I don't want this ****** city!!

[Torquemada]

Hello. I was wondering if anyone else has noticed this in their games. When I try to get rid of a city by building settlers/workers (a la CivII), when I get down to the last pop. point, the city never finishes building that settler/worker - it just sits there, turn after turn, in limbo. I don't know how to get rid of cities!!!! (aside from razing them upon military capture)

[Roulette]

Not sure. What I have done is make sure that it isn't producing food (starve if needed, but no growth is what you want. Then produce settlers until you get to 3 or 2. If you have 2, do one more settler and the city will ask you if you want to vacate the city. If you have a 3, build a worker, than another settler. Smae thing will happen and it's gone.

If it hasn't done this, check and make sure it's not just taking forever to build the settler maybe?

[Sarxis]

To be honest, I am glad that you can't destroy your own cities. What kind of government would get away with that? It really makes you think before building new cities, or capturing them.

[notyoueither]

Give it to some gumby power, then take it and raze it?

[duxup]

Remove resources

I saw this exact problem once and was able to solve it. The city was size 1, the settler was completed as far as shields were concerned, but would not build. I went to the city view and clicked on the resources (make them to an entertainer, whatever you want) so that the city has no chance of growth. Next turn the computer asked if I wanted to build that settler and I said yes and disbanded the city. Hope this works for you.

[Daveman]

I did this last night without a problem. The Japanese slipped in a crappy city in a tiny undeveloped corner of my continent outside my borders. It was at population 2, so I cut food production to "no growth" and put them to work on settlers... when they were finished I got the usual message box about how this will abandon the city, do you want to proceed?

One oddity though... the display panel showed a bunch of garbled text where the nationality of the unit (Greek Hoplite, Japanese Settler, etc.) should have been for the settler created out of this city. It stayed that way until I used them up.

[August Borms]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
To be honest, I am glad that you can't destroy your own cities. What kind of government would get away with that?

Well, the Belgian (or is it the Flemish?) government is trying to do it right now

[Torquemada]

Thank you, Duxuo and Daveman. I'll try it next time the situation arises. Now if I could only find some saltpeter......

[GreekyGoodness]

Originally posted by Assur


Well, the Belgian (or is it the Flemish?) government is trying to do it right now

What are you talking about? I'd like to read about this. Where are you getting your news from?

[RobC]

Can you disband a size 1 city by building a worker (and having no food growth)? If not, do you have to let it grow to a size 2 city then stop the growth and build a settler, or will it let you disband a size 1 city by building a settler?

[HalfLotus]

You can disband a size one city by building a worker.

[August Borms]

Originally posted by GreekyGoodness


What are you talking about? I'd like to read about this. Where are you getting your news from?

From Belgian TV/newspapers ofcourse

Well, the port of Antwerp needs to be expanded, and the village of Doel is in the way. I can't really explain it in English, but basically they're going to put tons of sand over the village. ( I think the inhabitants of Doel can stay there to at least 2007)

Several villages were "disbanded" a few decades ago too, also for the port of Antwerp...

I haven't found anything about this in English though.

[Der PH]

I live next to a big coal mining area in Germany. When the opencast pits need to be expanded, the villages in that area get completely relocated.
Of course these are no big cities, but I think, several thousand peole are affected.

[David Weldon]

If you abandon a city by building the last worker or settler when there is no population growth, you get ?barbarian? units. The text is screwed up in the bottom-right corner info box, but if you right click on the unit it is correct.

For settlers, being barbarian makes no difference.

For workers, it?s a huge difference. They are treated as captured workers, so they don?t cost upkeep (or take a unit slot), but they work at half pace compared to your normal workers. You can decide if this is a good thing (and keep the free unit) or a bad thing (and add population somewhere).

[Jokka das Trevas]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
To be honest, I am glad that you can't destroy your own cities. What kind of government would get away with that? It really makes you think before building new cities, or capturing them.

Well, in fact, Russia did it when Napoleon was trying to conquer them.

AFAIK, they were retreating and burning all villages in its way, so the french troops wouldn't have shelter or food and become weary.