Culture freaking flips!!

[Lucarse]

You know before i came to this forum i was a nice gentle civ player, not worried about being behind in tech, new that i would catch up... didn't have to have X done before the AD's etc...

But now i'm obssessed! help!... my problem last night was cultrue flipping after a very successful invasion.

I Invaded egypt (playing the huge world map) with loads of cavalry and cannon (just upgraded from knights) i took four cities in two turns (size 12 babies before hospital of course) RAZED 2 kept 2, during this time my culture goes throuh the roof?? and i get two cities from the romans (3rd largest civ after egypt and me) due to culture flip.

Ok after this egypt is on its knee's i have churned up its military after counter attacks its got no money no new techs(they are only 1 ahead) i get 2 more cities then bam!! i lose 3 cities in 2 turns to culture flipping (including about half my force)

My Questions are :

Why? surely there culture would diminish? (saw other cities in civil disorder).

Is there a rule of thumb for how many units you garrison in a city to stop resistance and gaurd from counter attacks?


In short my invasion bogged down (still producing rienforcements but not fast enough) and i clawed my way back to the hightide mark of my invasion and settled for peace (and get this for the negotiations they gave me their last tech and the remainder of their treasury, sound like an oppresive culture???)

Help,... explain!!!

Game level : Prince

[Tiberius]

You know, this is not the best title to start a thread with. Most people will only think "No. Please NO! Another ranter" or "Oh no, Coracle is back!" and won't bother to answer.

Anyway, I know I saw somewhere the exact formula, but until I find it, I'll quote a Firaxis employee speaking about culture flipping. Hope this helps.

"Culture-Flipping Exposed"
Dana Mahaga, Firaxis

In response to the requests I received earlier this month with regards to how "culture-flipping" works, I sat down with Soren, the lead programmer on Civ III, and he explained which factors influence the probability of a city "flipping" and what the relative weight of each factor was.

The base values used to determine the chance of city flipping are as follows:

A) The number of foreign nationals in the city in question (resisters are counted twice), and

B) The number of the 21-tile city-radius squares of the city in question that fall inside your cultural borders.


These numbers are then further modified by a variety of factors, applied multiplicatively. Here those are, in order of importance:


1) The ratio of distances to the respective capitals of both cities. Basically, if you're closer to your capital than the other city is to its capital, you've got a better chance of getting a flip.

2) The ratio of total culture points of both civs. Obviously, the better your culture is versus the opponent civ, the better your chance of getting a flip are.

3) I didn't even know this, but apparently each city has a "memory" and remembers the total amount of culture generated by any civ who has ever occupied it. This is the 3rd most important factor, because if the "attacking" civ has more historical culture in the city than the "defender", the chance of that city flipping to the attacker are doubled. This is one reason that conquered cities often flip back to their previous owners.

4) Civil Disorder in a city doubles the chance of that city flipping.

5) We Love the King (or whatever) Day in a city halves the chance of that city flipping.

6) Lastly, the number of land-based combat units (e.g., any unit with at least 1 point of offensive and defensive capability) in the city in question are subtracted. This factor is relatively low on the totem pole and this shows you why cities can flip even with huge militias garrisoned in them.

[vondrack]

Re: Culture freaking flips!!

Originally posted by Lucarse
Why? surely there culture would diminish? (saw other cities in civil disorder).

Culture never diminishes in Civ3. If you raze/conquer some of Egyptian cities, it will only slow down Egypt in the future (culturally speaking). Whatever culture Egypt accumulated before, it will keep it. The disorder has nothing to do with culture (perhaps a side effect of you taking some luxuries out of Egypt, who knows...).

Originally posted by Lucarse
Is there a rule of thumb for how many units you garrison in a city to stop resistance and gaurd from counter attacks?

Yes, there is a very good formula around. Let me see... it is here: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=51715 (and in many other threads). I am sure you will be able to figure out how many units you approximately need for a given city.

Also, I should point out a strategy often used to avoid losing large garrisons... after taking a city that is likely to flip back, you may choose to station only one or two weak/damaged units (what matters is the number of units, not their strength) and position the rest of your forces outside the city. This greatly increases the chance of flip, but OTOH, makes it easy to retake the city on the very same turn it flips (as it will have only one basic defender after the flip).

Once you lift the culture pressure up by taking the neighbouring enemy cities, too, starving the native population, and whetever else... then you can start treating the conquered city like any other, stationing a normal garrison there.

[Tiberius]

There it is! (the formula). Thanks Vondrack.

[Ethelred]

I have and usualy use a simple and effective solution for culture flipping.

One. I don't keep many units in a city. Just one permanent defender and at the beginning injured units being healed. All others stay out. That way I can retake the city if it flips.

Two.

Wipe them out. All of them.

Three. There is no rule number three.


Your new citizens quickly become happy to be citizens of your expanding and vital empire. Maybe its the corruption. They sure do seem to steal all the money the city should be producing.

[Lucarse]

Thanks For your advice guys, very helpful as always!!
However I don't think i'll be getting out the calculater needed for those formula's. as i said rule of thumb! :-)

I guess a back supply of settlers and a 'Scorched Earth' policy is better?

I should have metioned the last city i took was the Capital once that was taken the culture flip followed, this seems bizzare to me as i usually make a beeline for the capital to 'cut the head off' maybe i should re think ? any ideas?

[Ethelred]

I am not into razing cities. I only raze occaisionally. A couple of times after a city flipped a second time but I have kind of given that up too. If I did that I would have to build a settler. Since the AI was kind enough to start a city for me I feel I should make use of it.

I gave up on scorched earth as well. I only damage the connections to important strategic resources now. I am bombarding England's last remaining rubber tile every time Liz sends a worker to repair the damage. I took the other one just a few minutes ago. That city is close to London so I have to take London soon or the city may flip. Hard to do in the infantry and artillery period. I am four turns from tanks then two or three turns to get them across the waters. I think I will take the tanks to Japan instead as I may have England under control by then. Liz only has six cities but I have to go through London to get at the rest of them.

I don't make a beeline to the capitol unless its convenient. Early in the game its a good idea because the capitol is often the only city that won't be auto-razed. Later its the one that is most likely to flip back. However the capitol also effects the flipping of other cities so if a distant city is the next most populous taking it can help a lot. Often the capital may have an important wonder and that too counts in any decision I make about when to take it. Right now its just the next in line and otherwise I don't care. All the Wonders Liz has are obsolete.

Most of my tactical decisions are based on facilitating speed of conquest. The faster I take out a civ the less likely I am to have any conquered cities flip. That is one reason for keeping the cities as it effects what roads I can use. Liz has no rails so in this instance I couldn't blitz her even if I had tanks. I am just going to have to grind it out one or two cities every two or three turns as infantry take so bloody long to move across enemy territory. I brought over all my remaining cavalry but they realy need some bombardment as long I have to face infantry. The cavalry are pretty much limited to pillaging at the moment and I don't want to tear up all the roads as I will need them when I take the cities.

Of course if Liz had many units I would take out her road network to slow her defense and that would be a good use for the cavalry. I think she wasted her units trying to get them across the water at me and the remaining American cities on my continent. I got three ex-American cities that way without having to go to war with Lincoln.

She is so short on units that I spent three turns right next to her closest city while I continued to bring over more artillery and infantry so I wouldn't be wasting my first attack. She was unable to muster a single attack. She doesn't seem to have any artillery so my infantry were pretty safe on a hill while they waited for the rest of the invasion force. I was suprised when I got there. I wasn't expecting anything more than riflemen so I had to stall my invasion.

[Kampus majore]

Hm, especially their capitol would flip back soon! Because this city has the highest culture of all their cities!

The scourched earth strategy works best IMHO. Only when their city has a GW it might be worth the trouble to keep it. Because razing also gives you the units necessary to do maintenance on the damaged infrastructure...

But I sometimes keep their cities and use the "keep units outside the city" strategy.

[Kampus majore]

Keeping the city also depends on how strong you are at that moment. At the moment I am playing the Zulu's and at war with the Persians. They are stronger than I am but their units are a bit far away. Also they have the Immortal....

So I raze their city to prevend them from getting it back. This way I will weaken them and if I can keep the territory I will send a settler. It can be quickly build, so it works better than keeping their city.

[Ethelred]

The scourched earth strategy works best IMHO.

Wait till you have a stack of three move units on land covered with rails. Then you will see the power of the force.... er thats blitz. You can keep taking cities till you run out of units that have remaining moves if you take cities instead of razing them. A whole civ can go on a single turn. There is no flipping in that case.

[Kampus majore]

All right, but that only works if you are facing an opponent that is weak. I usually am facing stronger civs. If I keep their city I will loose it the next turn. Also I cannot take all of their city in one turn. They are just too strong to be able to do that....

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Kampus majore


So I raze their city to prevend them from getting it back. This way I will weaken them and if I can keep the territory I will send a settler. It can be quickly build, so it works better than keeping their city.

Early in the game sometimes that is best. There aren't many improvements in the city so you don't capture much. Even a barracks can help a lot though and you don't get to see what is in the city when you are asked to make the choice between governor and raze.

Late in the game the city may even have a courthouse and boy can that help if the city isn't hopelessly corrupt. Right now most cities that I am taking are near worthless except for the gain in territory but even some of them may be able to produce more than one shield with a courthouse and WLTKD. Which surprised me. I didn't think England would be close enough for that with the hordes of corrupt cities I have even on my own continent. Some are still worthless with a police station, a courthouse and WLTKD. Many are only good for increasing my territory and score.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Kampus majore
All right, but that only works if you are facing an opponent that is weak. I usually am facing stronger civs. If I keep their city I will loose it the next turn. Also I cannot take all of their city in one turn. They are just too strong to be able to do that....

Well its still early in the game and you are attacking the Persians a civ that often has a high culture. A city CAN culture flip that fast but its a matter of probabilities and often the city won't flip till later if ever. Often though the darn things flip right after I finish building a temple that would have saved them by expanding the border. That one bugs me but I can live with it.

What level of difficulty are you playing on? I have never played the Zulus myself. I don't care for their combination of charateristics and UU. Impi just aren't as good as horses so except for an extremely early rush I don't see the advantage to using them. Jaguar warriors are better for that anway.

[Lucarse]

I was under the obviously false impression that taking the capital would depress the society and they would crumble before me ah haha ha ha!! funny how its only ever worked once... hmm i need to adjust my CIV 2 strats i think.

As for taking whole CIV's in 2-3 turns i have ONLY managed to do this with Armour (usually modern) as i find with out the movement rate and the double attack abiity it is almost impossible to avoid a drawn out conflict with anybody with + 20 cities.

Infact has anybody done this before armour?

It annoys me too when my cavalry needs to wait/escort my cannon for bombardment, (but realistic!) i always carry sapper workers with me to build a railroad behind me, but this doesn't help after you pass their ZOC border.

I suppose the Raze or Not to Raze question depends on your reason you attacked your opponent? land garb or weaken, total destruction or pruning?

I have found this thread very helpful thanks, its always good to get tips ideas..

[Kampus majore]

In this game their culture is bad. Only their capital and a few other cities have culture. The rest has none. I meant they take it back by FORCE! Their immortals are strong....

I play on Emperor at the moment. I played deity a while, but the extra settler at the start is just too difficult to compete with....

The zulu's are quite usefull. I didn't play them before either. I usually played Bab's. But they have a few good traits: Militaristic, for cheap barracks and easy promoting; Expansionist for good goodies from huts.

The impi has really impressed me! It works good to be able to send in extra defenders fastly if someone starts a war! Jag Warrior is pretty useless, with an attack and defense of 1....