Conquered cities turn against you, this is unrealistic!

Surely the effects causing a culture flip must be in the programming, well ok, that is obvious, I know nothing about programming at all, so I am going to ask something that will seem incredibly lame to all those that know computers well, but can't someone just look into the program, like the actual written program of CIV III and see what the computer has been programmed to do concerning culture flips??

You made a good real life example rhandom, but I am limited in my historical knowledge and can only say two words "Zulu dawn" :goodjob:

When i talk of well organised civilians, i am being idealistic, not at all realistic, although the power of the people has worked, Polish uprisng, started with a loud mouth , but very smart union watersider Lech Walesa, who managed to over throw communism and USSR rule, using the power of the people. ( yes i know he would have been killed if USA didn't help, but the point still remains):D
 
Originally posted by Endureth
Look, whether you believe me or not isn't important. I'm trying to tell you how it works. I don't have this problem you are all talking about. I rarely have flips and when it does happen I know exactly why. Mostly it's because my unhappy in the city outnumber my smiley faces. Count them and you will see.
...
Some of you might feel the urge to respond and tell me how I'm stoned off my butt, but that's irrelavent :) ....

Endureth

Oh yeah, and happy gaming.

Endureth, this is a discussion and you wrote an excellent input, no matter if it will work for me, too. So thanks and no need to stone your butt :-) (also cause today is Christmas)

I will give it a few more tries. However, reading all the inputs I can see that everyone can accept the flip over under some circumstances. They are part of the game and I like it - but much less in war times when I lose my big armies!

I don't have time to build improvements often to stabilize the city. I want to use the armed forces to give me this extra time, that is where the things are going bad. The more armed forces you use, the higher the risk to lose all.

I can see there are other approaches as well and this approach is a militaristic one. However, we are still in war in this phase.

Some things need to be improved.
- Where are the units gone?
- There should be a difference between peace and wartimes. At least in wartimes the army should take care to avoid this flip over. You can finish your enemy, return to peace and thats it.

One more point, Civ has to be some sort of a realistic game. I saw a lot of discussions the other way around where people asked for things or proposed ideas and tons of answers said: These ideas are unrealistic and the things you propose are not exisiting - forget it or play a different game. Well, 100% realistic will and should never be reached.

My personal opinion is, excellent is good enough. Civ3 is a very good game. A few things need to be improved to have an excellent game (at least for me). The problem discussed here is one of most critical ones cause it really can spoil fun (for me), losing my complete forces for something I can't really control or influence.

P.S. Merry Christmas to all of you!
 
Here's where I jump in and add (even though I haven't read too far back in this thread) that since culture flips are undertaken by citizens of a city, it doesn't really matter if it's done during war or not. The citizens rise up and overwhelm your forces.

The frustration of not being able to keep all that they've conquered has plagued many civs. Maybe not through "flips" exactly, but c'mon-- This is Civ3, and it can delve only so far into geopolitics.

That said, although I like the concept, it SHOULD be dependent on the number of units in the city.

:santa:
 
This is all pretty simple. Let's say you live in San Francisco. Suddenly an army of 40,000 Chinese attack it, and capture the city and fortify themselves there. Are you going to walk down to the local pawn shop and pick up a shotgun and get to work? Or are you going to just stand around in fear watching your city turn into the new communist America Hong Kong?

What the previous poster said is dead on. There is no way an army of 40,000 soldiers are going to be able to hold down 1+ million people who really love where they live. At least not right away. I think that cities "flipping" is based on a number of factors including how strong your civs culture is, vs. how strong the enemy civs culture is and including the # of forces you have in the city.

Makes sense to me. If you don't really like you country you would be far less inclined to revolt against an occupied force than you would if you loved where you lived. You would also think twice if you knew the # of soldiers in the city were more than enough to destroy the city and all of your loved ones and you didn't have a chance of victory. But if you saw that you outnumbered them by a large amount you would organize a resistance and take the city back by force.

The best way to capture large cities I have found is to capture it and install a new governor. Then make sure you have 2 good defensive units ready to fortify that city but keep the rest of your attack force outside of it and waiting. Then if the city turns over you only lose 2 fortified units and can use the rest of your army to recapture it. I've found that some cities are more likely to revert back to the enemy than others. Typically the largest cities in a civ will revert back since they have/had the most culture and reasons for people to like living there. After 3-4 times of capturing their city though and showing them the resistance is futile they give up and the city will stay in my control.
 
:lol:
Entertaining "only in America" argument! Go down to the local pawn shop, pick up (steal?) a shotgun, and get to work - indeed! Ah, it hearkens me back to that cinematographic triumph, "Red Dawn"! (Best scene from that movie - "They can have my pistol when they pry it from my cold dead hand" bumper sticker!) :lol:

If the army that just invaded SF was strong enough to have defeated the entire trained defensive force that the US could deploy, do you think that a bunch of rabble could do what the US military could not?

Where did you come up with the 40,000 troops figure? China has a standing army of millions...

One would think it takes more than just spirit and numbers to overcome a trained, modern, fortified military force. A few people storm the baricades, and are gunned down like dogs. A larger group gather and try to organise, and the attack helicopters sweep in. A smarter soul holes up in a book depository and picks off a couple of patroling soldiers (good job!) and their buddies call in a mortar strike.

Anyway, I'm sure what you suggest is theoretically possible (and fun to discuss), but still, as far as I know it's never happened in the long bloody history of the world! Empires on the rise do not lose occupied cities to revolt unless they ignore them. We just want some sense of control over the whole thing!
 
Originally posted by Rhandom
Red Dawn was NOT a documentary. Sorry.

That's true, but in exactly the opposite manner than you mean.

The Soviets could no more attack and hold a U.S. city than we could attack and hold Moscow. To paraphrase Bogart talking to a Nazi officer who was dreaming of world conquest, there are some neighborhoods in Brooklyn he just wouldn't want to go into.
 
The US (or more likely China) very likely could hold a Russian city, after eliminating Russia's military as a threat. The military is the hard part. It often seems the other way around in the game!
 
There is no way an army of 40,000 soldiers are going to be able to hold down 1+ million people who really love where they live.


Oh, really??

40,000 trained disciplined troops armed with the most modern and deadly automatic weapons, tanks, and artillery against a disorganized civilian mob armed with what? Baseball bats and maybe some hunting rifles?

Give me a break. In Civ III the soldiers just disappear when a flip occurs - and there are no apparent civilian casualties!! Yea, right.

During the Draft Riots in New York in 1863 huge mobs of many thousands of crazed rioters were regularly defeated by police who were tremendously outnumbered. Discipline always works against the mob.


Civ III: Too much flipping!!!
 
zouave

40,000 trained disciplined troops?? You must have been watching too many movies, 90% of soldiers can't hit a bullseye at 50 yards, most of them are school drop outs with no other options, most of them can't even run 5 miles in less than 40 minutes. Basically They are not great men, just normal men, the same as a civilian, and believe me 1 million people is a hell of a lot, and to lose one pop point in CIV III, that is the equivalent of 1 million civilians being killed in the culture flip.
 
Ok, cutiestar, here we go again. I was not a high school drop out, I shot expert, I could go very long distances at a fast pace. Maybe you're talking about your countries military but I know for a fact you're not talking about mine, past or present.

US Army, 1970-72, 2nd Armor, 8th of the 60th, air defense. Viet Nam Era, 3 presidental unit citiations.

The whole idea of an assualt rifle is you don't have to hit a bulls eye at 50 meters, you put the target in the ring and pull the trigger on full atuo. Who the hell wants to run 5 miles when Uncle Sam gave us copters and tracks. High school drop out? Give me all drop outs for my squad, they've got something to prove. Now that's just a guess because I never saw any. Yes, we were normal men in a tough time, no different then any other time, past or present.
 
when I remember most wars in the past it was always a major goal to get the big cities to have a strategic base. It did nearly not happen that resistance could turn over a city very fast. I agree that it could be that you might suffer losses over time when resistance was fighting against you.

And thats usually what resistance is doing. Annoying you, doing damage, forcing you to spend resources and man power into which therefor cannot be used at the front lines, too.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HOW ABOUT a message 'Your troops did have tough battles with resistance forces in city xxx' or 'resistance did assult some of your forces and eliminates them' and you loose some of your troops, maybe city size and resistance will decrease slightly too...just an idea.

Once you can't manage to get in additional forces over the next turns you will be kicked out. This would make sense to me.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Last point:
Current game I have conquered cities around 3-6 in size (and quite a lot). I haven't seen this problem cause I can bring them down to 1 or 2 very fast. It seems that cities are much less likely to turn over when they are small (makes somehow sense).

Next battle I have to conquer bigger cities and I will have a comparison.
 
During a campaign,I have only had one city flip, and thatwas my fault-I neglected to post a garrison intil all was quiet.
It is after, when things are pretty well stabilized, andnothing nearby is pumpingculture in... I have only lost a few this way, and that could be the odd chance.. I have lost a few Aztec buttheir capital was close, although pushed off to an island, and he wes coming back in power.
I have Rome down to a few cities. I really don't like genocide, one of the things I did not like about pre III military victories. So I will push him completetely off my continent, improve his captured cities, and see what happens, Making notes.
After all,Ihave many other civs to comquer If Iwant to rule this world...:D
 
I am Navy from way back... but The Marine troops I have carried to battle,and the Army people I see where I work Now, are mostly all wearing Expert or Sharpshooter medals. I Know how to shoot guns at ships, But I will take our soldiers to defend me anytime. They can all shoot better then me. And I am better than the average city citizen.
It looks to me like they put in a very random factor. If you carefully follow good strategems, it appears that flipping is minmal,but does happen. then it looks like if the random number happens to match a certain number... say .977 .. then that city flips, no mattter what.
Like a perfect 20 or perfect 1 for the DND people.
 
J Fred Mugs

Yes i can only talk about what i know, and that is my country, i have no idea about yours, although I do suggest in your country all the better atheletes play pro sport, all the better minds earn millions in business, and all the better shots are in special forces. But that is just a guess. I was not actually trying to be derogatory towards the army, just making the point that army men are not supermen as some children would envisage them.

Since you are experienced as a soldier maybe you can tell whether you would feel you and your unit would have been able to take out 1 million rampaging cilvilians with some automatic rifles? and therefore in a culture flip a city of millions should lose pop points.
 
Well, i tried all of the above. In the last game i played, i had 3 cities flip after conquering them some THIRTY YEARS LATER, happying them up (hell, they were celebrating WLTK), improving them, AND MY PEOPLE OUTNUMBERED THEM 3-4 TO ONE (grown from size 4 to about 12 or more). One of them, the former capital, i could understand. But the rest? Sorry, no cigar. They were pissant towns i grew into metros with MY people with MY improvements (aqueducts and hospitals for growth). I wonder, propaganda? No, i was a democracy. He had no luxuries to make them happy. In one circumstance, the city that flipped had no cultural borders adjoining the former civ. I am waiting to see if it will flip back to me.

From now on, i will raze them, all of them. It's the only way.
 
Originally posted by cutiestar
J Fred Mugs

Yes i can only talk about what i know, and that is my country, i have no idea about yours, although I do suggest in your country all the better atheletes play pro sport, all the better minds earn millions in business, and all the better shots are in special forces. But that is just a guess. I was not actually trying to be derogatory towards the army, just making the point that army men are not supermen as some children would envisage them.

Since you are experienced as a soldier maybe you can tell whether you would feel you and your unit would have been able to take out 1 million rampaging cilvilians with some automatic rifles? and therefore in a culture flip a city of millions should lose pop points.

That atheleticly inclined people get to play pro sports is a horrible misconception, one that has many believing in. Kids go all out trying to be good at sports, forgetting to learn the skills that will count for later life.

There is no shortage of people trying to get into the military academies. My bunk mate was offered a commision to West Point, he had proven himself in the field, never applied for such a thing before.

Shooting is a learned skill. People from many areas in the US learn young, such as mine. Hunting is a big deal, a rite of passage. What I had over the others when I went in, is called instict shooting, something that to my surprise was also taught.

Special Forces are just another job, specialized. The big thing, the main thing, that basic training teaches you, is you can dig deep and find you can do things you didn't think yourself capable of doing. Special Forces just dig a little deeper. It may surprise you to actually meet these people. They aren't on the whole big men and everyone I've met (met more then a few) have been very gentle men, a pleasure to be around.

Could my unit take out a million mad citizens? Well if you're speaking of the 8th of the 60th, no. Half the unit was ground to air missles. the other half Vulcans (vulcan=20mm, 6 barreled gatling guns, mounted on tracks, could shot 1000 rounds in less then 20 seconds.), I don't even remember the total number of Vulcans anymore. Now if you're speaking of 2nd Armored Division, yes, many times over. A modern army division is no longer just made up of, in this case, just tanks. It would be it's main asset, however ingrained with in any fighting division is a combined arms force, artillery, gunships, infantry, etc. Now a group of divisions makes up an Army, how many varies. The number depends on the country and time period. We here in the States have many Armies, of which they all form the total US Army. The rest of the services kind of follow this, but use different names of course.

I'm not sure where you are getting your civ figures as to what each unit represents for the military and civilians. But I think one must look in game terms, hence game balance at this whole flipping thing. I think all we're asking is some kind of explaination as to how it can be kept under control, or if it is ment to be kept under control.

The very thought of unleashing the militery on civilains is horrible to me. I refused a direct order to do crowd control practice. One of many Article Fifteens I got and proud of every one of them. :)
 
A simple solution to stop cities from flipping. First off bomb the heck out of it and the neighboring cities. By destroying the improverments you destroy culture. You also kill off potential resisters. Take the city when it's down to 2 or 3 pop. Not a single city has EVER flipped back on me. I make sure that my citizens outnumber theirs (add workers back to build it up) and by destroying the culture in nearby cities you don't have to worry about that part either.

Bombers and artillery are the keys to true victory. If that pesky calvary keeps killing you infantry then soften it up with some artilley. I've found 20 artillery can knock down an invading force really quickly.
 
Originally posted by jju_57
A simple solution to stop cities from flipping. First off bomb the heck out of it and the neighboring cities. By destroying the improverments you destroy culture. You also kill off potential resisters. Take the city when it's down to 2 or 3 pop. Not a single city has EVER flipped back on me. I make sure that my citizens outnumber theirs (add workers back to build it up) and by destroying the culture in nearby cities you don't have to worry about that part either.

Bombers and artillery are the keys to true victory. If that pesky calvary keeps killing you infantry then soften it up with some artilley. I've found 20 artillery can knock down an invading force really quickly.

War is hell.
 
Bombing improvements doesn't destroy culture, it destroys culture income. The city's accumulated culture remains. It seems that a recaptured city even gets back the culture that it had before it was lost! (At least the culture borders seem to snap back to their original size.
 
Endureth,
thank you very much.
At last I understand the culture-flip.
It also explains why my military didn't prevent it
So, my conquered city has to produce as much culture as its enemy neighbour-city which is, like you said, 'throwing culture' at mine. (My current enemy is Babilonia, and culture is his second name....)
 
Back
Top Bottom