lets not raze our own city

[johncross21]

I had a huge continent having wiped out the eygptians and exiled them to an island. I realised that right in the middle of this enormous land mass was a narrow istmus.

joy of joys, put a city there and my ships could pass straight through from north to west. I would dminate the globe. I got my settler ready

damn, there was already a captured eygptian city two squares away so my settler was stumped

never mind lets whip the city down from twelve to two by building catapults but it takes time...

then I have to give the city back to the eygptians as a present.

damn and blast I walked back into the city with no damage inflicted and no option to raze

never mind give it back to the eygptians and give them a scout to man the defences.

invade, but for **** sake, the scout runs off

I could give them a archer

but reload ... lets not raze our own city

 

[DNK]

WB? Kind of cheap, but it just puts you at more of a disadvantage, I suppose. I do wish you could disband cities, but perhaps that's not so realistic?

 

[Ecofarm]

China displaced thousands of people to build their 3-gorges dam/city.

 

[DNK]

Yeah, I'm aware of modern examples, but I'm just not sure, outside of highly powerful regimes, that it's realistic. Maybe only allowing it under certain civics?

 

[LordRahl]

The fact that you can't disband the cities makes the choice whether ro raze it or keep it after capture much more important.

 

[biggamer132]

Yeah, I'm aware of modern examples, but I'm just not sure, outside of highly powerful regimes, that it's realistic. Maybe only allowing it under certain civics?

The Romans and the Persians used to relocate tribes and different ethnic groups all the time, not to rulers burning down their own cities when they got too rebellious. There's plenty of historical precedent for it, and I don't see why you shouldn't be able to get rid of a badly placed city.

 

[DNK]

I'm thinking a tribe is a bit smaller than a million-man city.

 

[n003lb]

I agree with the idea of a civic option allowing it. Under somthing like a monarchy or police state, the government has absolute power to do just about anything they want. You may get some rampant unhappines in nearby cities, where the refugees are relocated to, but it should be doable. However, under a representative government, such as representation or US, the option should be gone.

Another way of doing it would be to allow the population of a city to migrate to another location, so long as the city isn't too big. Maybe make it so a pop of 10 or less can "relocate," not disband. Instead, you would simply designate another location for the city, and then over time, the city would move to the new location. Not sure how that could be implemented, but I bet it's possible.

 

[johncross21]

I wanted to move a city for engineering reasons. I dislike Civs asumptions about the inevitabilty of progress and the benefits of permanent growth -

if i can build cities I should be able to move them -

However the historical precedents are not good even for the US -

Bikini Atoll - population forcibly removed so US could test an atomic bomb

Three Gorges dam will deplace 1.6m people

Pol Pot evacuated 2m people from urban centres



finally why can't I plant a forest even I build a factory

 

[Bradlius]

Another way of doing it would be to allow the population of a city to migrate to another location, so long as the city isn't too big. Maybe make it so a pop of 10 or less can "relocate," not disband. Instead, you would simply designate another location for the city, and then over time, the city would move to the new location. Not sure how that could be implemented, but I bet it's possible.

I think in Civ I you could build settlers and settle them in other cities, to increase population. If you could combine that ability with being able to whip settlers and reduce your population to nothing, you could sort of relocate, without too much loss of population. Just whip, whip, whip out settlers till you city disappears, then move the settlers to your new location and build a city, and then increase the population with your "refugees." It would take several turns, but it would have the effect of limiting this to a certain civic (Slavery).

 

[n003lb]

If memeory serves me, settlers could actually join cities al the way into civ III, but I may be mistaken. I'm certain they could do it in II.

Does anyone know if there's a way to mod the ability to whip a level 1 city? You would have to be real carful and not accidentally whip a city out of existance. Maybe there could be a way to allow this type of whipping only on a settler. This would allow us to atleast have a way of razing a city we don't want.

Just a thought.