Why does it take so long to raze cities?

[Bobs]

This is a pita with the settlement limitation. I don't want to wait 9 turns or whatever for the city to be razed, all while dealing with happiness hits and an overbearing war wariness system

Just raze them in one turn and be done with it. Is there a mod for this?

[Kettlebloke]

Yes I also agree that the raze time does go on for too long. Cities being raided should not count towards your settlement limit.

[Tricking Trapster]

I have not tried this, but it might be an idea to pillage and burn most improvements before razing? You'd imagine that might reduce razing time as there is less left to burn.

[Xenpo]

Originally posted by Tricking Trapster:

I have not tried this, but it might be an idea to pillage and burn most improvements before razing? You'd imagine that might reduce razing time as there is less left to burn.

It does not.

I agree, this needs to be reduced, or the cities do not need to count towards your city number.

I have given my feedback regarding the same in the feedback/suggestions sub forum, and suggest you all do the same.

[Martin]

I take it back, burning cities does take too long the debt it creates waiting it just breaks the game.

-464 happiness - 45.5 influence.. there's no point continuing the game. It's wrecked by design.

[Vlad]

Agree, basically if you are attacked when you are near the settlement limit (accounting for how many you can hold with extra happiness), you have to give all the cities back and seek peace, otherwise you are penalised for winning the war and holding the cities. A mod to reduce the time to raze a city would be great.

[Ghostica]

Or you know, maybe instead of changing the game get better at planning ahead when going to war (why are you at your city limit in the first place when you are razing that city).

War should be punishing.

[Inkidu]

Probably to give the owner a chance to recapture. I know I'd be pissed if my big city got razed and I had to take it back in something like four turns.

[aphthakid]

Originally posted by Tricking Trapster:

I have not tried this, but it might be an idea to pillage and burn most improvements before razing? You'd imagine that might reduce razing time as there is less left to burn.

War crimes seem to help. In the modern era, keep bombing tiles that have population and you can knock the population of the city down quite a bit before taking it and razing time seems to be at least partially dependent on population. I don't know if someone actually knows everything that factors in.

[Smacktar]

Exactly my point. I posted a similar point in the Game Feedback forum.

Maybe allow a setting in multi-player to set the raze city timing. Then human players can decide what works for them. In single player, just let us wage proper war vs. AI.

[Bandit17]

If you can't bare the cost of razing than don't do it. I see it fine as is. If you plan accordingly and you have the foundations of your civilization built properly than you can burn multiple cities at once. The cost should not slow you down and if it does than it presents a hard choice to make in the strategy game you are playing (hard choices are a good thing!).

[Bandit17]

Originally posted by Bobs:

This is a pita with the settlement limitation. I don't want to wait 9 turns or whatever for the city to be razed, all while dealing with happiness hits and an overbearing war wariness system

Just raze them in one turn and be done with it. Is there a mod for this?

Okay, after a lot more time with the game I have come to agree with the OP.

So my previous post still stands because it's really not about the happiness penalty so much as Ages have us on the clock and we only have so much TIME. I don't think it's too bad early on, when settlements are still on the smaller side, but larger late game settlements will almost never be razed in time before the game ends. I mean at Stalingrad it took only a handful of months seeing the population going from 450,000 before the battle to just under 10,000 after the German surrender.

One turn might be too quick but something like a 50% increase in speed might feel better.

[Dray Prescot]

Originally posted by Tricking Trapster:

I have not tried this, but it might be an idea to pillage and burn most improvements before razing? You'd imagine that might reduce razing time as there is less left to burn.

I tried pillaging ALL of the developed Tiles of a City before I captured it and then started razing it.

This did NOT reduce the time to Raze the City, it still took one turn for every developed Tile before the City was finished being Razed.

[Rhapsody]

Originally posted by Dray Prescot:

Originally posted by Tricking Trapster:

I have not tried this, but it might be an idea to pillage and burn most improvements before razing? You'd imagine that might reduce razing time as there is less left to burn.

I tried pillaging ALL of the developed Tiles of a City before I captured it and then started razing it.

This did NOT reduce the time to Raze the City, it still took one turn for every developed Tile before the City was finished being Razed.

I still can't relate to the problem at all myself, but if pillaging districts contributed to reduction in razing time, it could be a balanced solution (or "solution") to speed up razing time without making it too easy and lacking gravity. I'm perfectly satisfied with having to deal with either A) influence and war support penalty for a longer time or B) risking not being able to raze the settlement completely before end of the age, but I wouldn't be opposed to hurrying the process along with my own actions.

Worth keeping in mind that presently the whole thing about razing going to waste can occur at only two points in a game, at the end of each of the first two ages. Going to war early and with strategy and forethought should have its benefits too.