Razing Cities

[Hygro]

You do slaughter a lot of people, because half the population becomes wokers, and half dissapears. Also, A size 20 city has more than doulbe a size 10 city in population terms, so if made a new city with the slaves, it would be less than half.

 

[Ronald]

Razing or not razing???

For me it depends on my ultimate goal:

If I go for early conquest, I raze cities to get the free workers which help me to make roads or railroads for faster moving.

If I need dilpomatoc victory, I don't raze cities.

For HOF attempts (just leaving one city for the AI) it depends whether the city is well placed or the workers I get is more valuable

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by williem
Do you think that if the American army had emptied a city in Afghanistan while they were fighting the Taliban, that anyone back in America would even know about it?

Originally posted by willem
Razing doesn't necessarily mean that you slaughter the citizens of a city, it just means that you send them packing, and looking for a new home. Cities have been abandoned since they've been around, somewhere in the world there's probably one being left behind right now, due to lack of work or maybe some hydroelectric project.

My real question is, what happens to the people who leave? They just "disappear" huh?

Originally posted by Tassadar
Beleive me, i raze 95 % of the time since that, i will only keep the one with wonder like pyramid.

Ah, now heres the "majority." Then again, I am really quite suprised at how many people dont raze cities. I thought everyone razed for Tassadars reasons.

 

[zebomba2]

Instead of razing the cities, give them to the other civs. The AI has no clue on how to deal with the 10 cities-10civs buffer zone situation.

 

[Migraith]

talking about razing and taking over cities: at which point is the risk of flipping gone? I seem to remeber two messages, the one sounding like "your troops have quelled (one?) resiting citizens" or similar, the other one "resistance in XY has stopped".

can I leave the city w.o. troops after the seconde message? or is it just an indicator for the current situation with a strong garrison inside town?

regards

M.

 

[Yndy]

I see that a lot of poeple said they won't raze. If i thing i can hold on to a city i won't raze it either but I can see at least two situations when I'd raze.
One is in the Ancient age attacks when I can't keep troops in cities recently taken just because i don't have that many. So i raze and replace the city. At that time the workers are also very useful and razing is a great way to get workers in the right location.

Second is in industrial time when i do a massive attack with tanks. As i take some 3 cities per turn and don't have enough units to police many cities i just raze them and replace later.

Now i don't raze when I have a short term campaign where i take 2-3 cities and ask for peace as i can suppress the flip risk in a couple of cities.

I don't raze either when i am attacking to kill a civ for good. The risk of flip will dissapear as i finish off the civ.

To Migraith: A resisting citizen is twice more eager to flip than a non-resisting one. When resistance stops you can additionally use the hurry production order. So when the resistance has stopped the chance of flip is halved (as opposed to all of them being resistors). But the city still has a chance to flip if you don't keep a garrison. If i don't raze from the start my tactic is to end resistance asap and then take everyone out and send it somewhere else except for a couple of attack units which i park by the city so that if/when it flips i can take it back in the same turn.

 

[Migraith]

@Yndy

thx a lot! is there any period of time/event after which the city cannot flip any more? or is the chance given (even if low) until the end of the game?

let's assimilate them ;o)

kind regards

M.

 

[Yndy]

Migraith,

Assuming that no foreign city own any of 21 tiles around the city the chance of the flip relates to population with a lot of modifiers.
The city won't flip if:

- the civ whose population you have in the city dissapears. This could be different of the civ you were fighting. Say China took one Indian town and you took that town from China. The city could flip to India until you take out India.

- the foreign citizen(s) are assimilated by your population. To manage that you have to keep the city for a longer period compared to the period the city belonged to the other civ. I have not seen this documented but basically the cities you take in the ancient times are assimilated while the ones you take later in the game never do that.

The best strategy to minimise flip on the long run is to build workers out of the city until it reaches pop 1. Then garrison there a couple of units and your flip risk is minimal. Building some culture helps only if your accumulated culture exceeds the city's culture under its former ruling. So rushing cultural buildings in the enemy's capital is pretty much useless although it could help for his newly founded cities.

 

[Dragon67]

In early game, you have to raze them, it happens automatically, since many of them has no culture points. But does it harm the reputation if you do not have other choices?

 

[Yndy]

Yes it does. The good part is that the rep hit you take from razing cities only make others a little upset and the civ who's city you razed permanently furious. But it does not affect your ability to pay gpt.