June 30, 2002, 12:52
|
#1
|
|
Warlord
Local Time: 21:29
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Bourbonnais, IL
Posts: 161
|
Does killing the capital actually do anything?
I was reading the post about the dark ages, and I was wondering: Does capturing/razing the enemies capital really do anything but destroy the spaceship? The palace is instantly rebuilt in anouther city, which I think isn't fair, it should have to be rebuilt, and in the meantime, get some crippling corruption. The only reason I see why it gets rebuilt right away is because under most govs, corruption is based on distance to capital, and without one, that could be an issue. Maybe the forbidden palace should change into it if you lose it. But what I want to know is this: What exactly happens when you or an enemy loses their capital? Any negative effects other than it just shifting?
__________________
They don't call me Springfield Fats because I'm morbidly obese!
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2002, 13:35
|
#2
|
|
King
Local Time: 03:29
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: of Scotland
Posts: 1,383
|
No
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2002, 13:55
|
#3
|
|
Princess
Local Time: 04:29
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 541
|
You will loose of course all the accumulated culture, which is usually highest in your captital. You will also have changed corruption, depending on where your capital moves, but loosing the city follows the same rules as for normal cities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2002, 22:25
|
#4
|
|
Warlord
Local Time: 21:29
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Bourbonnais, IL
Posts: 161
|
Well that kind of sucks. In the very least it should throw in into anarchy for a bit, like if you chose to start a revolution. Would be anouther advantage for religious civs, and make things a little realistic.
__________________
They don't call me Springfield Fats because I'm morbidly obese!
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 1, 2002, 08:27
|
#5
|
|
King
Local Time: 03:29
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: of Scotland
Posts: 1,383
|
That, however would make a Religious civ far too good at war, which is not the aim of that trait.
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 1, 2002, 09:24
|
#6
|
|
Deity
Local Time: 05:29
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,112
|
But something defently needs to be done, there should be a reason why to attack the enemies capital (than to attack just some other city)...
__________________
This space is empty... or is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2, 2002, 17:24
|
#7
|
|
Emperor
Local Time: 20:29
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 4,168
|
You take their capital because it is so close to other cities you have captured from them that you want to reduce the chance of flipping. Also because their original capital is generally the most built up, improvement and culture wise.
It has been recommended that you just cut all the communication lines from it to the outside world to cripple the civ. Of course, if the rest of the world is already at war with them ....
__________________
JB
I play BtS (3.19) -- Noble or Prince, Rome, marathon speed, huge hemispheres (2 of them), aggressive AI, no tech brokering. I enjoy the Hephmod Beyond mod. For all non-civ computer uses, including internet, I use a Mac.
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2, 2002, 22:02
|
#8
|
Local Time: 22:29
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: ACK!! PPHHHHTTBBBTTTT!!!
Posts: 7,022
|
Taking a capital could actually, IMPROVE their production, IF the capital jump to a more central location of their empire.
The only real advantage I have found for taking the capital, is that it isn't autorazed.
__________________
"I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. There's a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside. Look out, he's fuzzy, let's get out of here."
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2, 2002, 22:13
|
#9
|
|
Deity
Local Time: 05:29
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Republic of Flanders
Posts: 10,747
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Tuberski
The only real advantage I have found for taking the capital, is that it isn't autorazed.
|
???  ???
could you explain this, what am I missing?
__________________
#There’s a city in my mind
Come along and take that ride
And it’s all right, baby, it’s all right #
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2002, 02:03
|
#10
|
|
Warlord
Local Time: 21:29
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Bourbonnais, IL
Posts: 161
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by alva848
??? ???
could you explain this, what am I missing?
|
If a city is size 1 with zero culture, you automatically raze it. But if it has 2 or more people, and has culture, you get the choice. The capital has the palace, so it automatically gets culture, therefore you always get a choice.
__________________
They don't call me Springfield Fats because I'm morbidly obese!
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2002, 19:03
|
#11
|
Local Time: 22:29
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: ACK!! PPHHHHTTBBBTTTT!!!
Posts: 7,022
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Palleon
If a city is size 1 with zero culture, you automatically raze it. But if it has 2 or more people, and has culture, you get the choice. The capital has the palace, so it automatically gets culture, therefore you always get a choice.
|
AFAIK even a size one capital that has expanded wont be razed either.
__________________
"I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. There's a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside. Look out, he's fuzzy, let's get out of here."
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 23:29.
|
|
