Tweet
Oh, I wasn´t aware that this topic is hot enough for a flame war. However, feel free to go on, since your opinion is obviously always right...
-
Yeah, i got a bit excited. But i hate this realism is always best thing.If you place a thing into the center of your life, that lacks the power to nourish. It will eventually poison everything that you are.
And destroy you. -Maxi Jazz, Faithless -
On one hand this feature is neat, on the other hand I don't like it. Its nice to have another option on conquering a city, but completely destroying a city seems to go too far.
What would be much better would be to have the raze option destroy a random bunch of buildings, and kill a good amount of population as your army runs amok, but leave the city still standing as a burned wreck of its former self, instead of completely destroying it. You'd get a good chunk of gold for all the buildings you destroyed. Plus now you can create culture buildings that were already built and would have yielded you no culture points, and you're able to have your citizens grow faster from the smaller city.
Having a large city get completely destroyed is completely unrealistic IMHO. It just never happened in history, unless the city was razed multiple times or small to begin with. The reason is that some of the city had always fled to the countryside, and when things settled down a few weeks or months later, they'd drift back to the city and it would go on. Take the destruction of Carthage. Completely "destroyed" for a moment, but it never disappeared from the map, and grew again to be a large city under Roman control, with the same name.
The Mongols were other great city destroyers, often killing 50% of more of a city's population, but they also almost never completely destroyed them. Balkh is the only large city I can think of that they completely destroyed, and that took several razings after they rebelled. The others always bounced back, even when every single man, woman and child was killed, again because of the fleeing to the countryside factor.
Realism is one thing, I also think less than complete destruction of a city is better gameplay and more fun. Lets say you're a looting barbarian civ like the Vikings. You don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Instead the strategy is to weaken towns, have fun looting them, then let them bounce back so after some time you can go in and do it all over again (once weakened, they're less able to successfully defend themselves the next time, so you can come back and "harvest" the city from time to time). If razing is less than total destruction, than this could be a viable game strategy.
Also, I think challenges make a good game. Completely destroying a city completely removes the challenge of having to deal with a hostile population at all. Just as completely overrunning a weak enemy may be fun at first but quickly becomes boring, so is conquest without any management consequences (assuming you're willing to completely ruin your reputation).
Conclusion: razing is a great idea, but please tone it down from complete destruction! This way, if you want to completely destroy a city you can still do it - just leave it undefended and raze it several times.Comment
-
I think that this feature was implemented so you could destroy small badly place computer cities and that sometimes annyoning advanced tribe cities from civ2.
Killing big cities with wonders in 1 turn doesnt seem reasoneable and will opt for som really cheesy tactics...If you place a thing into the center of your life, that lacks the power to nourish. It will eventually poison everything that you are.
And destroy you. -Maxi Jazz, FaithlessComment
-
cmon now! THIS IS A STUPID QUESTION!Originally posted by PGM
We've been told that Great Wonders can't be destroyed. What if you raze a city that has one of these???
im sorry but hello! of course the wonder will be gone! what else would it DO! I hate it when peopel ask these types of questions...
And God said "let there be light." And there was dark. And God said "Damn, I hate it when that happens." - AdmiralComment
-
Lose the attitude kid. If they announced Great Wonders as non-destructible, and introduced us to the city-razing concept a couple of days ago, I think some questions are in order. They will at least have to admit that the concept of Great Wonders as being indestructible is wrong, restrict the use of the razing option, or whatever. Either way, I believe that overlooking game items is not the way to go. At least not for those of us who never played the game, because Mr. dainbramaged13 has already obviously had the pleasure to do so. I love it when enlightened people share their knowledge on these types of questions with a mere peasant... (*humbly takes a bow*)Originally posted by dainbramaged13
cmon now! THIS IS A STUPID QUESTION! im sorry but hello! of course the wonder will be gone! what else would it DO! I hate it when peopel ask these types of questions...
Comment
-
I think that you just can't raze the city with a major wonder. You can't burn the pyramids.Retired, and it feels so good!Comment
-
exactly DonJoel.
a modern day bomber can fly from Nevada (central US) to the middle east and back, but in civ game turns that would suck."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott CardComment
-
they would drag it over to the nearest city you silly goose.Originally posted by dainbramaged13
cmon now! THIS IS A STUPID QUESTION! im sorry but hello! of course the wonder will be gone! what else would it DO! I hate it when peopel ask these types of questions...
"I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott CardComment
-
"C'mon you lazy slaves! We have to get the Satue of Liberty from New York to Washington D.C.!"
Hehehe, what a great image! You get a little screen showing your population all using a reeeeaaaallllyyyy long rope from D.C. to the Statue and hauling it in like a fish.I never know their names, But i smile just the same
New faces...Strange places,
Most everything i see, Becomes a blur to me
-Grandaddy, "The Final Push to the Sum"Comment
-
Well New Jersey stole Ellis Island and had it's eyes on the Statue of Liberty..."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott CardComment
-
It's so obvious!!! You get David Copperfield to do it for you!!!I never know their names, But i smile just the same
New faces...Strange places,
Most everything i see, Becomes a blur to me
-Grandaddy, "The Final Push to the Sum"Comment
-
No. It would be destroyed, just as happens in Civ or CivII when a city with a wonder is destroyed. The wonder goes with it.Originally posted by UberKruX
they would drag it over to the nearest city you silly goose.
Indestructible wonders probably means they can't be sold (as in Civ & CivII) and can't be destroyed by attacks of any sort. Or such is my guess.Introvert:
spreading confusion far and wide...
It will all be washed away by the incoming tide.Comment
-
Destroying a big city should be considered genocide by post-Industrial civs."Chegitz, still angry about the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991?
You provide no source. You PROVIDE NOTHING! And yet you want to destroy capitalism.. you criminal..." - Fez
"I was hoping for a Communist utopia that would last forever." - Imran SiddiquiComment
-
Destroying a big city should be considered cool by everyone at apolyton.Originally posted by orange
Destroying a big city should be considered genocide by post-Industrial civs.Retired, and it feels so good!Comment
-
here the problem with unlimited razing. Someone could just hit one city with everything they have. For example in one turn 20 offensive unites attack one city. So they take the city and then burn it to the ground. Imagen that as a sneak attack. Your at peace and than one turn later you are missing a size 20 city. An attack that you could never recover from.
That is why there needs to be a cap around 12. And the larger the city the more punishment every dishes out.
One more point. If they destory a city of yours and than 2 get revenge you destory one of theres you should be punished less.Comment
Comment