Raze, Loot or Occupy, How do you decide?

[TalkinNerdy]

I always wonder if I'm doing the right thing. What do you total war veterans do?

[Slayix312]

Raze if they are not complying and pissing me off (Averni); occupy if they are fairly reliable (pretty much any greek state). The latter goes for subjugating to; for me anyway.

I tried subjugating Averni without checking reliability; they turned on me a round later and then I had to go back and wipe them out the 2nd time.

[DecayWolf]

If you want to conquer this province for yourself, then ocupy.
If you want to take a city from your enemy but can't or don't want to ocupy this territory then lot it, and let the enemy retake after few turns take again and lot again, break enemy economy and raise yours (I never really need do this, but it's a option...)
Raze is a kind of pointless, since you could lot and destroy eveything also get some extra money... it's a kind of I want to mess with my enemy but I still want hold this province.

[Hardwire]

I go by money every time. ill just set my troops in there for a time till they cool there heads and stop trying to revolt. silly pesants do you really think you can match the might of sparta!!

[Kalvix]

Occupy if they are your culture and likely to not cause problems

Loot... I just don't use and never have I guess its meant to be used if you want to weaken somebody but not take over their stuff as it would be a hassle to own... never had that happen though when I go to war its for land!

Raze, if they have a different culture to you so will most likely rebel do this, it destroys every building and makes it much easier to convert it over to your culture. The hit to happiness is pretty huge but if you have money you can rebuild quickly and leaving an army in it for a couple of turns will quickly get it back up to positive happiness against anyway.

[GraveGrin]

I've tried Looting and Raiding in a Suebi campaign a few hours ago and its useful to get those rebellion started in other regions and some extra cash. Put then ur allies come across and occupy, great -.-. Usually i use a spy to have a look on the buildings and then decide if it fits to the rest of (my) province or my faction/playstyle in general

[sempronos]

Originally posted by Slayix312:

Raze if they are not complying and pissing me off (Averni); occupy if they are fairly reliable (pretty much any greek state). The latter goes for subjugating to; for me anyway.

I tried subjugating Averni without checking reliability; they turned on me a round later and then I had to go back and wipe them out the 2nd time.

I made the same mistake making one faction a client state. About 10 turns later they revolted when all my armies were far far away and it was a major pain to contain, because I was fighting two other factions at that time.

ALWAYS check their reliability before making them a client state, trust me on this!

[Ouroboros]

If raze removed that city from the game permanently I would use it. As for now the raze button feels pointless. I mean... if other AIs will simply take a city you dont want back, you might aswell just occupy it and keep it - building a temple and eco buildings.

Really wish Raze would permanently destroy a city but it doesent. So not occupying just prolongs the game. Because you have to go back and grab it again anyway to avoid "A NEW FACTION RISES!".

[-=EGS=- Gaminglord99]

i think raze and loot shoud not geve you the city loot shoud give you the same amount of gold the city makes a turn and the city stays with its origanal owner (youre looting not occupying) and raze should destroy the city like say city ->town -> outpost ever time its razed? that way you can still take ove a region even if the town is razed and the reversed could work outpost ->town ->city by growth what do you guys think?