also Half would be Overkill especially mid and late game 122÷2 (highest Pop number i reached) we are talking about 61 population that would be added to the nearest city not sure but probably that would be a starvation massacre for a long time >.>
if you say .5% i wouldn't be opposed as you don't totally massacre a city (although i think the Americans where quite good at that but even then they didn't massacre all )
There may be some refugees. The plan is that if you are known to raze cities then they will flee the cities you are approaching before you get there, reducing the population of the city. Also when you raze the city the number of captive - civilians you get and refugees/partisans created will depend on your/their tech level and your/their world view settings.
Maybe the city razing should expand to include an option to pursue, hunt down and slaughter off the citizens or let those escaping get away to become refugees.
Maybe the city razing should expand to include an option to pursue, hunt down and slaughter off the citizens or let those escaping get away to become refugees.
Or more basic:Raze and capture population as one option, raze and local genozide as the other. One giving nice capties, the other maybe increasing war weariness in your oponents. Fear is powerfull andall that.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.