Do you have minimum requirements that must be met not to raze a city?

[Artifex1]

What are your minimum requirements that have to be met in order for you not to raze a captured city?

 

[ZeroOne]

Well, I raze captured cities if the enemy could take them back soon. Otherwise puppeting is always a good choice. Of course if the city has some valuable resource(s) within its borders I might reconsider even if I'd otherwise raze it.

 

[Trickster7135]

I never raze until I have a settler there, as I like to work the land while I can with captured workers.

I also never raze if the city has an important wonder.

 

[Sonereal]

I don't raze if its on a river, near a luxury/strategic resource I need, or has a Wonder.

 

[biohazard72]

I raze in a few situations:

1. Early game, if it's a small city and nearby I'll raze/resettle to get a better city site.
2. If it's not defensible to counterattack.
3. If it's on a continent I don't intend to settle (Note: this is usually due to laziness).
4. If it transfers me from unhappy to very unhappy and I'm not immediately set up to rectify that.

 

[aimlessgun]

I raze in a few situations:

1. Early game, if it's a small city and nearby I'll raze/resettle to get a better city site.
2. If it's not defensible to counterattack.
3. If it's on a continent I don't intend to settle (Note: this is usually due to laziness).
4. If it transfers me from unhappy to very unhappy and I'm not immediately set up to rectify that.

What he said.

Unless it's putting into very unhappy, it will usually be worth it to as least puppet the city, since it will give you a gold profit and science to boot.

 

[zimmah]

i usually always raze, except if i have A LOT of extra happiness.

i never annex it.

but to be honest, i think i should look for wonders first before razing it the next time, i think i might in fact have razed some wonders by accident, haha.

 

[gareththegeek]

What are your minimum requirements that have to be met in order for you not to raze a captured city?

Yeah, if the game doesn't show me the raze button

Seriously though I try to avoid razing cities if possible because it seems to really tick the AI off and they have an explosive temper!

Then again what doesn't tick them off in this game

 

[Martin Alvito]

Wonder and luxury are good reasons to not raze.

If you're running a Happy surplus, it's usually a good idea to annex size 2-3 cities, build a Settler, then raze rather than raze outright. This is particularly true for a Warrior rush; anything that isn't a capital can generally be converted to a controlled city in 15 turns at low cost.

 

[CultureManiac]

Wonders are definitely a reason to keep a city but I don't see luxuries in the same way. If I raze and rebuild a city, I lose the wonder, but not the luxury. If the luxury is just outside the new city's first ring of hexes, you can always buy it - just make sure you have a settler standing by to rebuild the turn it turns to ash.

Apart from wonders, the only other reason to keep a city is if has very large borders and you don't want to lose that area to a neighouring civ while the city is rebuilding.

Small cities grow quickly, though, especially if you have a maritime ally, so you can burn and rebuild a 5-6 pop city in relatively little time.

 

[eric_]

i think i might in fact have razed some wonders by accident, haha.

Heh...would be cool if wonders built in razed cities remained on the map in ruined form, and became a kind of ancient ruins/natural wonder hybrid (happiness bonus upon discovery, original wonder bonus if you bring it within your borders).

As for razing cities, I actually rarely do it. Annexation typically only occurs if I've captured a city on a coast I didn't previously occupy and need a navy in those waters or if I need production on a newly-"colonized" continent. If I have a huge surplus of happiness, sometimes I'll annex until it's down around 6 or 8.