Is there an alternative to always razing cites?

[planetfall]

How do you deal with this problem:
England has 20 cities, most above 10 citizens
England is very weak
You invade with 2 columns of 30 panzers

If install new governor,

• "5 resisters" -- so have to park 10 panzers for 2-3 turns.
  
• campaign will take longer and ww will hit faster
  
• do this for 4 cities and suddenly campaign bogged down as only about 16 units are at full strength and free to advance
  
• gain some future mobility on roads and slow counter attacks
  

If raze,

• gain freedom for column movement, keep on rolling and rolling
  
• less chance of WW
  
• take full advantage of blitz and follow with settlers
  

Question: is there a method of installing new governors without crippling campaign?

[ACooper]

Every war effort needs support troops, in the case of Civ 3 this would be somthing like riflemen to occupy the conquered cities. This has been true in all successful wars and is much more realistic than the Civ2 method.

So, bring along some defensive units to protect the cities you conquer.

Also combat WW with happiness buildings/wonders. Don't start a war or go on the offensive until everything is in place. Then go knock the sh_t out of 'em .

[Bolleck]

My support troops are settler and workers.

[planetfall]

Acooper-- thanks. Guess I will have to use my 50 reserve infanty for police action.

I haven't noticed wonders helping WW. TOE is essential though.

Infrastructure takes forever to build. I can never conduct a campaign until late indust or early mod era. The tech tree goes by so fast with 1.17 that I usually only have a few rifleman and then it is infanty. Thinking of playing a game with minimum of 8 turns per tech to see if this slows the pace a bit and allows more early units.

I may have to change my play a bit if using slower moving units as police. I have been leaving a rail improvement gap at the borders to limit the counter attack penetration, but this ends up hurting me more as it takes longer for foot units to get in place.


Bolleck-- workers don't help with campaign. All they are good for is sucker bait. When the AI captures them, their units are vulnerable to attack.

[BillChin]

On the first turn, post a minimum garrison of one infantry in case of counter attack. Leave two panzers outside the city. Send the rest forward. The city will probably flip and then the two panzers can take it back the same turn. Once the roads are secure have no garrison at all. After all twenty squares in the city radius are in your cultural border, put the garrison back in. With panzers, that might be as soon as one or two turns. Once the resistance is quelled, rush build a temple or library (whatever is cheaper for your civ).

Whatever you do, do not leave a large garrison in a city in danger of flipping. You need two units for each citizen, plus additional troops for each square in enemy culture. So for a pop six city with 15 squares in enemy culture you are looking at maybe 30 or 40 troops to prevent a flip. With 30 or 40 troops you can take another five cities. The choice seems pretty simple.

Bringing settlers and razing is also a good option, especially for cities near the enemy capital.

[planetfall]

BillChin-- makes sense. Forget to mention this is only the outer ring of cities, any city close to the capital has to go.

Well kind of, this time I am trying an experiment of garrisoning London to see the flip effect. First round always starve to accelerate process, all entertainers and turn on mood governor in city governor. This helps control some flipping. Problem is civ influence area is behind campaign.

Just trying to figure out if there is some way to save cities and a few improvements as faster method of keeping civB from globbing up the newly freed area of influence. Especially with historical memory of city influence it would seem like the ability to retain outer ring cities would help more than razing and build new culture memory. No problem with smaller cities, but is a problem when have 10+ cities.

[Inverse Icarus]

didnt read other posts, sorry if this was said.

take the city, and if there are resistors, STARVE the city. stack like 6 units on it for a while. i'm a warmonger in despotism / communism, so i can kill people for the units / walls. if you starve the city to a 3 or so, the people come back as yours. works all the time.

[planetfall]

But will 6 units hold 5 resisters? I thought there was a 2 units/resister guideline. Or was that guideline only pre 1.17?

[Inverse Icarus]

it will if you starve it down to a 3

[nationalist]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by UberKruX
it will if you starve it down to a 3 [/QUO

Make sure that your culture is higher than the enemy. The AI is less prone to culture flip if you have more culture. If possible, try to get to the capital A.S.A.P., then raze it. This seems to decrease the chances of culture flip. As UberKruX said, starving the population is the best way to keep the city. Its harder to keep a large city and starve it down, thats why you should try to kill off some of the city's population with artillery if you really want the city.

[Elucidus]

Also it seems that your culture determines how fast the resisters stop resisting...Or did you know that already.

[nbarclay]

My ideal is to take out an enemy civ so quickly there isn't time for any significant risk of culture flips, or at least to reduce the enemy to distant island possessions too far away to spur rebellion easily. In the latter case, using gold to rush build temples (or, if playing a scientific civ, libraries) to build up some culture, and leaving about three units for garrison duty generally holds the risk of flipping down to a level I consider acceptable (at least as long as the war zone isn't too far from my capital). And with a big conquered city, I need the culture to expand the city's borders whether I need it to help control the city or not.

In regard to garrisoning, for the duration of the war, in the industrial and modern eras, I usually use somewhere around two to four units per city. Mostly, these are either wounded units that need a place to rest anyhow or obsolete slow-moving units that wouldn't be worth a lot on the offensive. (As a result, garrison sizes depend a lot on how many such units I have.) Such forces aren't enough to put down the resistance quickly, but there's plenty of time for that after I've won the war.

Of course this assumes I don't go on the offensive that late in the game without a clearly superior if not overwhelming balance of force. If I found myself fighting for my life against a culturally superior enemy, razing any cities I managed to capture might look a lot more attractive.

Nathan

[Zachriel]

It is not necessary to raze. I almost never lose a city to a flip, and even then the danger is evident. Once you understand how culture works, it is easy to avoid those nasty war crimes tribunals.

Try a game where you are not allowed to raze -- just for fun and challenge. Reload if you have to until you understand how it works. Generally, a rushed temple will prevent most flips in the short run, and cathedral will prevent most flips for the long run. But the temple must be built as soon as possible. Time is of the essence.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by planetfall
But will 6 units hold 5 resisters? I thought there was a 2 units/resister guideline. Or was that guideline only pre 1.17?

Are you kidding???

With 1.17, I once had a town of '5' with NO resistors and NO Unhappy citizens flip - despite a garrison of TEN veteran and elite units!

Such is the absurdity of Culture Flipping.

[Elucidus]

I've been capturing size 13 and 14 cities without any flips here recently. One of the first ones I took out was the capitol maybe that helped, but yeah I usually rush buy a temple.

Also I just flipped a russian city on the other side of the water. The corner of my culture touched the corner of theirs...and they were right up against a Babylonian city and it's culture halfway surrounded them. Go figure.