Razing VS Capturing

[haphazard]

I will either raze or capture depending on the situation or my mood.

But one additional reason for razing is to raze a city to leave a "hole" on the continent. If there is an unpopulated area of the continent, the AI will start building settlers and start walking them to this hole to found a replacement city. Even the idiot AI that you are currently at war with will switch a few cities to settlers and send them towards you with only the token 1 unit guard. Talk about easy slaves. (Note that enemy workers will make a run for it as you get close to them, but the settlers will just march blindly into the bulk of your forces if it sees a spot that needs colonizing.)

So I collect several slaves from my opponent and his equally stupid allies. As for the civs that I am not at war with, I can box those approaching settlers off with my ever growing supply of slave labor, and save them until a war opens up with that civ.

 

[egroen]

As you start getting up in the difficulty levels, the AI typically has much stronger culture than you -- especially if you are close to his capital, I would raze most of the time.

If I do hold on, I starve them down as fast as I can.

 

[Lexicus]

Razing has an impact on your reputation.
I have a question: what about capturing then immediately abandoning? Will that affect your rep as well?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Neither does affect trading reputation. It is the attitudes that suffer. Both from razing and abandoning.

 

[Nergal]

I must admit I prefer holding onto enemy cities just because of the rep hit. Providing I can wipe them out totally ,quickly enough, they wont flip. Its only when I get one of those towns that flips with about 9,000 units in it do I raze it, or if I am on a total rampage.
Quick question and sort of in keeping. Sometimes I go lenient on an AI and dont destroy them utterly for being cheeky. I might leave them with one or two useless villages to live in. Especially if they have island settlements, rip them off for all their techs and cash then leave them on little 1 tile islands works for me. Sometimes they get really cheeky and wont cough up any techs or cash, thats when they have them. In cases like that I see no alternative but to wipe them off the planet. After totally wiping a Civ the other Civs seem to be more annoyed with me that normal. It might be that I've simply expanded a lot but is there a rep hit associated with genocide?

 

[ALA Gator]

I typically don't raze because I generally conquer the entire civ. In my current game, I am going to raze a few of the cities because they surround the only source of Iron on my continent (primary reason for this war) and I can't have them flip.

 

[Lexicus]

Neither does affect trading reputation. It is the attitudes that suffer. Both from razing and abandoning.

Yeah, I meant attitudes, my bad.

Dang it...so my 'foolproof' strategy of taking, then abandoning cities isn't foolproof after all...

 

[Elephantium]

I generally prefer razing for two reasons: Slaves and leverage in peace talks.

Still, I'll keep cities if there's a good reason (wonder, quick lux access, etc).