture value (I think that's why in capture city, all culture improvments are gone, so you can build them and get culture points). And welcome

 

[wilbill]

Originally posted by yoshi74
@ChieftessA wonder don't gives you any culture when conquered?

That's right, they don't. You get the other benefits (happiness, fee buildings, etc. But not the culture.

How about a temple conquered from an enemy? Not getting culture from it would make the temply quit worthless, because cultural borders won't expand.

As Chieftess said, they're destroyed. Temples, cathedrals, etc. When you capture a city the cultural borders do shrink.

 

[phil87]

Yeah it can be pretty annoying but you would get too powerful if it didnt happen although perhaps there could be a unit built late on which would let you keep several or all improvements but still reset culture to 0.

 

[DJ Bonebraker]

Yeah, i find it annoying, too, but I think that the feature was added to keep a player from gaining "free culture," and making a cultural victory too easy. Still, I think they could've handled it better, like re-setting the city's culture to 0 when captured, but keeping all the improvements and the culture they generate, because it's the other players dumb fault for not defending their town well enough that they lost it, so why should you be punished for taking it? What I find even more annoying than the loss of cultural buildings is the fact that as a result, you have a size 3 city that's in constant revolt due to the fact there are no improvements to keep the SOB's happy (although if you didn't pillage the terrain improvements prior to capture, have a $hitload of luxuries, AND the AI was kind enough to build a marketplace in the town, this becomes less of an issue), which is why I ALWAYS rush build a temple in newly conquered cities, once the resistance ends (sine I use the Stack o'Doom(tm) strategy to conquer cities, resistance usually only lasts one turn, if even that).

Sorry about how long-winded that was, but I think that this is an issue that Firaxis should address, since IRL, cultural buildings aren't always destroyed during a war.

 

[binyo66]

Originally posted by Hikaro Takayama

Sorry about how long-winded that was, but I think that this is an issue that Firaxis should address, since IRL, cultural buildings aren't always destroyed during a war.

In modern reality, I could say 90% of cultural building remains intact. Destroying cultural building, just made other countries attitude lower by some numbers But, this is game. If we could keep all cultural building, how much money we could save it?

 

[akhenaten]

Originally posted by binyo66

In modern reality, I could say 90% of cultural building remains intact. Destroying cultural building, just made other countries attitude lower by some numbers But, this is game. If we could keep all cultural building, how much money we could save it?

Varies by the real-world battle, I suppose. A lot of cultural buildings were damaged or destroyed in WWII.
Anyway, if the point is realism and not just plain gameplay, I don't think they're trying to recreate the destruction of cultural buildings but the attitude of people to being subjugated. If a country today marches in and takes over a foreign city by force, there is going to be a period of time of active resistance, and a longer period of time when people just aren't too happy to be under the yoke of some foreign government. The city won't be as productive even after the physical infrastructure is restored. Most of that won't change until the city is somehow liberated or the people come to consider themselves members of the new country, not occupied by it. Because cultural buildings are how the game deals with happiness and the extent cities are part of the broader empire, the destruction of these buildings emulates reality fairly well, IMHO.