Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Have you found it worthwhile to raze settlements in order to bring fertility back? I'm thinking I might as well have a couple goat herds and just look elsewhere for fertile lands to put my farms rather than go through the trouble.
Razing is never beneficial to fertility, its simply that its effects are limited in duration. :)
I have never razed a settlement for the specific issue of fertility/infertility. I have resettled lands but that is usually in the late game. I'll raze usually because I am pissed at the occupants and desire a long-term solution which sacking, for example, does not provide, and/or I was not prepared to "occupy". In one campaign I did raze a number of places (including one of mine) in the hope of creating a "buffer" between my lands and the Huns. Can't recall if that clever strategem worked or not...