So does ceding cities have any meaning in R&F

[myclan]

In vanilla I know ceding cities is just nonsence. How about now? Will it have a big impact on loyalty?

 

[Athmos]

not 100% sure but I think it's still just nonsense. I can't imagine why Firaxis left that option in when they removed the underlying mechanic.
Their work on the interface looks quite sloppy indeed.

 

[leandrombraz]

I didn't test it yet because I still didn't go down the warmonger path but when I asked on twitter they said it was unchanged from the base game

 

[Victoria]

Indeedy still additional warmonger points for accepting a ceded city and nothing much else to mention.
One does wonder what we are all missing if they decided not to change it

 

[leandrombraz]

Indeedy still additional warmonger points for accepting a ceded city and nothing much else to mention.
One does wonder what we are all missing if they decided not to change it

Either it isn't high priority or they are working on a major overhaul that involve ceding cities. I refuse to believe that they actually think the mechanic is good enough to justify its existence.

 

[Victoria]

. I refuse to believe that they actually think the mechanic is good enough to justify its existence.

‘Good’ Enough? It’s paying extra to get more warmonger points, it’s broken.

 

[Brutus2]

Indeedy still additional warmonger points for accepting a ceded city and nothing much else to mention.
One does wonder what we are all missing if they decided not to change it

So just to be clear, the way it currently works... it's always better to NOT add "cede city X" to the peace deal?

 

[leandrombraz]

So just to be clear, the way it currently works... it's always better to NOT add "cede city X" to the peace deal?

yes, unless you plan to sell/give the city to another leader that isn't the original owner, ceding allow you to do that.

 

[azmundai]

The thing about dart board design decisions is ... someone still had to put the option on the dart board in the first place ...

 

[Victoria]

yes, unless you plan to sell/give the city to another leader that isn't the original owner, ceding allow you to do that.

Hmmm is that the case? I thought it was only capitals and CS that could not be swapped, not non ceded cities. I think I made that assumption wrongly a long time ago because I stupidly tested on a capital.

 

[leandrombraz]

Hmmm is that the case? I thought it was only capitals and CS that could not be swapped, not non ceded cities. I think I made that assumption wrongly a long time ago because I stupidly tested on a capital.

Don't say something like that, I been spreading this all over the place like it's the gospel of the crab god lol We need more tests now!

I'm not sure if I actually checked this in my own games or if I just assumed it true.

 

[bbbt]

‘Good’ Enough? It’s paying extra to get more warmonger points, it’s broken.

I'm not 100% sure it's paying extra any more in R&F, it sort of seems like the AI is valuing it at 0 now.

I do wonder if they plan to address it, but wanted to see how loyalty played out first. So far there seems to be definite complaints on both ends, at least on things like reddit/steam (that it doesn't do enough to keep in peaceful expansion and that it makes warmongering too hard).

 

[Victoria]

that it makes warmongering too hard).

Rofl it makes it easier, you do not have to take all cities, a good warmonger takes them fast. It has encouraged warmongering. Some people!
The decrease in science means walls are down longer
The emergencies are lovely free money
Purchasing units with gold is more expensive
Are they noobs?

I’ll double check ceding when I get a chance

 

[bbbt]

Rofl it makes it easier, you do not have to take all cities, a good warmonger takes them fast. It has encouraged warmongering. Some people!
The decrease in science means walls are down longer
The emergencies are lovely free money
Purchasing units with gold is more expensive
Are they noobs?

I’ll double check ceding when I get a chance

I think one playstyle is to take one city, regroup a bit, take the next city, etc. which would be harder now. But I also am not sure how well people understand the new mechanics in terms of things like attacking someone in a golden age while you are in a dark age will be a massive disadvantage to holding the cities. It's hard to judge as being an active participant in these forums I'm aware of most of the smaller details. But I'm not sure the more general player is, and the game doesn't necessarily do a great job of exposing all of that. I think that's been an issue since the beginning to some degree.

And of course you have people with completely opposite gameplay desires (I've seen posts complaining it's too easy to get multiple golden ages - and posts complaining that they get into a normal age instead of multiple golden ages)! It does make it clear how hard it can be from a game design perspective for this game.

 

[leandrombraz]

I tried to test it in one of my R&F saves that I was already in a war about to end, I triggered a military emergency. You can't trade cities that are the target of an emergency, ceded or not, that much I learned...

 

[leandrombraz]

Hmmm is that the case? I thought it was only capitals and CS that could not be swapped, not non ceded cities. I think I made that assumption wrongly a long time ago because I stupidly tested on a capital.

I tested it, I got more warmongering in the ceded city but I can't sell it to anyone but the original owner regardless if I asked to cede or not. I tried to pass some turns and nothing, it doesn't show up in the trade list, only in the original owner trade screen.


Edit: I uploaded the save if you want to take a look. It's right in the turn I was allowed to make peace. Don't mind the positioning of districts, I was throwing districts all around while testing =P

 

[Victoria]

attacking someone in a golden age while you are in a dark age will be a massive disadvantage to holding the cities

Yes but possible, I have taken cities while they are golden and I am dark. It’s a messier business but with Victoria off continent it’s quite fantastic. Last game I played I got 20 redcoats off a 5 city cluster, that’s just because they kept flipping and turning out muskets (lol) I did not intentionally keep flipping them but it was in rough terrain with mountains. On a flat plain I would have probably only had 1 flip before I got a 3 city triangle, then it’s GG. Cities do not flip for a few turns and governors can delay that for a turn or two and as the governor does not die it’s fibe to do.

And of course you have people with completely opposite gameplay desires

indeed, I play most styles that have standard speed, it’s just people will always complain, I’m more of a positive view, give me the rules and I will play with them.

I can't sell it to anyone but the original owner regardless if I asked to cede or not.

nice work. One suspects they have changed this function due to the ability to sell a city then let it flip.

 

[Victoria]

Well... I have jkust killed Shaka (in a deity dark era) and never got a ceded city from him and can now sell any city but his capital

 

[Karmah]

Can someone remind me the reasoning leading to having cities cedto you is idiotic? I remember they was a thread at the time where I didn't have any so I never really integrated the issue. I remember the gist but not the details , cities in occupation are supposed to have some kind of disadvantage yet somehow they aren't or what ?

 

[leandrombraz]

Well... I have jkust killed Shaka (in a deity dark era) and never got a ceded city from him and can now sell any city but his capital
View attachment 489379

So we can't trade cities to anyone but the original owner into the original owner die, then it's open market for any city but the capital? Interesting.. Edit: I wonder what happen if you bring Shaka back. Will the cities still be tradable or it goes back to its non-tradable state once Shaka is back in town?

I would love if Firaxis was more open to talk about this kind of stuff. I would pay for an statement on why ceding cities still an option if it have no function and even penalize the player with warmongering. If it's broken, why not remove it into they can properly implement it to do whatever it's supposed to do?

Can someone remind me the reasoning leading to having cities cedto you is idiotic? I remember they was a thread at the time where I didn't have any so I never really integrated the issue. I remember the gist but not the details , cities in occupation are supposed to have some kind of disadvantage yet somehow they aren't or what ?

Occupied cities don't grow in the base game and get a loyalty penalty in R&F but the occupied status isn't removed by asking the city to be ceded, it's removed when you make peace. There's no reason to ask the AI to cede.