Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[captain camel]

Hello, new to the forum, and somewhat new to the game. I have been going over some of the articles and read through a game, and I noticed that in war, players often raze cities they have captured, and then set up a new city right next to it. What is the purpose of this instead of just holding onto the original city? Does it have to do with the captured city's likelihood to flip, or something else?

Thanks

 

[vmxa]

Basically it is about the flip, but also not having to leave troops in the town to pacify it.

 

[EMan]

Also, the AI does not have much good sense when it comes to the placement of cities.

 

[Scandal]

Can mayan javelin throwers enslave barbarians? Also, does it matter if unit attacks or defends to enslave opponent?

 

[darski]

Can mayan javelin throwers enslave barbarians? Also, does it matter if unit attacks or defends to enslave opponent?

Yes on barbs - you can add to your workforce in amazing ways at change of age uprisings.

No, you can enslave on both attack and defense.

 

[Spoonwood]

Yes on barbs - you can add to your workforce in amazing ways at change of age uprisings.

No, you can enslave on both attack and defense.

Especially on Chieftain.

 

[Takhisis]

If you're doing Chieftain you're not really playing.

 

[EMan]

@Takhisis: Why don't you try your "play" in the Civ3 HOF at Chieftain level to see if you're "not really playing". You might be surprised.

 

[Spoonwood]

@Takhisis: Why don't you try your "play" in the Civ3 HOF at Chieftain level to see if you're "not really playing". You might be surprised.

BUMP. Chieftain often makes for the hardest tables for the HoF to get a number 1 spot, and sometimes it can even come as a challenge to get in the top 5, or even on the table for a particular victory condition on a particular map size. In many ways Sid HoF actually comes as easier than Chieftain HoF.

 

[EMan]

While I agree with you regarding the top spots in the HOF Chieftain Tables, when it comes to Sid-level, I think ye be way too modest!

Sid level requires much extensive skill in Diplomacy, Trading & Military strategy & tactics (that Chieftain doesn't).........Just to SURVIVE!! (Probably more Luck, too!)

Maybe you're just becoming an "Old Hand" at Sid Level, but I'm impressed by your accomplishments. (And Moonsinger may be looking at an "Heir Apparent", wherever she is!)

And, yes, I'm hoping you will educate me more about Sid-level play when the time comes!

 

[Spoonwood]

While I agree with you regarding the top spots in the HOF Chieftain Tables, when it comes to Sid-level, I think ye be way too modest!

Sid level requires much extensive skill in Diplomacy, Trading & Military strategy & tactics (that Chieftain doesn't).........Just to SURVIVE!! (Probably more Luck, too!)

Maybe you're just becoming an "Old Hand" at Sid Level, but I'm impressed by your accomplishments. (And Moonsinger may be looking at an "Heir Apparent", wherever she is!)

And, yes, I'm hoping you will educate me more about Sid-level play when the time comes!

I just meant Sid HoF vs. Chieftain HoF . I do agree that beating Sid requires a good amount of skill in general. But, as an example of what I'm talking about, take a look at the small Diplomatic tables. To get the 3rd spot on the Sid tables, you just need to win. So, you could play an 80% archipelago map with a good food start, say with the Byzantines. Granted that's not necessarily easy, but I do think it comes as easier than say getting a sub 380 diplomatic win on Chieftain small... or at least that the Sid start doesn't require as much luck/use of MapFinder.

 

[FrozenSphere]

In the Civ 3 info center it says this:

You may perform small-scale ethnic cleansing by choosing which population unit is used when building Settlers of Workers

How do I actually make this choice? I have a city that I captured from the Russians and it has a population of 1. It is about to grow to become population 2, so I will have a Russian and Persian citizen. I am also building a worker, and it's scheduled to complete at the same time as the population growth. How do I make sure the russian citizen gets used up? I then want to abandon the city in order to build another one right next to it, which will be a better placement.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

In the Civ 3 info center it says this:



How do I actually make this choice? I have a city that I captured from the Russians and it has a population of 1. It is about to grow to become population 2, so I will have a Russian and Persian citizen. I am also building a worker, and it's scheduled to complete at the same time as the population growth. How do I make sure the russian citizen gets used up? I then want to abandon the city in order to build another one right next to it, which will be a better placement.

I think what the quote says is simply false. You cannot chose which citizen is picked. It'll just be the last one.

Although, I might be wrong too ... There have been discussions about this, so a search could definitely pay off and shed some more light.

From what article is the quote? If it is a War academy article, then there should be a link at the bottom which say something like "Discuss this article". If you follow it, you'll be taken to the thread where the article was originally posted.


ETA: Come to think of it ... Can you actually abandon a city into a worker? I know you can abandon a city into a settler. What you could try is to let the worker build complete while the town is not growing and still at size one. That should give you exactly what you want: a Russian slave and an abandoned town.

ETA2: Yes, that ^^^ works.

 

[FrozenSphere]

I think what the quote says is simply false. You cannot chose which citizen is picked. It'll just be the last one.

Although, I might be wrong too ... There have been discussions about this, so a search could definitely pay off and shed some more light.

From what article is the quote? If it is a War academy article, then there should be a link at the bottom which say something like "Discuss this article". If you follow it, you'll be taken to the thread where the article was originally posted.


ETA: Come to think of it ... Can you actually abandon a city into a worker? I know you can abandon a city into a settler. What you could try is to let the worker build complete while the town is not growing and still at size one. That should give you exactly what you want: a Russian slave and an abandoned town.

ETA2: Yes, that ^^^ works.

Ok, it's from here:
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/infocenter
Try entering "population unit" into your browser's search, and it will take you to that quote that I posted.

And I looked at the bottom, and apparently there is indeed a forum thread about it, like you suggested, but no one has said anything in it. Here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=269561

Ok, I have not tried building the worker while the city is still at 1. Does it have to also be not growing for that to work? I'm gonna try it, thanks!

Also, I don't even know how to abandon a city into a settler. In my previous game I remember I abandoned a city but I didn't get anything out of it but ruins, if I recall correctly...

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Ok, it's from here:
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/infocenter
Try entering "population unit" into your browser's search, and it will take you to that quote that I posted.

And I looked at the bottom, and apparently there is indeed a forum thread about it, like you suggested, but no one has said anything in it. Here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=269561

Ok, I have not tried building the worker while the city is still at 1. Does it have to also be not growing for that to work? I'm gonna try it, thanks!

Also, I don't even know how to abandon a city into a settler. In my previous game I remember I abandoned a city but I didn't get anything out of it but ruins, if I recall correctly...

There are two methods for abandoning a city. One is to chose "Abandon city" from the context menu. The other is to build a settler (size 1 or 2) or a worker (size 1), while the city is not growing. Simply hire a scientist or tax collector to make sure that that is case. It can be tricky with agricultural civs, because of the food bonus in the city center.

 

[scratchthepitch]

There are two methods for abandoning a city. One is to chose "Abandon city" from the context menu. The other is to build a settler (size 1 or 2) or a worker (size 1), while the city is not growing. Simply hire a scientist or tax collector to make sure that that is case. It can be tricky with agricultural civs, because of the food bonus in the city center.

I didn't know that. Every time I tried abandoning a city by building a settler or worker, the unit wouldn't finish until the city had one extra pop more than needed to build the unit (it had the shields already, but just would sit there in the build cue, turn after turn). I guessed the game wouldn't let a player convert the last pop into a unit. Now that I think about it, those attempts must have all been tried with the city gaining pop, I never tried it with a stagnant pop.

Thanks

FrozenSphere

If you abandon a city right when you conquer it (using the pop-up asking if you want to keep the city), you should get a worker out of the deal. If you abandon after that (using the abandon command), you wont get the worker.

 

[FrozenSphere]

FrozenSphere

If you abandon a city right when you conquer it (using the pop-up asking if you want to keep the city), you should get a worker out of the deal. If you abandon after that (using the abandon command), you wont get the worker.

You don't "abandon" it when you conquer it, though, you raze it. Razing a city leads to other civs liking you less, which I'm trying to avoid. From another thread, apparently the change in attitude is permanent for every city razed.

This brings up another point. I think I incurred the attitude hit by abandoning it in the way that Lord Emsworth suggested. Hmmm...

 

[scratchthepitch]

You don't "abandon" it when you conquer it, though, you raze it. Razing a city leads to other civs liking you less, which I'm trying to avoid. From another thread, apparently the change in attitude is permanent for every city razed.

Yeah, raze is what I meant there, but was having one of those senile moments when I wrote that. I almost never raze a capture, even if I had decided it should be abandoned. I may keep the city around a few turns, or quite a few, before abandoning. Usually I have it build workers until the time comes.

This brings up another point. I think I incurred the attitude hit by abandoning it in the way that Lord Emsworth suggested. Hmmm...

Could be the game sees it as the same thing as a raze, but I don't know. The diplomatic aspects of Civ never interested me because they are so lame.

 

[Takhisis]

Destroy them as you go! Once Gandhi of all people conquered his own continent and then jumped across the sea to the continent a few tiles from my shores, he just went on destroying huge metropolises with high prodcutivity and wonders.

 

[darski]

I have noticed that the AI is more likely to raze cities lately. Just found it interesting.