Razing cities

Spartan_RawB · December 29, 2002, 23:31

I was in a game the other day. Captured enemy cap. After its capture, I put in a defender and the cap had a wonder. At this point the city is size 2.

The next turn, the city is still size 2. Enemy attacks it, and kills the defender. Reduces it to size 1. Then, he sends a unit to recapture his capital.

At this point, I expected the city to be razed, but...it wasn't. Why?

Six Thousand Year Old Man · December 30, 2002, 01:13

I assume no walls, of course, since the city was reduced to size 1 on the first attack.

I've seen this as well... probably some random factor at work.

Spartan_RawB · December 30, 2002, 04:48

Needless to say, it sucked. The city was built on a forest, and it had a wonder. That's all. Anyone seen this?

Scouse Gits · December 30, 2002, 08:32

I believe this phenomna is a function of the state of the food box - but I am prepared to be contradicted...

SG[1]

solo · December 30, 2002, 11:49

Capitals have some special properties. Maybe among them is an immunity to being razed.

rah · December 30, 2002, 11:59

What type of unit razed it? Might the glitch be if a non-offensive unit is the razer.

I can remember this happening once on one of my cities by the barbs. I expected the (original size two and reduced to) one size city to be destroyed and it instead turned into a barb city (it wasn't my capital) But I can't remember if an offensive unit did the final stroke or whether it was the king.

Rich

Spartan_RawB · December 30, 2002, 16:20

It was a catapult in there. And his elephant killed the cat, and took cap I think.

Anyway, I lost that game b/c of that failed surprise attack. His SZ lived on.

LDiCesare · December 30, 2002, 16:29

Size 1 cities are not destroyed if they had been previously owned by the attacker. It's been explained somewhere, maybe the GL...
I don't know how long the "used to own that city" flag lasts, but it also helps lowering the cost for bribing the city if I am not mistaken.
So if you take a city then lose it to the previous attacker within a few turns, it is not destroyed (and the message says they "liberate" the city). If a lot of time passes or someone else takes the city, then population is reduced.

rah · December 30, 2002, 17:39

In my case, I had been the sole owner of the city in question. So something else also has to contribute.

War4ever · December 30, 2002, 19:58

i have seeen this happen to and it has left me scatching my head.....i think the grain box is a logical explanation...but how many of us are checking the box..... only when size one and determining whether or not to attack out against barbs.....at least for me...

nothing pisses me off more than a city that grows to size two as it loses its defender, only to be taken the next turn....

i suppose i should be thankfull, i can always bribe it back but i think my ego would rather it was just destroyed

Heresson · January 1, 2003, 14:36

Barbarians never raze a city... Do they?

Straybow · January 2, 2003, 01:05

Yes, I believe I've seen barbs raze a city. It was Moscow, a single-city empire, with a wonder in it. It was ages ago… wait a minute, it might have been Civ1…

rjmatsleepers · January 2, 2003, 03:19

I had a Civ2 game recently where the barbs razed one of my cities

BTW - When do they ask for money rather than attack

Is it worth removing a weak defender in order to pay them off

RJM at Sleepers

Scouse Gits · January 2, 2003, 03:46

The barbs will demand cash if you have > 50g in the kitty...

SG[1]

Six Thousand Year Old Man · January 2, 2003, 18:02

Quote:

Originally posted by rjmatsleepers
I had a Civ2 game recently where the barbs razed one of my cities

BTW - When do they ask for money rather than attack

Is it worth removing a weak defender in order to pay them off

RJM at Sleepers

IMO, yes. Particularly if you have enough cash so they will ask, but not so much that they'll ask for a lot. And especially when your defender will be overwhelmed anyway. My question is... do they ALWAYS ask for cash when at the gates of an undefended city and you have >50g? (@ SG [1] )

That said, there's a school of thought in these parts advocating the abandonment of a small, non strategic city to barbs, and then stationing a diplomat nearby to bribe cheap NON units. Handy, especially in Republic/Demo (and better with Leo's).

Heresson · January 3, 2003, 11:32

It is worth moving the defender away. However, answering your question, in my most recent game I had 200 gold and they didn't ask for it, they captured the city... Sometimes, however, it is not that bad. Later You can bribe it for a low price with at least one costy barbarian unit in it.
It's not like in Heroes, where I left my city be taken so that
the rival build for me the most expensive buildings...
chlip

War4ever · January 3, 2003, 16:40

are you sure its > 50 g.....i am not sure i have seen barbs not trash a city with less that 80gold or so....i thought maybe the lowest i have seen was for 39g one time.....

its been so long...i rarely pay them off unless i have to......even then if i have too much cash but alot of cities i will let them take it and just bribe it back...

if its early in the game then i am more likely to pay...cuz those early cities are important

Scouse Gits · January 3, 2003, 19:54

Yup - we're sure its > 50g - but beware the tribes have memories if you have told the Goth Barbs to sod off previously they will not ask again...

The SGs getting fairly well sloshed - but nonetheless pretty sure of their facts...

War4ever · January 3, 2003, 21:19

oh i was not aware of that laast bit of info....the amount of cash is irrelevant, but the sodding off part..good to know

Caesar the Great · January 3, 2003, 22:43

what i've seen happen in 2.42 is barbs kill a city if there wasn't a defender in it, but if they kill the defender - reducing the city size to 1 - they conquer it

so it might have something to do with the food box

but with normal civs... maybe it has something to do with it being a capital? probably a glitch though

War4ever · January 13, 2003, 01:13

ok in mp the other night i had barbs capture two size one cities both without defenders in them, off boats

i had no cash

needless to say i bribed them both back, but i was surprised ?

rah · January 13, 2003, 09:41

Didn't know that had a memory.

The only problem with paying their bribe is that when they disappear, the king does too.

DrSpike · January 13, 2003, 12:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
if you have told the Goth Barbs to sod off previously they will not ask again...

Really? You just keep on learning with this game.

rah · January 13, 2003, 12:57

I can remember, when we cooperated more in MP games, giving most of my gold to my partner so the barbs wouldn't demand as much. (and right before losing a city to an opponent so they would get as big a chunk of bucks)

As long as MWHC wasn't your partner, you'd get the money back later

RAH

War4ever · January 14, 2003, 00:12

yes MWHC wasn't too trustworthy in a few departments

Caesar the Great · January 18, 2003, 11:07

reminds me of a game of monopoly I played recently

5 people were playing and whenever me or my friend were near the "Pay income tax" thing we'd sell all our property and money to the other for 1 dollar. My friend ended up landing on boardwalk with the hotel (which was owned by some other player) and I ended up keeping all his money and property and eventually winning