I DON'T admire your culture Damnit!

[Malthis]

Culture rocks...but not when I've capured all but two of the enemy's cities, quelled all resistors, built up my own citizens in the captured city, built my own Forbidden Palace in an adjacent city, put TONs of money into cultural improvments in captured and adjacent citys, and STILL after hundreds of years with the enemy having only two pathetic cities neither of which are remotely close to the ones I captured hundreds of years ago, without civil disorder or any provocation, the city ADMIRES the culture and switches over. My guess is a culture rating from wayyyyy back is still being used to tabulate whether they revolt or not. If that's the case, Revolt should be based on current cultural output, and not from a long gone empire that has been crushed nearly to extinction. Otherwise, capturing cities will become a useless endeavor and I'll just have to raze everything to the ground. Real bummer.

[Dis]

I starve them down to a small pop. when they grow again they turn into nice obediant aztecs (that's me)

edit: I didn't see the part about you building up your citizens. How many did you have? what level are you playing?

[Malthis]

Originally posted by Dissident
I starve them down to a small pop. when they grow again they turn into nice obediant aztecs (that's me)

edit: I didn't see the part about you building up your citizens. How many did you have? what level are you playing?

I'm playing Regent, and the city in question was about a size 20 with more of my nationality than the other.
See...just hopeless...

[VetteroX]

Malthus is right... if you cap a diffent "group" then yours ex: european group captures asian group, NO MATTER WHAT you do, it always has a chance of revolting. This is idiotic, and HAS to be addressed in a patch.

[Dis]

I didn't realize this was the case. the manual (just kidding). but supposedly after a few generations there should be no threat of that. I'm not sure how that works though. As turns in later years have fewer years pass. so you can have 100 turns pass and only turn over 2 generations.

I guess it is asking too much to get an explanation for this. Eventually someone will do some testing to figure out all the variables. That won't be me though . That is a thing I loved at the civ2 boards.

[Grumbold]

I'm not going to disagree that it is a huge pain in the ass but it is certainly accurate. In recent years this is exactly the sort of thing that has been happening in Bosnia, Serbia, Basque seperatists in Spain, Georgia to name but a few. What worries me is that it does not seem to be preventable by having large garrison forces.

[Dis]

I'm having very little problem with that (only 1 case so far, and I have conquered over 15 cities). but I'm still in the lower levels. So I'm guessing difficulty level affects this.

[Fidel]

Originally posted by Grumbold
I'm not going to disagree that it is a huge pain in the ass but it is certainly accurate. In recent years this is exactly the sort of thing that has been happening in Bosnia, Serbia, Basque seperatists in Spain, Georgia to name but a few. What worries me is that it does not seem to be preventable by having large garrison forces.

large garrison forces like in afghanistan and vietnam?

[cort]

it is totally realistic.
the greek, serbs, arabs, polish.. countless countries as we know today were under the control of some other civ for several hundred years and they did not lose their nationality.
the germany hold paris for a couple of year and what happend? french kick their ass in the first oppotunity.

my suggestion to whoever complains about the issue; i issue any combination of the following three strategies to fight with the issue;
1. before capturing a city, i lower down the population by bombardment to at least 5-6. after capturing, i pump up the population to at least twice by bringing in workers from my homeland.
2. i raze down cities, found new ones at the same place and populate them with my workers. this is especially worthy considering the fact that most of the time captured cities have no significant improment at all.
3. if possible, destroying the whole civ is the best formula; suddenly resisters begin to behave as natives

[Fidel]

Originally posted by cort
the germany hold paris for a couple of year and what happend?

um, french collaborated en masse

[Wolfshanze]

Typical French

Originally posted by cort
the germans hold paris for a couple of years and what happend? french kick their ass in the first oppotunity.

Actually the French didn't kick ANYONE's ass in WWII, because they were so busy retreating, losing, and collaborating at every opportunity. (for the record, Germany kicked France's ass).

For some odd reason, the British and Americans liberated France since the French couldn't do it for themselves, and gave it back to the French.

A few years later, the French kick out the Americans...

...some gratitude!!!

[cort]

i am not french by the way. i said it because it is an example no one can miss.
you are right of course; french buddies didnot kick german ass at all (some US maybe)

[cort]

i look forward to playing this game multiplayer by the way.

it will be REAL fun to kick some ass

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by LaRusso


large garrison forces like in afghanistan and vietnam?

Which city did you have in mind?

Now if partizans were popping up in the countryside or improvements mysteriously getting blown up I would be delighted. When the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Armoured Division and the 101st Airborne regiment are stationed in a city but disappear without trace I get pissy.

[Fidel]

Originally posted by Grumbold


Which city did you have in mind?

Now if partizans were popping up in the countryside or improvements mysteriously getting blown up I would be delighted. When the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Armoured Division and the 101st Airborne regiment are stationed in a city but disappear without trace I get pissy.

operation tet comes to mind
i must admit it is sometimes annoying.
but for the sake of realism, does egypt have free granary in every city nowadays?