How to defend against trebuchets?

[Blaupanzer]

Think of a significant segment of the population a of a razed city as fleeing (many to die along the road), and a significant segment burning as they cannot flee without being shot. The genocide aspect is why razing a city leaves a permanent black mark on diplomacy with that civ.

Relatively small units can slaughter an awful lot of people in modern times . The two limitations are ammunition and the sanity of the shooters. Take another look at eastern front contemporary films showing Russians digging their own death trench and being machine gunned into piles of bodies. Those are not faked. The Nazis made those in order to BRAG about their accomplishments in the east. Cold-hearted doesn't even begin to describe ...

[Dis]

not to mention the starvation and disease aspect of all the refugees. It's safe to say a lot of people die when razing cities.

In modern times I think disease and starvation is overstated by the media when describing refugees. But in the times before modern medicine, it was a serious issue. Millions did die.

[Tattila the Hun]

Yah, but there would be global outrage, charred bodies and ruins on CNN...

I would not be so bad, if the city ruins would actually be city ruins, that you could plop a settler down, or maybe just a worker, rather like New Orleans after Katrina, and there would be the basic infrastructure in the queue, with varying amount of work finished. Essentially repairing the damaged buildings/institutions.

And that the citizens would become refugees for a time... If you promptly re-establish the city, they'd return.

[Forwarn45]

It would also be consistent with the type of current options for voting at the UN, to add an option that prevents cities from being razed.

[Dis]

doesn't seem hard to do in modern times. People who raze cities should have economic sanctions (cancellation of all trades and open borders).

But there could be exceptions. As we all know some nations support other nations that commit atrocities. But then those nations could also face some penatly. These rules get complex though. And you'd have a whole web of things going on.

[CarnalCanaan]

Originally posted by Tattila the Hun
Yah, but there would be global outrage, charred bodies and ruins on CNN...

Actually, I like this idea. As a late-modern quirk, add in the effect that cities razed after the discovery of Mass Media result it much greater diplomatic hits.

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by CarnalCanaan


Actually, I like this idea. As a late-modern quirk, add in the effect that cities razed after the discovery of Mass Media result it much greater diplomatic hits.

Except for AGG civs who would, no doubt, applaud such behaviour.

For my part, I find razing cities to be a disgraceful waste of production and commerce.

[Blaupanzer]

Most of the time, I agree razing is a waste, especially in modern times. However, in game terms, if the city in question is close to the borders of a third civ, it will jump ship on you if you leave it in place. Sometimes, it is better to plop your own settler one or two squares farther from that border, than it is to occupy the existing city only to have it revolt and join that third civ.

[Dis]

yep, and it's a similar situation that I had. I was trying to keep a city I conquered that was too close to a 3rd civ (Napoleon of France). I didn't get my culture up fast enough, and his culture went right up to the corner of my city. Allowing him to attack me in on the first turn.

Even without the war, it was a diplomatic penalty having a city so close to him.

[Virdrago]

Use many. many units in the city to make sure the rowdy population doesn't even think of trying to revolt, never mind being attacked. I had a game where Catherine had 23% or so left of a city being Russian. She plopped about 25 units there so they wouldn't revolt. Quite annoying, really

I wouldn't say use 25, but 7 or 8 should work.

[LzPrst]

some good thoughts here. I especially like the city ruins = easier rebuild.

as for razing stuff... Grozny anyone? the russians pulled up some artillery and pummeled the city into a big heap of rubble covered by a thick layer of poison gas as the local chemical factory stores were blown up. Grozny used to be a big important city. I dont think rats live there now. Reputation hit? no no. war on terror. it was selfdefence.

as for the refugee idea. there's something that I've been wanting for ages. there should be several options when you Conquer a city.
A. Annex: You take control of the city, very small gold amount pillaged.
B. Plunder: You destroy several buildings and drive away most of the population. You also get more gold from conquering. The city becomes yours.
C. Raze: You destroy the city, but the population spreads out as refugees City built on ruins have 50% production bonus for buildings it had before destruction and get half the culture it had before it was destroyed. Wonders are not destroyed.
D. Do a Genghiz, Annhiliate: You burn it to the ground and kill everyone in it. HUGE rep hit.

Refugees would function something like this: When chased away from a city half the city's pop will spread out and attempt to settle in nearby cities that are friendly (your own or with open borders). Chance of spreading religion as a result. If the city they came from is rebuilt half the refugees will return.

Example: The Mongols attack the Arabs, conquering a border city. Genghiz wants it and Annexes it, placing a new governor. They then move on further into the Arab empire. Nearing a cash flow problem Genghiz Plunders the next city he takes netting him a decent sum of gold and turning the city into a small outpost. Continuing his drive he conquers an Arabic size 12 city with Library, Granary, Wall and Theatre. Genghiz Khan and his Hordes take the city. Genghiz has too much maintenance expenses as it is so he decides to Raze it. The city is destroyed, 6 population points are distributed to nearby cities. The Arabs then fend off the onslaught and resettle on the ruins. The city will then receive +3 refugees from the cities that received the boost becoming on settling size 4 and will get the buildings mentioned at a 50% discount.
The Arabs want revenge so they push on into the Mongol lands and manage to take a Mongolian city. Wishing to ensure the Mongols wont rise again the Arabs they Annhiliate the city turning it into empty grassland and get a large rep hit with everyone who is friendly towards Mongolia.

Comments?

[Tattila the Hun]

Originally posted by Dis


Even without the war, it was a diplomatic penalty having a city so close to him.

So that's what the "Closed borders spark tensions" means, even if we have open borders?

Originally posted by LzPrst
...Wishing to ensure the Mongols wont rise again the Arabs they Annhiliate the city turning it into empty grassland and get a large rep hit with everyone who is friendly towards Mongolia.

Comments?

, I wonder, if it would be possible to ad some effect from the razing, like, well, fear... Incentive to the AI to bolster their military, or give you some nice tech... "Here, you look like you could use this. (I hope he doesn't get any urges to raze my cities... )"

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by Tattila the Hun

So that's what the "Closed borders spark tensions" means, even if we have open borders?

It's "Our close borders spark tensions" and means that you have cultural ownership of tiles that it has some cultural influence over but not enough for it to own the tile.

Very amusing when the AI builds a city right on the edge of your cultural boundaries and then starts complaining that you are culturally threatening it.

[LzPrst]

Originally posted by couerdelion

Very amusing when the AI builds a city right on the edge of your cultural boundaries and then starts complaining that you are culturally threatening it.

solution: Annhiliate

Mongols, strike fear into the hearts of thine enemies

Yeah. The Annhiliate option should have a "Eeek. You're scary"-bonus in diplomacy.

[joncnunn]

On the original topic, best defense against trebs, I'd say attacking the taskforce containing the trebs in the field with units with field promotions before they get within bombard range of your city. This also applies to cats and other seige weapons.

In addition, Cats are advaiable way before Trebs and are also better on the field than Trebs (trebs sole edge is attacking & bombarding cities) and so you might want to consider having a few cats of your own in that time peroid even if your aren't planning on attacking anyone.