When to raze a captured city

[crouchy]

Hi all,

When I capture a city I'm given the option to raze or keep it. I am wondering when it makes sense to ever raze given the penalties for doing so.

Is there any advantage for razing and re-settling my own city in the same location?

Thanks

 

[Kryxal]

In the same location, I'd say no, beyond trading the eternal "you have one of our cities" penalty for extra warmonger penalties. Possibly if you can place two cities in other spots because you razed this one...

 

[TomKQT]

I raze when I don't like the spot or when I don't want so many cities. The AI usually make cities much closer together than I do, so I often choose the better ones and raze the ones between.

As soon as you conquer the city, you can open it and see what buildings and districts it has. If there is nothing or just damaged granary (and the city is like 2 population), you don't lose much by destroying it anyway (unless you really want a city there, then you would need a settler and some time to move it there).

In Civ6 there is not that direct punishment for having more cities as in Civ5, but don't forget that you still need amenities for all your cities.

Oh and another though: In the late game, I often raze much more (when I'm in a huge conquer war against multiple enemies), because more cities means more micromanagement and it slows the game soooo much. And those small cities with 1 or 2 districts take so long to become usefull in any way.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Possibly if you can place two cities in other spots because you razed this one...

Even then, you also need to pay the cost of two settlers. The "free" settler/city is almost always going to be better, unless you're planning on a long game and really want to maximize your available space through well positioned city sites.

Another situation would be if you don't think you can keep the city loyal and don't want the AI to take it back after it goes to free city status. Even then, you're probably better letting it flip to free city and raze it once it's a free city, as I don't think you get warmonger penalties at that point.

 

[crouchy]

So it sounds like keeping the city is the default decision to make unless:

1. It's early game and I want to have a city in that general location but not the exact same tile
2. It's late game and I don't want too many cities

 

[Pietato]

Keeping on higher difficulties is the way. AI has production bonuses, so has built a lot.

 

[JosephC]

I have also razed a city when I didn't like the AI's district placement. Though; I havn't done it recently, AI seems to put their districts in better locations now.

 

[Disgustipated]

I very rarely raze. But if they stupidly put a holy site next to Kilimanjaro then the city will be burnt down.

 

[LFRANK]

I've recently starting razing cities around my real targets. Since domination wins require capitals, razing cities near it reduce the loyalty pressure from those nearby cities. In my last game France was leading and got pulled into war with both Japan and the Aztecs. Since their capitals were close together I spearheaded my troops into Japan and took Kyoto (?) while razing Osaka and another city I can't remember to reduce their loyalty. I also moved a couple of governors to ensure Japan's capital didn't rebel on me. Did the same for the Aztec capital, took it, razed the nearby cities and then bam, got a cultural win out of the blue (not that I wasn't working on that goal as well).

I know from other threads that taking cities is not recommended (warmongering, sigh) but I get real satisfaction when I do. I'm more of an in your face opponent and ignore most of the WM penalties as I play. I'm used to being hated in my conquests.

 

[Karpius]

I have just razed my first city ever! It was the city-state of Valetta perched on the island of Malta in a Giant Earth map. I am playing Rome and with Carthage and Valetta right there in the way of my Mediterranean expansion, I actually declared war (unusual for me). Carthage I kept, but Valetta had no real value in such close proximity to everything else.

As a general practice, however, I never raze cities. I either liberate former city-states, or keep cities (annex) of rival civs. I rarely see such cities flip, however, so long as I am well prepared. If the taken city is too far from my influence, then I just return it in the peace deal.

 

[Larsenex]

Burn them all to the ground. Pour salt down, let the desert tiles spread.... >>> win!