One culture flip guarantees no future flips

[joncnunn]

Last time I did massive rushing of settlers in foreign territory was in Vanilla.

In that version, when 2 foreign citizens of the same nationality were used, the settler would have that nationality.

With 2 foriegn citizens are different nationalites chosen, the settler would have a barb nationality.

With 1 native citizen & 1 foreign citizen chosen, the settler would have the native nationality.

As for the citizen remembing to be unhappy, nope! [Exception of actually disbanding the unhappy city right after founding a replacement city nearby. Disbanding unhappy cities moves the unhappiness.] But note that if this is going on late in the game you may well over the OCN limit and so any new city you build might start might start with the 1st citizen by default unhappy.

Give Peace a Chance and Stop Attacking the Mother Country are also unviversal.

Originally posted by Willem

No, but they will carry the unhappiness of their home city with them to the new one they establish.

[joncnunn]

Originally posted by Geronimo
does conscription cause resentment in the populace as well? for a long while before I could finish building hospitals in all my size 12 cities, I would conscript when the food box was filled and either disband the soldier to add shields to the hospital or use it for bolstering defenses. I'd hate to think that I was making the entire population of the empire permanently less happy by doing that.

Yes, "Hell No, We Won't Go" is draft unhappiness. 20 turns.

Drafting solider and disbanding them for shields is a really bad idea unless you have surplus luxaries and are absoluately positive you won't be at war for 20 turns.

[joncnunn]

The chance isn't zero, but unless a weird RNG occured, it's very doubtful that it would flip back. It would still be a good idea to replace the cultural buildings.

Originally posted by Geronimo
What about cities that spontaneously flip to your side? are they prone to flipping back to the original side in the same manner as a conquered city would?

[Modo44]

Originally posted by joncnunn
Drafting solider and disbanding them for shields is a really bad idea unless you have surplus luxaries and are absoluately positive you won't be at war for 20 turns.

What does war have to do with this? I thought you get the unhappiness regardless. I do it often, with Infantry, and Mech Infantry, as their shield value is substantial. Even core cities draft some every now and then, if they happen to have surpulus food.

[joncnunn]

You get the happiness problems regardless.

But personally, I rather not have my citizens saying both "Give Peace a Chance", and "Hell No, we Won't Go" at the same time because it generally means my luxary slider would have to be set high enough to start reducing science.

Originally posted by Modo44

What does war have to do with this? I thought you get the unhappiness regardless. I do it often, with Infantry, and Mech Infantry, as their shield value is substantial. Even core cities draft some every now and then, if they happen to have surpulus food.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by joncnunn
You get the happiness problems regardless.

But personally, I rather not have my citizens saying both "Give Peace a Chance", and "Hell No, we Won't Go" at the same time because it generally means my luxary slider would have to be set high enough to start reducing science.

Some cities have more happiness improvements than others, and some may be larger than others. Thus, depending on the situation, it may be possible to draft in cities that are smaller and/or that have more happiness improvements without pushing into a situation where it would be necessary to use the luxury slider sooner.

And of course if you're in a government that's immune to war weariness, the whole question of "Give Peace a Chance" is irrelevant.

[Modo44]

Point taken. In epic games, a city must be comfortable with it's happiness situation to draft. Some are, some are not, I agree. But being a builder, I more often run into food problems, rather than happiness problems. Cities with maximum possible production, and nearly zero surpulus food, simply don't have the ability to draft.

I do, however, use heavy drafting in scenarios. Most notably in the Napoleonic Conquest. They have the benefit (and drawback) of too much Irrigation at the start. Cities quickly hit the 12 population mark, wih still lots of spare food, and get drafted from.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Modo44
Cities with maximum possible production, and nearly zero surpulus food, simply don't have the ability to draft.

If cities have any food surplus at all, they can draft when they max out their food box and grow back the following turn. They have to go a very long time between drafts, but occasional drafting is still possible.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by nbarclay
If cities have any food surplus at all, they can draft when they max out their food box and grow back the following turn. They have to go a very long time between drafts, but occasional drafting is still possible.

Yes, and I use that, thanks to your tip about population being computed before production. But the point is, I often get cities down to 0 surpulus, to maximize production.

[Arrian]

I remember an instance of city flipping when I was still learning the game (so Vanilla CivIII, either unpatched or one of the first couple of patches) that really annoyed me.

A border city (English - how do I remember that?) flipped to me in the medieval era. It was maybe a size6. I built it up for a loooong time. In the late industrial or early modern era, once I'd built darn near all the buildings in it and gotten it up into the teens in pop, the rat bastards flip back to England.

My response, as I recall, was rather irrational. A little while later I nuked the 3 best English cities and sent my Modern Armor over the border.

-Arrian

[vmxa1]

Why is that irrational?

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by latka
To go back to the original post. The French citizen was destroyed when you took the city. When a player owns a city, new citizens are added to the right. The groupings are foriegn civ on the left and domestic civ on the right. When the city flipped, the single French citizen moved to the right. When you attacked, it was destroyed. People have to die before you take something. All that was left were your citizens. Voila, a French city without any French people.

That's how I had it figured, too.

[Last Conformist]

In one of my first monarch games back in Vanilla, I had a Greek city that was situated among my cities (but fairly close to the Greek mainland) flip to me in the medieval era. Being at that time quite ignorant of the mechanics of flips, I blithely built it up to a metro with all the perks. Centuries later, in the early modern era, it suddenly flipped back to the Greeks.