evacuation

artemisarrow

Warlord
Joined
Dec 1, 2003
Messages
181
not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but i think it would be a great idea to have the option of evacuating a city like for an on coming army or bombing or disaster. instead of spending 50 turns making settlers or workers, there could be an option to evacuate the city and that would creat several refugee units that would hold the cities population, but leaving thecity pop to 1. players can then move the units to saftey and other cities to help populate or wait out to see about recapturing the cities, this was done throughout history, especially in russia armies marched to st petes and the russians left it desolate so the captors would be in peril for the winters.
refugee units only option would be to populate or repopulate cities.:egypt:
 
I kind of like that idea. the only thing I would suggest is that you could only create refugees for your citizens, otherwise, i would be too easy to prevent culture flips.

For example, Russia takes a German size 15 city. Russia should not be able to create refugees and rush them back to Russia so that the city is no a size 1 and will begin being populated by Russians.
 
Originally posted by artemisarrow
not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but i think it would be a great idea to have the option of evacuating a city like for an on coming army or bombing or disaster. instead of spending 50 turns making settlers or workers, there could be an option to evacuate the city and that would creat several refugee units that would hold the cities population, but leaving thecity pop to 1. players can then move the units to saftey and other cities to help populate or wait out to see about recapturing the cities, this was done throughout history, especially in russia armies marched to st petes and the russians left it desolate so the captors would be in peril for the winters.
refugee units only option would be to populate or repopulate cities.:egypt:

This sounds similar to, but different than the option of abandoning the city. Perhaps in the pop-up right click menu on a city, include the choice "Evacuate refugees" that would give you a special refugee unit.

This refugee unit would represent a single population point and would only be able to join cities, not found them. It would have no offense, a single point of defense (refugees are known to carry knives, cooking pots, etc.), and a single movement point (refugees don't move very fast at all).

You would receive one refugee for every citizen of your nationality in the city, up to the point of leaving a single citizen (have to have somebody to act as caretakers).

A strategy for use of this could include evacuating a city in front of an advancing enemy or doing so in front of a soon-to-erupt volcano or other such natural disaster that might be added.
 
I was about to post a thread about refugees, then I saw this one. It's a good idea.

Refugees, like settlers, would retain their nationality. So if you made refugees out of foreign citizens they would stay foreign when you added them to other cities.

Also, this way you could deport foreign nationals (trade them like workers from your capital) or bring in immigrants if your population is not growing fast enough for your liking.

I think refugees should created like a drafted unit. Free, but only one per turn. That way you wouldn't have huge cities producing tanks up until the last minute, only to flee down to one pop the turn before it is captured and build up another city farther from your troops.

Also, perhaps call the 1 pop refugee unit an "immigrant" unit that can be produced any time. Under a mobilization economy (at war) you can also create "refugee" units containing 2 population.

Taking it a bit further, perhaps civil disorder automatically randomly creates immigrant units that attempt to flee your country. You could accept foreign immigrants if they make it to your borders or seal your borders and turn them away. This may make for some tedious "refugee round-ups" though, so it would have to be implemented properly.

I like refugee units. :goodjob:
 
It's a good idea. Abandoning city now just wipes the city off the face of the earth and the population disappears. An immigrant-unit that can't do anything but immigrate is a great idea.

@pirate: I and many others have suggested in the topic called Civil War that civil disorder and resisters should have the possibility of creating revolutionaries. I think this is along the lines of your suggestion about the immigrants, but perhaps more extreme. They could actually both be implemented. Some unhappy people would simply leave and create another civ, some would try to overthrow you. Anyway, check the thread out if you haven't already. It's in this same forum.
 
Thanks! I'll check out the civil war thread.

I like refugees being non-combat. Refugees are huge issues in any real world conflict - they may be non-combat but they can strain the resources and patience of neighboring countries.
 
I really like this idea! It doesn't seem to hard to implement and would create a greater reality. After all, America wouldn't be 1/10 its size if it wasn't for immigrants and no Civ game has ever taken that into account.
 
I like the idea but when you capture a city of size one it is automatically destroyed.
 
yay i got responses!
lol
mmm u have a pont about the one pop cities being distroyed, i think they should get rid of that period
refugee units are a great way of protecting your people, also it can be almost an exodus, like if your nation is being totally invaded u can try to evacuate your people to another safer place on earth, or a strong point in one turn, i hate it when i have huge cities that get taken and there is nothing i can do to save the people
 
Sounds good to me:
I also think that you shouldn´t be able to just raze cities especially when they´ve reached a certain size. It´s not realistic that you can simply let 2.5 million people disappear - they should a least become refugees who could be added to your cities in small "portions". Democracies should not be able to raze cities at all - genocides rarely pass parliament debates...
 
ya razing cities a certain size that big is really not realistic, if anything they should be sacked or get tribute payed
 
I've been thinking about evacuation/abandoning cities ever since the topic came up in the Civil Wars thread. As Shyrramar pointed out to me over there, having to manually build workers to move a city's populance elsewhere is very tedious (in Civ 2 you couldn't just abandon a large city the way you can in Civ 3). But on the other hand, having all the people from a large city just "vanish" isn't very realistic.

The problem with refugee/immigrant units that are free to build, however (and especially if you can build more than one per turn) is that it become relatively easy to move a large city over to an adjacent tile in a short amount of time. Simply build a settler, then abandon the city or whatever you need to do to make all its people into refugees/immigrants, then settle them all into the new city that the setller build right next door. You wouldn't do it for one of your own cities, since you'd lose all the improvements, but it might be somewhat of an exploit in a newly conquered city, especially since you could send the refugees off to your core, where they'd be unlikely to cause a culture flip, and bring in immigrants of your own nationality to instantly have a large new city of your own. This sort of thing should of course be possible, since forced relocations have happened throughout history, but it shouldn't be too easy, and I fear that might be the result of population-units that could be instantly built/drafted.

Here's one possible solution: refugees/immigrants can only join cities that have a granary, and they deplete some of the food from the granary on the turn they join the city. That would limit you from building a city too quickly using these units: once the granary was depleted, you'd no longer be able to add them (you could still add regular Workers and Settlers) and instead you'd get a message like "This city does not have enough food for these refugees - they must look elsewhere" The amount that each refugee depleted from the granary would have to be playtested, but it should be high enough to keep from from instantly building large cities with these units, i.e., a couple units should probably deplete the entire granary. And of course, adding refugees/immigrants to a city would slow down how fast the city would grow by normal means, since the granary would have to get refilled first.

Hopefully, this would keep people from using these types of units exploitativelly to move people around at will and instantly make huge new cities, while at the same time allowing the concepts of immigration, citizens fleeing from war zones, and evacuation/abandonment of unwanted cities to be in the game. If Civ 4 allows food to be moved around from city-to-city, as many people hope, then these units (workers, too) should eat food each turn (as settlers/engineers did in Civ 2) to prevent the exploit of saving a city from starvation by simply making refugees and then having them rejoin the city once enough food was available.
 
I think if a city is starving some of the inhabitants SHOULD become refugees. I think it's a good way to save a city from starvation. And I don't think people would "store" population as immigrants/refugees because they could easily work them in another city. Some sort of upkeep would be in order. Or instead of upkeep, make them vulnerable to disease on any terrain. Maybe this could even change per age (self sufficient, but succeptible to disease early on, but requiring upkeep in modern times)

My solution to the "vanishing metropolis" was to only let you create one immigrant/refugee per turn (like drafting citizens) and eliminate the option of instant abandonment.
 
I once added a new unit to my game that functioned in this capacity. It worked like a settler, but without the ability to build a city. I set it up to take a few turns and use 5 citizens. It had the ability to then go to another city and be re-converted. I never really followed through, but maybe one of you sees more potential.
I like the refugee idea.
Of course reducing the population also weakens the cities defense, so walls became a must, etc.
 
Originally posted by Pirate

My solution to the "vanishing metropolis" was to only let you create one immigrant/refugee per turn (like drafting citizens) and eliminate the option of instant abandonment.
Sure, but when I suggested removing instant abandonment in the Civil War thread, Shyrramar reminded me what a pain it was to get rid of a city you didn't want in Civ 2.

Just thought of something: what if the citizens in a city you abandon don't just retain their nationality, but are actually units belonging to whatever civ's nationality they are. In other words, if you capture a size 12 city from England, you can't just abandon it and get twelve people to move elsewhere in your empire, instead, 12 English units are created. If you're still at war with England, you can of course capture those units, and then join them to other cities in your empire, but capturing them if you've already made peace with England is naturally an act of war. This doesn't address any issues related to abandoning cities you built in the first place, but is seems like a realistic concept related to captured cities. If you abandon a formerly English city, it'd be natural that the people pack up and head back to England to resettle, rather then settling elsewhere in your empire. Any citizens of your own nationality would of course be yours to do with as you see fit.
 
Yes! There are tradeoffs for creating refugees - lower defense, less taxes, science, and production, vulnerability of population. It's a good tradeoff - they are cheap or free, but they sap other resources while they are wandering about and need military protection.

Someone should do an actual refugee mod and playtest it a bit.
 
There should also be a situation where if people are unhappy in your country but are happy in a country that you have trading connections with, immigrant land or sea units should autimatically be created and move towards one of the other civs cities. They would remove population from your city and add it to the one they go to, but they would retain your nationality. This could also happen within you civ, people moving into happier areas. You could have the option of stopping them with your soldiers (it could work like the capture worker function) or you could just let them go. If you stopped them it would make your people unhappy and would not be allowed in a Democracy or Republic.
 
if you recapture the city you lost, you send the refugees back to thier homes, you should be able to rebuild the improvments lost/destroyed rather quickly
 
i think another thing to look at with refugee units is that , A if a nation captures my roman city of twelve, maybe it might be possible that some of the population can get away as a regugee unit and i can try to get them to anotehr city for protection

im sure it has happened in history alot where a city is being captured and a few of the people get away in the process to try to flee to their neighboring nation. i mean if babylon captures jerusalem, cant the jew try to flee to fight another day?? haha ok where did this idea go....
 
Originally posted by judgement
Just thought of something: what if the citizens in a city you abandon don't just retain their nationality, but are actually units belonging to whatever civ's nationality they are.

This is a fabulous idea! I have always wondered why people don't get upset if I abandon a city with 3,000,000 citizens. I know I would be angry if my city was burned on the ground by my government and all the people would be annihilated. Well, in that case I wouldn't be angry for a very long time, now would I? Well, perhaps that's a bit off topic now... :rolleyes:
 
Top Bottom