1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

The eternal dilemma... when to stop taking cities....

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Sherlock, Jun 25, 2017.

  1. Sherlock

    Sherlock Just one more turn...

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    1,039
    Location:
    Eagle, Idaho
    I was in an alliance with Rome and they back-stabbed me, declaring war on me.

    When this happens I'll always take at least one city before letting a Civ off the hook.

    But heck, I've got the army.... should I just go ahead on take Rome?

    Seems like a pretty good city, but not sure I really need it.
     
  2. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,275
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Depends if you care about warmonger penalties....

    I'm currently playing Norway for the first time, went with island plates and king. After having fun with longships, I decided that the Thunderbolt of the North could only win by taking every. Single. City. He clearly doesn't care about warmonger penalties. No dilemma for him. :D
     
  3. bite

    bite Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,052
    I'll take my continent, by that point I have nukes anyway so I don't want the irradiated mess that is my neighboring continent anyway
     
    KumaChan, Leyrann and craney1987 like this.
  4. ShakaKhan

    ShakaKhan Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Messages:
    705
    More cities equals more power. You stop taking cities when you decide that you have enough power to win the game.
     
    KumaChan likes this.
  5. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,058
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Or just never stop as in my picture in the Favorite settings thread. :) One fun aspect of this game is you can take everything like back in the Civ2 days. The penalties are so small, that there is little deterrent. Of course I was playing Macedon, and without worrying about war weariness penalties, I can go all day long, and I did.

    In normal cases, the time to stop taking cities is right before your own cities revolt from unhappiness (from war weariness).
     
  6. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,751
    You stop taking cities when you can no longer take cities... Went through Mvemba on deity this morning....Hit Scythia, DOW'd and they came at me... it was only then I looked at the military score.... my 360 to their 1650.....The AI was poor at attacking but when knights appeared (I had no Iron) it is time to take their money and regroup.
     
  7. gettingfat

    gettingfat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,407
    If your concern is warmonger penalties or amenity issue, you can always return the captured cities in the peace deal or even later as a gift. This will cut down the warmongering, remove the you occupy my city -18 rating, empty the AI cash, relics and writing. You can also use them to trade for cities you prefer and have everything intact. Also, capturing cities reduce their population, and you can rob their tiles if these cities are at your border, so your enemy will have no chance to recover. Before you return these cities you can also run projects to give you a few additional coins. So take and return is generally better than not taking.
     
  8. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,751
    Indeed
    Capture lots, loot all their land give back cities with no useful amenities or production and then watch the rebellion begin... their civ is now gimped and still likes you if you have done it right.
    Alternatively just take the lot but remember this... a Gimped Civ generates more gold out of those cities than you would and with less amenity issues you can milk the cow with your extra amenities.
    Razing is an option if you are going to wipe a civ out completely, its just a question of whether you have the amenities to handle the pop growth.
     
  9. gettingfat

    gettingfat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,407
    I normally won't raze cities unless close to victory. Just loot everything and trade them to my next war target, Dow, take the city back and resurrect the leader. This way I will gain a friend and also clean up all annoying envoys of this leader.
     
    Tyroq likes this.
  10. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,751
    Aaah the gifting cities exploit In god mode or how to make everyone love you after slaughtering them.
    Definitely one I want fixed.
     
    DizzKneeLand33 likes this.
  11. DizzKneeLand33

    DizzKneeLand33 Fall from Heaven 2 still rocks

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Especially when gifting a city in Siberia has the same value as one in the Virgin Islands....
     
  12. mtt9999

    mtt9999 Builder of Dreams

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    123
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    I like the idea of looting the city and crippling it and then give it back. What exactly does everyone mean by loot everything? Take the great works, maybe have a builder "harvest" the resources for another quick unit? Can we sell buildings like in earlier civs?
     
  13. Salmuth

    Salmuth Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    Messages:
    16
    How many times do I settle close to the cities I'm going to take, just to make sure that when I give them back, I give them cities with a ton less tiles to work. It also boosts your new born city because tiles are improved already. I may even use a builder or two to kill bonus resources in the city I give back.
     
  14. gettingfat

    gettingfat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,407
    Too bad we can't sell buildings. What I usually do is to swap all possible tiles, chop forests and harvest for units, move any great works away... I may even start building some useless wonders or districts before the handover
     
  15. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,751
    I always place a holy district if I can...that has more meaning to me than anything else.
     
  16. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,789
    Gender:
    Male
    Pillage Pillage Pillage!

    And pillage some more.

    They'll call you a warmonger for taking cities, but looting and pillaging is okay. It often comes down to how much my army costs, and how much it costs to defend. Usually a new city will help pay for it if you can buy/build the proper infrastructure. Plus losing units lowers my costs.... Think about soldiers as aggressive versions of settlers. You build settlers to build new cities. You build soldiers to take other people's cities.

    I would seize his capital though. This will make it much harder for him to recover and threaten you again. He'll hate you forever, but be sure to kick him when he's down.

    However, you do want to consider the diplomatic makeup of the game. Some leaders will react more strongly than others and if everyone else is peacefully trading and leaving you out when you put yourself behind due to war, that may not be nice.
     
  17. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,751
    Pillaging gives war weariness too.

    @Archon_Wing he will not hate you forever if you settle a city on some ice and sell it to him, removes the -18
     
  18. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,789
    Gender:
    Male
    I just like how you can heal your units as you reduce city defenses.But you know, if I don't have to take the city by force, all the better! (err.... I mean the city tile itself, surrounding the city is already using force)

    That seems a bit odd that they would forgive you for taking all their stuff and letting them retire in the tundra, but I'll keep that in mind. I don't really mind being hated for being a warmonger (especially by the conquered) as long as I can get decent trade with some other leaders.
     
  19. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,751
    Or during the peace deal just give a crappy low prod no lux city back, that also removes it.

    Keeping a civ in the game to lower your amenities as a gimp can be useful, just go and demand gold off them every now and then
     
  20. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,789
    Gender:
    Male
    Yea, these are things I like to do as well. Aka keep the best land and give back the "crap". And demanding gold is what I meant by kicking them while they're down, though I should have been more specific.

    I do know outright annihilating them is a big no-no, as it was in V. Though I just hate looking at Trajan so much that I will do it anyways.
     

Share This Page