Thoughts on Enemy's Capital:

[dojoboy]

Currently playing a regent game on standard earth map (us mac-gamers are yet to enjoy all the fun) as Babylon.

Long story short --- Warring against Germany. Their capital is on the southern edge of its empire (South America ). After destroying it, I realized I had just improved Germany's economy by relocating its capital to the center of its empire. I would have been better off pillaging Bismarck's roads out of the capital to weaken his economy. I may not have been able to maintain a presence thus allowing the roads to be rebuilt, but I could always repeat it.

 

[Japher]

That totally sucks!

Anyhow, taking a city is still good, even if it helped them. It is one less city the have to make a war machine.

My advice keep going, and kill them all.

Warmongers'R US

 

[LittleDragon]

There really should be some greater consequences from capturing/destroying a nation's capital. At the very least the palace should have to be manually rebuilt somewhere, with the nation running at a very high corruption.

I also think destroying the seat of a nation's government should have a chance of sending the nation into anarchy. Sometimes Civ III does not even attempt to bear much in common with reality.

 

[dojoboy]

Originally posted by LittleDragon
There really should be some greater consequences from capturing/destroying a nation's capital. At the very least the palace should have to be manually rebuilt somewhere, with the nation running at a very high corruption.

I also think destroying the seat of a nation's government should have a chance of sending the nation into anarchy. Sometimes Civ III does not even attempt to bear much in common with reality.

I agree. The idea that I improved Germany's position by destroying its capital and, as a result, the capital moved to the center of Germany's territory (decreasing corruption considerably = increasing gold) just doesn't seem balanced.

 

[Baleog]

How about having the capital "grow".

I mean that if the capital has been forcifully relocated, it doesn't automatically have the same benefits it used to have. Rather, you would have to wait, say, 10 turns to get full prodeuction back. In the first turn you'd be on the same production as if you had no capital at all. In the second and subsequent turns the effects of a capital would slowly start to appear around the chosen city.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

I always suggest one thing when this pops up, and I'll repeat it here again:

If a capital is taken, the civ gets a brand new 'Interim Palace' - just as it gets a full one now. This IP has HALF the corruption and anit-flip influence as a real one and can be upgraded to a full Palace by building/rushin a halfcost 'Palace renovation' in the city..........

 

[dojoboy]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
I always suggest one thing when this pops up, and I'll repeat it here again:

If a capital is taken, the civ gets a brand new 'Interim Palace' - just as it gets a full one now. This IP has HALF the corruption and anit-flip influence as a real one and can be upgraded to a full Palace by building/rushin a halfcost 'Palace renovation' in the city..........

Wow! I thought you were dead!

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by dojoboy


Wow! I thought you were dead!

Yes, I am, I just haven't stopped moving yet!

 

[pompeynunn]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
I always suggest one thing when this pops up, and I'll repeat it here again:

If a capital is taken, the civ gets a brand new 'Interim Palace' - just as it gets a full one now. This IP has HALF the corruption and anit-flip influence as a real one and can be upgraded to a full Palace by building/rushin a halfcost 'Palace renovation' in the city..........

Good solution.

I hate it when taking a Capital city moves their Capital to a city closer to you, then you suddenly lose a city with a culture flip (happened to me once). You have no way of knowing which city the capital will move to, so can't evaluate the consequences properly.

 

[docceh]

Civ 2 had it spot on!

If the capital is taken there should be a chance of the nation falling into outright civil war, with the rebels fighting on your side.

 

[Tassadar]

A.I. keeping their capital is one of the biggest cheat and unfair rule in that game. If human lose capital you dont get a free moving palace ( you dont respawn either).

In civ 2 , human were able to split an a.i. civilisation in 2 by taking their capital which was fun and fair, unfortunatly civ 3 dont.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Tassadar: your Palace does move!