Culture Flip Prevention

Aggie · September 16, 2002, 14:58

I am opening this thread to discuss ways to prevent cities we capture from culture flipping. Lets face it when you have cities of size 6+ being taken flipping is a true problem(especially if they have culture) . So lets have some ideas. If we had an overwhelming number of troops I'd say just garrison, but the troops will be needed to take other cities and I would hate to lose whole armies due to a flip. Most likely starvation will be are best protection and taking the persian land as quickly as possible will help, since several factors we can alter are distance to enemy capitol and # of sq of city radius in enemy territory, and of course # of enemy citizens. The first 2 can be handled by driving the enemy back, and the last might be a job for duddha. The factor left out is enemy culture in city vs our culture in city can not effectively be dealt with so I am ignoring that.
Aggie

=OttomusCeasar= · September 16, 2002, 15:03

workers, reduce them to size one cities if we like their location, otherwise worker them into nonexistence. then we never have to worry about them flipping and we're going to have to produce a lot of workers to clear jungle anyway.

UnOrthOdOx · September 16, 2002, 15:17

Once again:

A trick I have used before is to rush a settler, then rejoin it to the city. This works best with poprushing IMO,(size 6, -2 to pop rushing, -2 to settler = 2 Persians. Join the settler = 2 Persian, 2 Apolytonian citizens) but should work equally well here. That will give us a few of our OWN citizens in the city without damaging it's production potential too bad. (I really need to test my theory that you can continue this till it is 100% your citizens. If the Settler always takes the right most citizens when it is made...we could eliminate foreign presence in such situations. I haven't played my own games forever, though...)

Beyond that, I am not sure things like how many troops are needed or such.

UnOrthOdOx · September 16, 2002, 15:18

You know.

I think cash rushing would be cheaper to do with workers (10 shields for one citizen as opposed to 30 for 2), but same theory. Join them back in, and test out my theory, or make enough to take it down to 1 citizen first, then join them all in...

Aggie · September 16, 2002, 15:20

Hummm good ideas, maybe we could populate uber from these settlers and develope it with the workers and also have a settler fro new sidon

Aggie

Duddha · September 16, 2002, 15:54

And if we don't have enough cash at any given time we can always starve them out.

=OttomusCeasar= · September 16, 2002, 15:55

workers, workers, workers, clear our jungle to reveal the glorious grassland beneath!

UnOrthOdOx · September 16, 2002, 16:15

Quote:

Originally posted by =OttomusCeasar=
workers, workers, workers, clear our jungle to reveal the glorious frassland beneath!

Eh, too many will drive up our support costs too high, i'ld rather spend THAT money on actual troops. The wars have cost our military might some. We now rank among the last in the world, look at the stats. Join them back in as productive citizens...

Reddawg · September 16, 2002, 16:44

Here's a novel thought: don't take any cities.

have a nice day

lololol

Duddha · September 16, 2002, 16:57

Heathen!

Shiber · September 16, 2002, 16:59

The idea of building settlers sounds too much expensive. After all they cost 30 shields each. However, I think that those huge Persian cities that will soon be ours produce at least 10 shields a turn so they can produce workers quickly and send out the foreign population on to a life of public service.
I wouldn't worry about the upkeep. We need workers anyway, and the increase in production and commerce resulting in the improvements that they make are well worth the extra upkeep.

UnOrthOdOx · September 16, 2002, 17:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Shiber
The idea of building settlers sounds too much expensive. After all they cost 30 shields each. However, I think that those huge Persian cities that will soon be ours produce at least 10 shields a turn so they can produce workers quickly and send out the foreign population on to a life of public service.
I wouldn't worry about the upkeep. We need workers anyway, and the increase in production and commerce resulting in the improvements that they make are well worth the extra upkeep.

Sure they produce 10 shields NOW. They will not when counting the resulting unhappy citizens, the corruption, etc.

We will be spending cash either way if we want it done in one turn. Joining the units back in would just alter the nationality if we wanted to maintain a large population for some reason. If we can afford the upkeep, fine, send them away to hacking in the jungle. We need settlers for UberIsland from somewhere, though...or are we not risking another crossing?

Shiber · September 16, 2002, 17:33

Yes, you're right. What was I thinking?
I'm still for producing workers but I see now that we won't be producing them at a rate of one per turn. Not without throwing in some money anyway.

GhengisFarb™ · September 16, 2002, 17:50

I like the worker idea, we've gotta clear the jungle sometime and if we mass produce workers and do it all now we have it cleared for when we enter our GA. I don't think jungle tiles produce much of an advantage during a GA.

Donegeal · September 17, 2002, 05:11

Since Firaxis is not of the Banana, they did not realize the potential of the jungle and a GA does not effect it. Rule for GA is one extra shield where at least one is already produced and one extra Lyton where one is already produced. This last 20 turns.

Donegeal · September 17, 2002, 05:16

It has been my experience that if ANY citizen is of the conquerors nationality, it is that citizen that is turned into a worker. I believe the build-worker-join-worker trick can only produce one native citizen.

Harovan · September 17, 2002, 05:49

Be carefully with that settler thing. If a city has only foreigners (let's them call "French" for simplicity), an eventually built settler will be French (by nationality, but still our unit), produce 2 French citizens (or 1 if a city is built) and we gained nothing except unhappiness.

Butch Cassidy · September 17, 2002, 06:28

I don`t think u can build settlers with foreign nationalities, as it says in the manual

Panag · September 17, 2002, 08:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Butch Cassidy
I don`t think u can build settlers with foreign nationalities, as it says in the manual

hi ,

yes you can

when the workers are no longer needed we can spread them out over our empire , ....

have a nice day

UnOrthOdOx · September 17, 2002, 08:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Be carefully with that settler thing. If a city has only foreigners (let's them call "French" for simplicity), an eventually built settler will be French (by nationality, but still our unit), produce 2 French citizens (or 1 if a city is built) and we gained nothing except unhappiness.

You would think that, but I have never had that happen. Now, whether that was because I played an old version for so long and that has been fixed, I don't know. But it seems that you CANNOT PRODUCE a foreign nationality. Therefore, you can change their nationality by using the citizens as settlers or workers.

GhengisFarb™ · September 17, 2002, 08:38

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
But it seems that you CANNOT PRODUCE a foreign nationality. Therefore, you can change their nationality by using the citizens as settlers or workers.

Oh yes you can. It takes the pop from the right and if they are both Persian, your settler is Persian, if they are a mix it calls them "barbarian" at first and then some weird code later.

This may have changed with 1.29 though.

Harovan · September 17, 2002, 08:42

Your settlers can be "French" and I had it happen very often.

Ever tried Aeson's "Recycling blitz"? It means, after discovering Recycling, you get 1/4 of shields back, when selling improvements. Imagine, you capture a "French" size-25 city and have lots of resistors. Now sell a bank or something like that, get at least 30 shields and switch production to settler. This way you just have rushed the settler even during resistance and without sacrificing a unit. Next turn disband the city and rebuild it with the settler. Works 100%, the only downside is, that the settler will be "French" and thus produce a "French" citizen.

Duddha · September 17, 2002, 09:18

I pretty sure you can't produce a foreign settler, but even if you can atleast we can divide the foreign pop.

OPD · September 17, 2002, 10:42

If only there was a save game that could settle this arguement.

ten lytons to the first person to find the french settler.

Harovan · September 17, 2002, 10:52

Not with the current save, President (may I already call you so?), and not now since I'm still working, but it's simple to check out. Take a game of your own, capture an enemy city (resistance doesn't matter), make sure there's only foreigners in it, set production to settler and disband units till the settler is ready. Next turn a "foreign" settler will be there, meaning your settler with foreign nationality.

BigFurryMonster · September 17, 2002, 10:59

Where was our Settler built? Port Rouge ..? Hmm...

OPD · September 17, 2002, 11:11

BFM wins
Apoc pay the man

yay I can attach images now.

Please note this stlr had already been built I havn't played ahead and built one.

=OttomusCeasar= · September 17, 2002, 11:15

Quote:

Originally posted by OPD
BFM wins
Apoc pay the man

yay I can attach images now.

Please note this stlr had already been built I havn't played ahead and built one.

Ahh, so Unorthodox's theory is proven wrong. Now if we can just this disprove "round earth" nonsense.

Harovan · September 17, 2002, 11:48

I should have read Apolyton right after work rather than to build a prove out of an own game:

UnOrthOdOx · September 17, 2002, 13:27

I know that I have made them without before, but that could have been caused by some mod I was using at the time I suppose. At least someone set me straight.