Just a question.
I had a minor dispute against the poor celts whan one of my subs "accidentally" sank one of their transport
- you know sometimes it happens when torpedoes hit
- well, they declared war
.
So I sent a couple of crusier to teach the "steel way" to one of their cities.
This city was surrounded by barbs in fortress (musket+cannon) and I wondered if, in case of an empty city, the "raging" barbs would take the opportunity sack and settle.
With much disappointmen I only saw the barbs "raging" in the fortress not taking the empty city (for 3 turns).
Is this the usual raging approach?
I had a minor dispute against the poor celts whan one of my subs "accidentally" sank one of their transport
![naughty](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/naughty.gif)
![Cute....](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/cute.gif)
![LOL](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/lol.gif)
So I sent a couple of crusier to teach the "steel way" to one of their cities.
This city was surrounded by barbs in fortress (musket+cannon) and I wondered if, in case of an empty city, the "raging" barbs would take the opportunity sack and settle.
With much disappointmen I only saw the barbs "raging" in the fortress not taking the empty city (for 3 turns).
Is this the usual raging approach?
![Confused](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/confused.gif)
Comment