Conquered cities turn against you, this is unrealistic!

[jju_57]

City flipping uses both total culture and culture income. Even when you build that library you only get 3 culture points. If that nearby enemy city has a library that is 1000 years old then that library has more culture points then yours does. You risk a flip. Bomb that city. Destroy those culture points. Then your city won't flip. I just love artillery! Twenty artlillery pieces can give you a big edge. Is that stack of cavalry near your city causing you trouble. Bomb it. Reduce them to one hit point. Then you can safely attack out of you city with infantry and not worry about them being caught in the open. And the AI NEVER attacks with 1 HP. They always retreat to heal up.

In my current game I'm the Americans with the Germans on one side and the Japanese on the other side. There are also the Zulus, Russians, Aztecs, Romans, French and Indians. Both the Germans and Japanese are always attacking me. These 20 artillery pieces have gone by rail from one end to the other end to stop an attacking force. Even though the entire world is at war with me, (I had MPP's but they had other MPP's and decided to honor them and not mine) I've fended off rebeated attacks and managed to capture 3 of the 10 German cities and 7 of the 12 Japanese cities. I now have tanks and am about to take 2 more German cities and two more Japanese cities. I also have a couple of carries that I use to hit the luxuries and resources of the other countries.

Bottom line is that bombers and artillery are a real asset. Use them. And reduce that culture in your enemies cities.

 

[Peteus]

While you may be right that culture income makes a difference, it definitely isn't the key. I and others have seen cities flip back to their native civ when he was down to one expansion city on a faraway island. There were no enemy neighboring cities "pumping culture at me." And some of the flipping cities definitely had more culture income, and possibly more accumulated culture, than the far-away (small) outpost. How do you explain that?

Oh, and I've seen the AI attack (another AI) with 1 HP a few times, but only an amphibious force that was unable to retreat. Chaaaarge!
The AI is bad at invading from the sea, but in his defense, it is bloody hard! Especially with railroads working like they do, so that the defender can bring the entire continental army to bear on your beachhead, and then vanish like smoke the next turn...

 

[jju_57]

Peteus,

I can't explain that at all. It isn't logical. Is this pre or post patch because I've seen a change post patch. The only other explanation is that I tend to build up my other cities. I'm always at or near the top culture wise. I've played about 10 or 11 games so far and the only cities that flipped were ones that I recently captured and where I didn't hammer down nearby enemy cities. And pre patch cities were flipping back and forth all over the place.

 

[Moulton]

Thanks, Peteus, had not thought about accumulated culture. Of course it remains, and must be a factor.
Personally IMHO, I like the concept of flipping--it makes sense to me. I just want to understand how to conbat it. Yes, trooops can hold the lid on rampaging civilians. We did this in Bosnia, fairly recently. Perfectly? No. Had we tried to conquer and covvert those cities to the American Way (whatever that is) I suspect some or all of them would have flipped.

When I took Rome in this game, most of the cities had like 1 to 3 resistors, and I put that down in one or two turns. Those cities did not flip, and are now producing about 3-5 shields each. Some ot the cities, Rome itself, and the last 4 big cities (12 pop--max) had 6 or 8 resistors. It was like they saw the end of their culture coming, and did not like it. Great. That is what I would expect on a real conquering run. The only city I lost was one i had not left a garrison in, and there were still resistors.. Cant blame that on the game.
Even the occasional wild hare flip I think I understand, and can logically accept-- just dont like for it to happen to me And it does seem to be purely random.

BTW, I remember seeing a target posted by one of the girls in this unit here, (I am too old for active duty--they say. Personally, I don't think 65 is old ) I just work here. Her pattern was 5 holes in the bull at 300 yds. She is just an ordinary soldier.

The sports craze if way out out hand, IMHO. I'd rather play computer games. An awful lot of our capital and time is devoted to sports.

 

[Peteus]

Well, I have to admit that all of the wild flip results I've seen were pre-patch. I wasn't expecting any help from the patch, because I didn't see anything listed in the documentation. If it's better now, sweet!

But on the other hand, I haven't played as much since, and I play a different game now to avoid flips! Burn 'em down, then eliminate them totally! "You don't understand...I killed all the Hrishnak - everywhere!"

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Peteus
Can anyone think of a situation where such a government was at war for a long time, even for a "righteous cause", without enacting some sort of martial law?

Czar Nicholas was a Monarch who instituted stringent social controls throughout Russia. Nevertheless, war weariness in WWI led to major disruptions in the cities and his eventual abdication and murder.

So, I guess the point is that just because you institute social controls does not mean that you have eliminated war weariness and unrest.

 

[No.Dice]

Guess i spoke a little too soon. In my current game, i've just been the victim of around 10 culture flips, none of which were in my favour, over the last century or so. Though understandably so, they were all cities conquered through military might, belonging to a civ whos culture was on par with mine. Didn't hurt me too badly, i only garrison conquered cities with wounded troops, while it certainly hurts when you lose a couple of 1 hp cavalry, you don't feel it nearly as much as if they were veteran.

What i've learned, compare your culture with the culture of the civ with whom you're fighting on the histograph, if its near equal or above, raze their cities, if not, its generally safe to keep them (there are always exceptions, but its usually pretty safe).

I still wish peaceful culture flips would happen a bit more frequently. Its a bit annoying when your capital and 4 more of your oldest cities, churning out 25+ culture per turn, can't convert that one size 2 foriegn city with a single temple.

I only skimmed some of the previous posts, do conversions factor in the culture of the entire civ, or only the single city in comparison to the cities of a different nationality surrounding it?

EDIT: Guess i should have just gone to bed, i was looking to reply to a similiar thread discussing culture, sorry about that.

 

[Polonius]

I’m starting to get a bit repetitive about this, but I don’t think that city flipping is either unfair or erratic – I just think that it’s poorly understood by most players.

Read the Civilopedia entry on City Defection – it spells it out.

You need to win the hearts and minds of the new citizens if you want to keep them. Force (garrisoning) helps but it’s only part of the picture. While you are still at war with their original civ they will be more likely to resist (reasonable enough). If they are unhappy or generally meeting general conditions for civil disorder they will also try to revert to their original orientation (also fair enough). Why should they immediately change allegiance to your civ if you treat them like junk?

Many players seem to concentrate on military goals at the expense of high culture (a key element in flips) and get by with mediocre happiness levels. If you can’t or won’t improve these, then fair enough, but expect to get more flips. As Moulton remarks on a post a bit higher up, it’s a civ’s overall accumulated culture that counts and that figure stays regardless of the local individual cities you wiped out.

Also check out culture in the Editor, it lists the percentage chances of a city resisting under the various comparative levels of culture. Again, the key factor is overall accumulated culture, not what one local city has or hasn't got. If yours is crap compared to theirs there is a whopping 90% chance of resistance (not the same as flipping but a contributing factor).

Get the little internees cheerful and you’ll get a lot less flips. Keep a high happiness rating for your empire, connect the captured cities by road to your luxuries immediately (if not sooner!) build a temple before anything else, create some entertainers, spend more on happiness temporarily if you have to, do whatever you need to win their little hearts. You can’t just bludgeon them into switching allegiance, you have to woo them a little – and that seems reasonable enough to me.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Polonius
I’m starting to get a bit repetitive about this, but I don’t think that city flipping is either unfair or erratic – I just think that it’s poorly understood by most players.

I agree. I rarely have flips. I believe most of those experiencing them are warmongers (bless their little hearts), and run a Communist governement with 0% luxuries. Then they wonder why the people try to free themselves.

When I conquer a city, the people rejoice in their new found freedom, their liberation from the oppressors, their new wealth and opportunity, their teeth are whiter, they get, . . . well you get the idea.

 

[Peteus]

Nope...at least not in my case. I am a diehard perfectionist, myself! I always lead in culture, and have only ever switched to communism as a religious civ (no anarchy). Democracy all the way! Use luxuries as needed to control war weariness, when I'm at war. Keep relations good with everyone if I can, then retaliate swiftly if someone declares war on me. Only declare war if it's strategically cruicial.
In captured cities, I always rush temple + courthouse immediately. The cities that are flipping almost never have resistors when they go, because my culture is strong and I use a big garrison to squelch them within 3 turns, even in captured metropolises. Yet I still see flipping, even when the city that flips is bigger than the whole surviving enemy empire! And even when the whole city is happy/entertaining. That's what gets me all red-faced!
Someone suggested that it might be better post-patch. I'll admit that I haven't seen flip problems since the patch, but I haven't really given it a chance (I've been razing everything.) I hope they are right - I'll test it out some and see!

 

[Rhandom]

Originally posted by Polonius
"I’m starting to get a bit repetitive about this, but I don’t think that city flipping is either unfair or erratic – I just think that it’s poorly understood by most players. "

I think you are getting repetitive because you aren't reading all of the posts now that refute your claims. There must be 15 different people in this thread (including me) who've reported losing cities when they had all happy citizens, in we love the king days, with practically no corruption, with up to a dozen military units in them, even with the freaking Forbidden Palace! Cities flip when you have rush built every possible culture item for the city, when the enemy has less than 1/2 of your total culture, or one city left on a separate continent, completely out of contact with your cities. They can happen the turn after capture, or 100 turns. The only trend I can even come close to verifying as personal experience is that lots of military units actually seem to encourage flipping, a model which is utterly absurd (but may just be coincidental that I have noticed it). Oh, and that it seems much less likely to occur early in the game (though other refute this, too).

The civ-o-pedia gives no useful information to prevent flipping. I think we have all read it. It gives vague generalities that people who really try hard can use rationalize the flips, like people reading horoscopes. It gives no concrete answers, suggests no viable strategies, and most importantly, gives no warning of cities that are close to flipping.

 

[Zachriel]

A good way to learn to deal with flips is to use the autosave feature. Reload the game a few years before the flip. Then try different strategies to prevent the flip.

 

[cutiestar]

I agree with Poloneus, and now after reading his last post the penny has dropped for me.

Way back in this thread someone asked me to tell how i stop culture flipping, as it is extremely rare for me, now I just worked out probably why.

I play a strategy where i keep my empire in WLTK day, so i can gain the extra bonus of less corruption and more efficient production, i guess that must all add up, so as when i take another city, they will like the idea of sticking with my empire. As i hardly ever get flipped, and any cities of mine i lose usually revert back to me.

Rhandom when you say that many posts here refute poloneus, as they get flips even when all their people are happy, i think the happiness adds up over years, so if you just go and put up happiness tax and entertainers for a few turns, it really doesn't make much difference, a bit like the average score theory.

 

[Polonius]

Originally posted by Rhandom

I think you are getting repetitive because you aren't reading all of the posts now that refute your claims. There must be 15 different people in this thread (including me) who've reported losing cities when they had all happy citizens, in we love the king days, with practically no corruption, with up to a dozen military units in them, even with the freaking Forbidden Palace!

I understand you Rhandom - but I have been reading the posts. I would say that people have not been reading mine properly.

Why would the Forbidden palace have any effect whatever on flipping? It's NOT A CAPITAL. Capital proximity is what effects flips (yours and theirs).

I'll say it again. The rules are there to be read. They DON'T claim that happiness, resistance, or any other of the factors will PROOF your city against flips. They DO suggest that these factors will have a PERCENTAGE effect. My reading of the rules says that getting the five or six factors that effect flipping into the high zone will all (moderately but cumulatively) effect the flipping percentage chances. I DON'T believe that you can ever get to 100% safe, as almost everything in this game has a random element. But I DO believe that you can A) Improve the odds in your favour considerably B) Learn to live with the degree of flipping that your style of play tends to result in.

Civ3 is not a game of certainties - it's a game of percentages and possibilities (and that's why I think it's superior to more predictable games). If you must have certainty in your calculations, then the only answer is playing a different game.

 

[Eliezar]

I don't understand why someone would find it hard to believe that a 20 population city with all Greeks would revert to the Greek civ after the Romans overtake it.

Now if that 20 population city is all Romans through assimilation then I doubt it is defecting if Roman culture is bigger than Greek culture and there is a sizeable garrison there.

Eliezar

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Eliezar
I don't understand why someone would find it hard to believe that a 20 population city with all Greeks would revert to the Greek civ after the Romans overtake it.

Now if that 20 population city is all Romans through assimilation then I doubt it is defecting if Roman culture is bigger than Greek culture and there is a sizeable garrison there.
Eliezar

Here, here! Culture is quite playable and has plenty of historical justification.

Just in our lifetimes, the Soviet Empire dissolved before our eyes. In ancient times, garrisons would often change sides, depending on the highest bidder, and the expectation of final victory. In Afghanistan today, many tribes (cities) changed sides to join with the stronger culture. They just flipped.

Remember, you warmongers: No one has ever conquered the globe and then held it. Genghis came close, but couldn't hold it. Conversely, the French lost their wars of European conquest, but the spread of their Republican culture changed everything. Alexander couldn't hold his empire either, but the Greek culture dominated for hundreds of years.

The more I think about Civ3, the more I like it, and the more I appreciate its historical parallels.

 

[Peteus]

Why would the Forbidden palace have any effect whatever on flipping? It's NOT A CAPITAL. Capital proximity is what effects flips (yours and theirs).

Firaxis (I think in the Civilopedia?) say that "The FP provides all of the benefits of a second palace". It's the palace that is important - the capital is just the city that houses the palace.

This is just another example of the problem I and others keep restating with culture flips. I think that building a temple, marketplace, etc. helps. I observe that proximity to the enemy palace seems to be a problem, and assume that proximity to my palace (and hence my FP) helps. I suspect that the culture the city accumulated for the enemy and the amount they have accumulated for me make a difference. The game help and/or manual state that the courthouse, WLTKD, and cultural superiority help. A Firaxis developer stated that a garrison helps. People in the forums believe that culture income of nearby cities plays a part. (I don't.) Etc, etc.
Yet all of these souces have proven less than completely reliable. So I capture a city that I know is at risk, and am willing to do whatever is necessary to keep it from flipping - but I have no idea of the best thing(s) to do! It may be possible to argue that it's realistic, but that's beside the point. It isn't fun, so it's a bad design.

One other point that I've made before - the cities that flip back are almost always old core cities. If I'm losing my old core cities, the game is over (or I did something stupid.) So this knife does not cut both ways. I have lost ~50 cities to flipping, and have never had one city that the AI captured flip back to me!

 

[Polonius]

Originally posted by Peteus
Firaxis (I think in the Civilopedia?) say that "The FP provides all of the benefits of a second palace". It's the palace that is important - the capital is just the city that houses the palace.

You are dead right about the description of the FP - and I think that Firaxis have confused people by saying "all" the benefits. But I think you are wrong about your assessment that It's the palace that's important. I think it's true for the majority of benefits but not flipping - where they make a clear distinction that it's Capitals that count. The terms are NOT interchangeable.

You can only have ONE capital. And that's the one that has your actual place, NOT your Forbidden Palace. The factor that affects flipping is very clearly stated as being your capital - or theirs - and not the location of palaces as such. All palaces give benefits to corruption etc (I forget the full list) but only fully fledged Capitals give any flipping benefits. At least that my reading of the rules.

I sympathise with people who find the rules confusing, and who would like more transparent games, but I think that Civ3 is at it's very heart a game of chance, possibility and probability not certainty. There are other games with much simpler rule bases for those who prefer a greater degree of predictability. I like Civ3 as it is.

I'm not trying to insult or belittle people who find Civ3 perplexing or annoying (I've found some of it pretty hard to figure myself). I'm just saying "this is how it seems to be, folks. These are some workarounds - and these are bits you are just going to have to live with".

Anyway, good luck to you all with your battles. I hope that you can wring at least some satisfaction out of the game. I've loved it.

 

[Peteus]

Polonius, I do love randomness. I have no problem with things like Pikemen killing the odd tank. What I need in order to understand the game is to know what the factors involved are. You and I both have to make a lot of assumptions, because Firaxis hasn't given us clear enough information. That's just annoying. I'm sure we're both wrong on some of our assumptions too, which means we're doing things that are stupid (or at least a waste of time) because we think they work. Not my idea of fun.
Even if I could figure out what works and what doesn't, and eventually learn to deal with it, I'd be happy. But that's just impossible. The game is too complicated to do a significant test on something like this, unless you took it on as a full time job! Too many variables, and not enough basic info to start with. (As fun as that sounds, I don't have the time.)

 

[Gatlin]

Originally posted by cutiestar
Firstly this is not a civilisation simulator, so drop the word "REALISTIC" please.

LOL!!! Not a civilization simulator? I must have bought the wrong game then, I thought I was getting Civilization3, and not FantasyWorldBuilder3.

But on topic, I'm not sure about the city-flipping all that much, It was supposed to be easier to have happen post patch, but in my experience, nothing has changed, even with a huge culture lead on chieftain.