Is culture really a nuisance in losing your conquered cities?

[Peterk]

Part of the reason this aspect of the game is getting a bad rep is because of the shock-value when it happens the first. People get all happy when they take an enemy city and then when the computer takes it back they feel that it's a cheat of some sort.

It used to bug me a little too since no amount of troop presence seems to stop the revolt from happening either - a size 3 city has gone back to it's previous owner with about a dozen of my military units inside it. Very scary stuff.

Finally got a handle on it by using the following tactic - you have to garisson heavily to quell resisters every turn but also try sending some workers in to dilute the native population with some of your own people. Keep diluting in this way until you can keep in under control and at least get some production out of the new city.

[Pyrodrew]

I was having a horrible time conquering an opponent with strong culture, until I started having a few weak or damaged units occupy captured cities

Someone mentioned in another thread that they had 8 units in a size 2 city... and after a few turns lost them ALL from culture. He really needed that city for the oil too. His analogy was the US sending troops to Saudia Arabia for oil & the troops deciding to blend into the Arab culture because of the cute harem girls.

Stationing troops does work to stop rebellions tho... just not stop culture from absorbing the city. I agree tho you shouldn't lose your troops when a city decides to switch back to another culture.