Why raze cities?

[kitfox]

I've been watching a few let's plays and have noticed that some players will frequently raze and resettle cities they've captured, even if they have 7+ pop and a few buildings. I'm wondering what the advantage is in doing this? It seems to me building a courthouse would be much easier - which is what I usually do. The only advantage I can see to razing a city is that you guarantee it cannot be liberated later. I've only ever had one captured city so badly placed that I decided to get rid of it completely.

Am I missing something?

 

[Txurce]

I've been watching a few let's plays and have noticed that some players will frequently raze and resettle cities they've captured, even if they have 7+ pop and a few buildings. I'm wondering what the advantage is in doing this? It seems to me building a courthouse would be much easier - which is what I usually do. The only advantage I can see to razing a city is that you guarantee it cannot be liberated later. I've only ever had one captured city so badly placed that I decided to get rid of it completely.

Am I missing something?

Your own city will be happier much sooner. But there are plenty of advantages to keeping a captured city, starting with advanced pop and development.

 

[Bascule2000]

If you're playing China, raze and resettle for double the mandate of heaven bonus!

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

Several reasons:

- The new city can be in a better placement
- Once Pioneers/Colonistes are available, a new city might be more developed than an conquered one
- Courthouses require upkeep. For underdeveloped cities, replacing them is worth it
- Happiness issues

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Several reasons:

- The new city can be in a better placement
- Once Pioneers/Colonistes are available, a new city might be more developed than an conquered one
- Courthouses require upkeep. For underdeveloped cities, replacing them is worth it
- Happiness issues

A razed city will also significantly up war score against the opposing civ, potentially putting you over the top when it comes to capitulation.

 

[Gothic_Empire]

A razed city will also significantly up war score against the opposing civ, potentially putting you over the top when it comes to capitulation.

Or more importantly, if you're the Aztecs, a golden age.

 

[theMisterRud]

plus, if you want to play tall, razing is a great way to push neighbours back

 

[tu_79]

If you're playing China, raze and resettle for double the mandate of heaven bonus!

Or more importantly, if you're the Aztecs, a golden age.

Any civ with a bonus for conquering cities, for that matter. Assyria? France? Raze the city and let AI resettle. Repeat.

 

[Stalker0]

plus, if you want to play tall, razing is a great way to push neighbours back

I agree with most of the posts on the thread so far except this one.

In my experience the AI will almost always resettle a city if you don’t take the land. If your goal is push back, it’s better to puppet

 

[theMisterRud]

In my experience the AI will almost always resettle

Exactly, you really want to stagger them: you want them to keep throwing resources on the plot of land (settlers, units), creating non-defenseable cities that need considerable reasources to get going, you go into a perma-raze frenzy in which you stagger the AI, exploiting his next neighbour, which will eventually join you and move in.

On king, I managed to stop a runaway Ethiopia this way

 

[andersw]

I used to beline pioneers and resettle but have swapped to keeping most unless those on attrocious positions.
I did of course forget about courthouse upkeep.
Often just let the captured city build the settler and then raze when settler is ready.
I've also done the classic, save city+settler for pioneer, forget to upgrade said settler and settle with no extra buildings at banking

If there is a LOT of culture around the city it can really stink to resettle and lose not only important strategic or lux resources but possibly also a strategic launch position for another war.
If I have great wall it can be even more important to keep that extra culture.

On the other hand, raze and resettle to get double bonus from council of elders and/or chinese mandate of heaven, raze and let ai resettle to get conquer bonuses from same spot again and probably more.

Hard to say that there is one definite answer.

 

[ElliotS]

Hard to say that there is one definite answer.

If the game is balanced correctly (and it seems like it is to me) then there is no definite answer. You want to use a combination of Annex/Puppet/Raze to achieve the maximum result.

 

[Gothic_Empire]

Also, raising Indonesian cities and letting him resettle over and over again can create an eden of spices and nutmeg.

 

[Dawnpromise]

In my last game I found myself razing cities because I didn't want a territorial dispute with my enemy's neighbors. I find sacrificing a bit of land to avoid pushing too far out is a small way to try and avoid a warmonger spiral.

 

[wobuffet]

In my last game I found myself razing cities because I didn't want a territorial dispute with my enemy's neighbors. I find sacrificing a bit of land to avoid pushing too far out is a small way to try and avoid a warmonger spiral.

Won't they come right back and settle in the same area anew though?

 

[Dawnpromise]

Won't they come right back and settle in the same area anew though?

Sometimes, but usually I find that most of the time they can't settle in the old sites because a neighboring civ's borders, either mine or someone else's have grown up and boxed them in. Particularly noticeable when you've got two neighbors citadel spamming each other and you'd rather be neighbors with one over the other.

Also as someone else pointed out time spent training settlers is time not spent on soldiers or infrastructure.