razing cities after you take them over

[freakboy]

Burning the ground...

I wish I could have a slash and burn retreat. Take over a bunch of cities and then raze them as I retreat back across the landscape. That would rock.

It'd be like russia vs napoleon!

Anyway, is there a good way to do this? It'd be handy especially once you go over the city limit.

Freakboy

 

[GreenLantern]

Originally posted by freakboy
Burning the ground...

I wish I could have a slash and burn retreat. Take over a bunch of cities and then raze them as I retreat back across the landscape. That would rock.

It'd be like russia vs napoleon!

Anyway, is there a good way to do this? It'd be handy especially once you go over the city limit.

Freakboy

Is there a city limit? I've never noticed one.

You can starve cities down to 1-2, then build a worker/settler to disband. But it takes time.

 

[freakboy]

I should have said the corruption/city limit (depends on map size)

See some of the other threads around here for why this is annoying.

Personally, I think it's pretty cool. It keeps one side from steamrolling over everyone.

Greg

 

[GreenLantern]

Originally posted by freakboy
I should have said the corruption/city limit (depends on map size)

See some of the other threads around here for why this is annoying.

Personally, I think it's pretty cool. It keeps one side from steamrolling over everyone.

Greg

Oh, right. I have noticed the corruption. Question, though. Is it based on the number of cities, or simply the distance from one of your two capitals? I agree it is cool, it makes "take over the world" a much less dominant strategy (I think it was out of balance in Civ2).

But I have yet to see cities on my own continent that are so unproductive that they aren't worth the upkeep cost for the territory grab. I want to lock down as many future resources as possible.