No option to pillage a city and leave?

[Badtz Maru]

When your army takes an enemy city, you usually have two options - raze it or install a new governor. I'd like to be able to just give it back to the enemy sometimes, but often they won't talk to you to let me gift it back. I realize I could just install a governor and leave it undefended, but what if I don't want the added upkeep penalty for however long it is for the city to be reconquered?

[Possibility]

Why in the world would you take a city and then give it back? That is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard.

[John-SJ]

One reason might be that a city that was once an asset to a civ can be turned into a liability.

Imagine what would happen to one of your cities if all of its tile improvments were destroyed and all city buildings banks, theatres, etc., were leveled. That city would go from an asset to a liability, slowing your whole civ down.

And, at the same time, the pillaging civ doesn't have to take possession of a city that may not be of great benefit to his empire.

[Son of David]

In reality, do you think it's easy to shift ownership of cities around?

Think of the bureaucracy and the paperwork, the costs of changing administration, change of legal system, etc - it would be a NIGHTMARE!

Just think of the pomp and ceremony when Britain gave Hong Kong to China. A city is more than just a little trifle to be proffered about like a chocolate candy.

[John-SJ]

What!? I LIKE chocolate! ... oh...

But you are right, we simply click the "Install a new governor" button, but in reality this choice should consume a fair amount of resources for perhaps several turns.

[Clonereject1138]

Originally posted by Son of David


Just think of the pomp and ceremony when Britain gave Hong Kong to China. A city is more than just a little trifle to be proffered about like a chocolate candy.

How dare you involve the ambrosia of chocalate with petty human affairs, you heretic! Aye, sometimes I give em to my alies, so I can take em again. Then I burn the city.

[John-SJ]

Or, as one person suggested elsewhere, destroy all tile improvements and then gift it to someone you don't like. Even if that civ is a long way away and the maintenance kills them, you still get a diplomatic boost from it.

[Badtz Maru]

Sometimes I go to war just to make money - a couple of fast units pillaging towns can make 80+ gold a turn, and sometimes I'll see a city that is lightly defended while doing so and snag it. Now, I often play with city razing disabled (I think it's unrealistic that an army can wipe a full-sized city from the map completely), so I'm stuck with a worthless city. I could gift it to another civilization, but that feels like an exploit, I know few human players who would want an undefended city in the middle of another civilization's territory, especially a civ they are not at war with. I'm also not sure if it's possible to gift a city before it's period of unrest is over, I haven't tried but I bet it's not. If I just leave it for the AI to reclaim at their leisure, it counts as a city lost to the enemy, and until they get a unit over there (which might not be possible if I'm doing well), it counts as one of my cities. I just want to be able to pillage a city without taking ownership of it.

[GeoModder]

As long as their is unrest in a conquered city, it doesn't cost upkeep.

[John-SJ]

Does that strike anyone else as just a little strange? I would think that if there were unrest in a city upkeep should be double, or triple?

[Diadem]

I agree that it would make sense to have an option to just pillage cities. That is, of course, something that happened frequently in history.

Conquered cities were often pillaged, and sometimes razed a little, but usually they weren't burned to the ground. And often ownership didn't change.

In 455 the Vandals took Rome. But they never installed a new governor. And as the city is still there, I don't think they razed it

[Son of David]

Originally posted by John-SJ
Does that strike anyone else as just a little strange? I would think that if there were unrest in a city upkeep should be double, or triple?

Not really. Since all the buildings are out of operation there are no costs to maintain things except for the troops that are stationed there.

What seems strange to me is that civil unrest is not affected by the number of units garrisoned in a city, as well as the fact that cities with angry citizens no longer randomly damage buildings.

[khearn]

Originally posted by Badtz Maru
Now, I often play with city razing disabled (I think it's unrealistic that an army can wipe a full-sized city from the map completely)

Carthago delenda est! - Cato the Elder

Have you ever heard of the city named Carthage? It was in northern Africa, on the Mediterraiean Sea, just across from Sicily. They were originally a Phoenician colony and built up a nice trade empire, until they got in a few wars with Rome (the Punic Wars). They did fairly well at times, you may have heard of a fellow named Hannibal. He was a Carthaginian general who marched from Spain, across the south of what is now France, and over the Alps with an army that had a few dozen elephants and attacked Rome from the north. Didn't take Rome, but controlled much of what is now northern Italy for 15 years or so before he went back to Carthage. That was the second Punic War. Eventually Rome got upset enough (lspurred along by unceasing efforts by Cato the Elder) that they conquered Carthage (Third and last Punic War) and razed the city and slaughtered or enslaved most of the people. Some say they plowed salt into the fields to prevent the survivors from growing crops (although the evidence for that is weak). A century later, the Romans built another city at the same location (it was a good location), but it certainly wasn't Carthage.

So yes, an army can indeed wipe a full sized city from the map completely. Carthage isn't the only example, but it's probably the best known.

[Diadem]

ceterum censeo, carthaginem delendam esse!

Now that is a quote that should have been in the game somewhere.

[ghen]

pillage and leaving would have to be accompanied by a formal version of the abandon city mod so the civ on the receiving end of this beat-down can abandon it if they don't want the maintenance either. Balance.