Should the SMC have control over captured cities?

[Nym]

I think 5 turns (or less) after resistance has ended is quite good.
I would actually say that the SMC should control such cities at least until resistance ends.

[Inverse Icarus]

hrm, me thinks we're going to need gramphos to come up with an algorithm for this one.

and about you culture loving anti starving people human rights bleeding hearts: you're the reason america hasn't won a war since the 1950s.

this post brought to you by supreme military commander UberKruX. Glory Comes From Spilt Blood.

[Inverse Icarus]

i'm not risking 10+ of my men garrisioning a size 22 city that will flip back any second, destroying all my men without a fight.

this post brought to you by supreme military commander UberKruX. Glory Comes From Spilt Blood.

[Spiffor]

UberKrux :
I still don't understand why YOU'd have the control over captured cities rather than the city planner... I'm not asking questions about city starving (this is not the issue of the poll). Care to explain why it would be better for the empire ?

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Spiffor
UberKrux :
I still don't understand why YOU'd have the control over captured cities rather than the city planner... I'm not asking questions about city starving (this is not the issue of the poll).

i'm trying to give the SMC power to supress the rebellion by any means neccessary, in order to protect his troops. he can also command what needs to be built there, as he is fighting the war, and walls or a unit may be more useful than a temple or library, depending on the suitation.

another good reason, already stated, is that the army may need to be refreshed, ie rest in the city and rush a few more units while they recover.

[Spiffor]

Thanks for the clear answer.

[Panag]

Originally posted by UberKruX


i'm trying to give the SMC power to supress the rebellion by any means neccessary, in order to protect his troops. he can also command what needs to be built there, as he is fighting the war, and walls or a unit may be more useful than a temple or library, depending on the suitation.

another good reason, already stated, is that the army may need to be refreshed, ie rest in the city and rush a few more units while they recover.

hi ,

every city should be looked at , one case at the time , this way you always get the best results , ....
the counsil should decide , but every city can be different , so every city needs a different solution , ...

have a nice day

[punkbass2000]

No. If the Military Advisor wanted to be the city planner, he should have ran for... city planner.

[Aggie]

I think the smc acting as military governor of occupied cities is appropriate for a limited amount of time during and after resistance(5 turns). I do however, think that any actions that will cause loss of citizens should be apporoved by the president.(even though some loss of citizens is inevitable during these liberation times)

[ThePlagueRat]

I sniff Hawk Party business here. *shiver*
Cultural and intellectual citizens, be careful here...

[ManicStarSeed]

I'd say that immediatly after occupation, the city should be considerd "under marshall law."

The SMC has total authority to do whatever is necessary to suppress resistance, protect the troops, ensure border expansion, etc. It is the military's job to turn over (to the cityu planners) the burnt, empty husk of a town only after the city has been fuly "docilized"... say 5 turns after resistance has ended.

Then the city planners can work thier wonders.

Looking at it this way.... Can you imagine trying to building a temple, library in the middle of a combat zone?

Let the military finish the job.

My 2 cents...

MSS

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by Spiffor
As the one responsible of happiness, it is the city planner's job.
The job of the military advisor would be to move his units in his newly captured cities, so that they resplenish health, and to petition the city planner to build units in the core cities. That's called teamwork, and that's the core of the Democracy Game.
There is no reason the military advisor has any direct control over cities... Do you imagine the science minister having direct control over some units ?

I do not think that happiness is what we are looking at here. We are looking at a DIRECT THREAT TO THE MILITARY if the city flips back and we lose units without a fight. As the SMC, it is his responsiblility to assure the safety of his units, and our citizens first. If that means starving a few foriegners, those without the stomach for it can bury their heads in one of the libraries and research some better weapons.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx



I do not think that happiness is what we are looking at here. We are looking at a DIRECT THREAT TO THE MILITARY if the city flips back and we lose units without a fight. As the SMC, it is his responsiblility to assure the safety of his units, and our citizens first. If that means starving a few foriegners, those without the stomach for it can bury their heads in one of the libraries and research some better weapons.

exactly.

this post brought to you by supreme military commander UberKruX. Glory Comes From Spilt Blood.

[Il Duce]

Control by the SMC for a period of time is highly desirable to maintain control of captured territories and not interfere with front line battles, the SMC should have control until the city has been deemed safe from short term enemy attack.