Razing VS Install Governor

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Kirby
When you abandon a city do you get workers/settlers from it?

When you abandon, you get nothing but a pile of rubble. You get workers (about half the pop points) when razing a city. You never get settlers. If you got a settler when abandoning a city, clearing jungle would be too easy, wouldn't it?

[Panzer32]

Abandoning a city:

I would like to see a unit called the 'refugee' or something like that. They would represent one unit of population. They would be created when a city is abandoned, and their only ability would be to join city.

Well... a random thought for civ4!

[Frank Johnson]

Refeugees are a good idea, but they're much more likely to go back to the enemy, than come to you. ^_^

I guess it could be like one of those things adjusted for government differences. When you take over a city, a certain number of people flee the city, some to you, and some to your enemy. But if you burn the city, you get some slaves, but others escape as refuegees.

Besides that.....the war artillery works in the game is kind of lame. I don't know any major cities that had 90% of its citizens killed by artillery. Bombing....hm slightly more leathal....but.....

I'd say the many more people were simply rendered homeless by bombing campaigns, so having them become refuegees (instead of dying) would be smart too.

[Cruddy]

Warning! Untested, but it should work

BRILLIANT TIP THIS! Just read it on CF, to be honest, but it's so good I had to share it with those who don't know. Credit to Jack Merchant.

When you install a new governor in a city with resistors, IMMEDIETELY set that governor to maintaining happiness.

As the resistors stop resisting, they're either put back to work or set as entertainers (usually the latter).

This means no civil disorder in that city - and it won't flip unless a nearby enemy city's culture border expands.

Pretty good huh? I KNEW those governors were good for something.

[Cruddy]

Re: Warning! Untested, but it should work

*** Please Delete, repeat post ***

[Arrian]

Cruddy,

My general approach to quelling resistance/preventing flips is to simply make all available citizens into specialists (this results in starvation). Once I have control over most or all of the population of the city, I will turn them all into taxmen as I starve the city down (so I at least get a few gpt out of those pop points). Then, once I've starved it down to a low pop (usually 1-3, depending on how confident I feel about my culture), I allow it to grow again.

Overkill? Possibly. But I almost never lose cities to flips, so there is a payoff.

Obviously, if I'm tearing a civ to pieces with Cavalry and expect to wipe them out in a few turns, I might not starve their cities this way. I'd be more likely to employ the "IDGAFIYF" technique until I've eradicated the civ.

-Arrian

[Don Giovanni]

Re: Warning! Untested, but it should work

Originally posted by Cruddy
it won't flip unless a nearby enemy city's culture border expands.

Are you sure about this ? I think I have experienced several flips, where this wasn't the case, but I could be wrong !?

[stonewall]

There are several things that effect the chances of a city flipping. Try this thread

I am sure there are others if you do a search.

[Gutz]

What is this?? "IDGAFIYF" I have been out of CIV 3 for a while and dont remember this one..... Coming back in though!
Chris

[Salvor]

I took it to mean he doesn't particularly care too strongly should the city undergo a culture filp.

[Gutz]

Ahhh, Thank you!
Chris

[Nakar Gabab]

If you're using a GIANT STACK-O-DOOM(TM), you can always just garrison more defenders than they have citizens and wait a turn. It slows you down, but you get the unique joy of watching the resistance crushed immediately.

[Arrian]

I tend to go with GIANT STACK-O-DOOM plus specialist starvation. However, if I'm worried about a flip and cannot spare a huge number of troops, I will employ the old tried and true "I don't give a **** if you flip" strategy which involves fortifying two attack units outside the city. If it does flip, it gets 1 regular defender. My 2 vet attackers will take it back immediately.

-Arrian

[lmtoops]

In high level games, it's much better to keep the city and give it to another civilization. In some instances, the other civs will trade for the new city. But most of the time, the city is gifted.

If you use the gift strategically, there are some very good effects. First off, your relationship will be greatly improved, which is great for the AI civs that are stronger than you.

Second, you can make your borders multicultural. Some of the civs are close friends and the common border can be relatively defenseless. Forces can be concentrated on your true enemy border.

Third, if the AI civ is far away, the city will never be strong. Which means it may flip culturally. In case of war, they are easy to capture, if you capture a few of the weak cities the AI is much more willing to talk peace.

Two more things, which I believe to be true. Units that are in the gifted city are automatically returned to your capital (or nearest city??). I know this happens in the latest version.

I've not seen any unhappiness, when gifting the city. This may be because none of the citizens are my nationality; I'm not sure. Of the conquered civ is unhappy, but your already at war.

[Arrian]

In some instances, the other civs will trade for the new city.

It is my understanding that the AI will ONLY accept cities as gifts now. Firaxis patched out trading cities to the AI for goodies to prevent abuse by humans trading worthless size1 tundra towns for significant money/tech/resouces.

-Arrian