Don't raze that city
- Thread starter McBain
- Start date
yeah - only recently have i found razing cities helpful - but a couple of times i have tried a half-assed invassion of an enemy's continent, take two or three cities, and then realize that i can't resupply them fast enough - so i disband all but one, pull my troops back to the one, and try and make a stand - someimte, you have to disband that one too - but at least you arn't giving them back to the enemy - don't know if it gives you a rep hit though - but it shouldn't
Richard III
Duke of Gloucester
It never occurred to me that there WAS a rep hit from razing.
How unfair!
How unfair!
Catt
Emperor
With version 1.21f you can disband a city (just use right click). You won't get any workers / settlers / other assets as a result of disbanding.
It's unclear exactly what the effects of disbanding a city are. Razing apparently does affect reputation (according to a reasonable interpretation of the manual); it would seem like an obvious exploit to be able to take the city (rather than raze) and then disband immediately without a rep hit -- and the game designers have not missed most obvious exploits. Neither the Readme to 1.21f nor any Firaxian (to my knowledge) has spoken as to the affects of disbanding. Others on these forums have stated / speculated that the unhappiness contained in a disbanded city is transferred to other cities in your empire. I don't know if that's accurate or not.
One thing is for certain, if you have an extra settler handy, and you intend to raze anyway, you might be better off taking the enemy city, moving your settler into position (taking advantage of road / RR movement bonus), abandoning the city, and finally building a new city with your settler (can be done all in the same turn). I have used this tactic once before when I was racing against the 2050 retirement limit and domination was the only possible way to win the game. I couldn't afford to leave units behind to garrison a city of foreign nationals (with a high chance of overthrowing my occupation force), had to press on with the attack at all costs (and so I effectively was razing large cities, something I almost never do
).ufftyuwe
Freedom Fighter
yes
I knew it when I played my first game already
GeneralTacticus
Warlord
This wouldn't actually work all that well, as when you disband a city you get no workers from it, which are a big incentive for razing.
T-hawk
Transcend
It is definitely true. Unhappiness caused by drafting and whipping is transferred to the closest city that you control. ("Stop the aggression" and "Give peace a chance" unhappiness doesn't transfer.) It can be useful if the unhappiness transfers to a core city of yours that can absorb it without missing a beat, but do that several times and you'll have a problem.
Catt
Emperor
I'm not saying that it's not true -- I just have never done an experiment to confirm it, nor have I seen anyone detail an experiment or other evidence that they've done to confirm it. How do you know for certain that it's true? It may very well be true!
Would just be nice to know for certain.OTOH, if the "Stop the Agression" and "Give Peace a Chance" don't transfer, then abandoning rather than razing becomes more of an exploit than it might otherwise be -- assuming you have a settler ready as I suggested, you effectively claim the land as yours without having to deal with XX number of foreign citizens whose main complaint is "Stop the Agression" or "Give Peace a Chance."
Similar threads
