I mean it might be a good mechanic to keep in. That city / settler plan stuff might be a viable way for science cultures to catch up to builders/industrials once you've rebalanced the tech score a bit. Although settler costs still seem too low in population for the gains you get :D

IMO, self-ransacking/razing is just absurd. It's silly historically and it's silly in terms of game effects (gaining gold, breaking existing trade routes). That would be bad already, but the bigger problem is that settlers interact with the industry/infrastructure economy so dramatically that you end up wanting to do ridiculous things to utilize them. I understand the good motivations behind settlers but they're simply a failed design attempt considering their implications. (See the recent Humankind diff game won on turn 55 due to settler spam among other exploits.) Settlers need to die and get patched out. Any unit that lets you spam a city without paying influence for it is ripe for abuse. The game needs a different approach to the problem of infrastructure catch-up.

I kind of feel like while making settlers cities shouldn't produce influence as an offset to being able to skip the influence cost when founding a city - which is an awesome tool in colonizing the new world but still feels pretty busted.

Krikkitone wrote:

I think you should not be able to raze your own districts/main plaza

Instead there should be an action to "Remove District"  done by city and "Revert City to Outpost", and "Abandon Outpost"

Outposts should not be liberated, just abandoned. [cities could still be liberated]

[Also the range of City Walls should be limited to 2 Tiles from Main Plaza or 1 tile from Garrison to allow easier Ransacking without a siege... and every turn you ransack should give some benefit]

Wow i do agree with all you suggestions, hope to see all of those changes in the future. I would also love to see some trading of outpost implemented between players and maybe also gifting outposts.

Ningauble wrote:

Well if you detach it ... it is an outpost. So you can modernize by making a new city after detaching it - and then reattaching territories to it. It just seems to be that everyone recognizes the rapidity that a settler provides in 'raze' and rebuild depending on how successfully the city it. I guess you could argue it's just demolishing and rebuilding. There is scrap sometimes but nah at the very least demolishing/ransacking your own cities shouldn't be all that profitable. 

Well you can't "detach" the main city territory except by ransacking it (or merging cities but that is ridiculous)

What They need to do is make Merging Cities and Attaching Territories use the same mechanic for determining cost

1. Territories term

30+50*(#Territories from one group)*(#Territories from other group)*(Total Attached Territories -Total # of cities)

[-1 from larger group]

2. District Term

Something like

500 * Districts in one group^1.16 * Districts in other group^1.16 / (Total Districts in Merged Group)

[do not count Outpost/Main Plaza/Admin Center/Wonders or Extensions]

3. Population Term

10*(Food cost of Total Population-Food Cost of Population 1 - Food Cost of Population 2)

And ignore infrastructure.... have the New City only have the Infrastructure of the one who keeps the Main Plaza.

Right. No I was saying maybe detach a territory to make a new city with the updated infrastructure and then absorb the old city but it's pretty expensive.