Ships lost with City!

[benn]

When you take a city, all the naval units in it are destroyed. This makes sense if the city were blockaded, but in the game seems to always the case. This helps me always instead of the computer, but I wonder about it.
Just like the lost units when someone deposes you, Firaxis does not seem to like the idea of just displacing units one square. I think it would be a lot better if naval units "flee" the city and your land units "flee" from a city that revolts.

 

[damunzy]

Good point....While I think that the ships should get away I don't have any great military history knowledge to pull a reason, for or against escaping, from.

 

[Dark Sheer]

In a real life case, if you believe you will loose the city, usually you would have move the ship out already.

So, if you think you can win and do not remove your ship out of the port, then they are lost to the enemy. At least Civ3 destroy them and not give it to the enemy like artilery.

 

[benn]

Originally posted by Dark Sheer
In a real life case, if you believe you will loose the city, usually you would have move the ship out already.

My point exactly! This usually does not hurt the human player because we can predict when we'll lose the city. However, I have seen the AI lose 4 ironclads when a city was taken by my land forces (no blockade). It could have sailed these off to the next city 5 suares away.

 

[bakant]

Surely a big battleship even if blockaded in port should be able to destroy a warrior.

 

[hannibol43]

I didn't like the fact that (or expect it) my battleship was destroyed in port when I had no unit defending the city. The ship should have some sort of defensive value against land attacks in a city thatr is rediculous to think a rifleman could take out my battle ship