This sounds interesting but i don't know how the forced displacement of population would work out in later stages of the game when maybe there aren't any territories that haven't been settled. Also I can't think of incentives to kill the population of a city that will eventually be yours or to send them away to your enemy. I can understand destroying the city if you think the enemy will take it back soon, but if you intend to keep it I don't understand why would you want to get rid of the pop, much less send it to your enemy. But cool ideas nevertheless

you can already raze/ransack your own settlements and outposts when playing, this isn't automatic but the function of razing conquered cities is thus still there. I cant remember if you can ransack other's cities but you can do so towards opposing outposts at least. 

200mm wrote:

I think that there should be more options when conquering a city. such as

a) totally erazing a conquered city, or reducing it to an outpost

b) when performing an option in a) the remaining population of the conquered city faces following fate.

 

  1) Relocation to one of my cities: this action increases the population of my target city.

 

  2) Relocation to outside of my border: this action causes the population to flee to nearest cities, which are controlled by original culture. If none is available the population becomes refugee and flee to a nearest city, which is NOT controlled by Player. If none of the aforementioned options are available and the adjacent area is NOT controlled by anyone, the population become nomad for some time and eventually create a new independent free city in that region. (if they survive long enough)

 

  3) Total extermination: Literally, this action causes the population to perish. Since this option is quite extreme, it might lead to some kind of political/diplomatic consequences. (maybe Player lose political stability when the morale against the owner of the city is insufficient, or surrounding countries receive instant moral boost against Player or even trigger crises, depending on leader's traits and government types??)

I would love to have this as well because in games like civilization 4, I tend to autoraze by default cause I can't move them at all, if I can relocate the conquer city, and move it to an area that could fit it in by recommandation circles so i know I'm placing it in a good area. I've also wish we can change the name of the city to similar to the name of my own empire that I currently rule (remember Instabul after it was Constantinople). That way it feels a bit more original, so I don't feel like I'm playing Japan that just conquered New York, for example.

Limstella wrote:

you can already raze/ransack your own settlements and outposts when playing, this isn't automatic but the function of razing conquered cities is thus still there. I cant remember if you can ransack other's cities but you can do so towards opposing outposts at least. 

Thank you for clarifying... unfortunately I had little chance to play Stedia demo, therefore I may miss some already-existing features.

roger212 wrote:

This sounds interesting but i don't know how the forced displacement of population would work out in later stages of the game when maybe there aren't any territories that haven't been settled. Also I can't think of incentives to kill the population of a city that will eventually be yours or to send them away to your enemy. I can understand destroying the city if you think the enemy will take it back soon, but if you intend to keep it I don't understand why would you want to get rid of the pop, much less send it to your enemy. But cool ideas nevertheless

That is a good point. Maybe relocating population to one of my cities should lead to some changes, such as

 -random social event(positive or negative)

-reduction of political stability of a target city for certain turns (if cultural proximity between original population of your city and newly relocated population is low, then it should have much worse effect)

-instant drop of your cultural influence or changes to the number of religious followers(If the population has different religion from yours)

Also, changes to political stability, cultural influence and religious followers should be scalable, depending on a ratio of relocated population/total population of my target city

And the incentive for displacement of the population to the enemy, rather than extermination could be less enemy morale boost or less diplomatic reactions from other countries?

Or weaker grievances/crises

I never knew there is a similar feature in older Civilization games. Very interesting!

Thank you for providing us very detailed information Waykot!

And yeah, maybe an ability to generally relocate any population among various cities could be also useful.

Historically both migrating to newly conquered area and forced displacement did happen, so there is no reason to exclude such feature in Humankind™.

The population relocation seems very interesting. As of now, you can indirectly do it if you are a military-aligned culture, by levying militia/citizens, which cost pop, and then moving them to another city & disbanding. If they were to implement the population relocation as you suggest, they would probably have to rework this bonus, as levies are not a very good unit type and many people who played the opendev commented the pop relocation was the only useful feature to come out of it.

Waykot wrote:
Maybe a VIP can confirm it ?

VIPs can confirm nothing. We are under strict NDA not to release new information. Cat-O-Nine-Tails controls info released so you'd have to ask her but she's pretty busy these days.

200mm wrote:
Thank you for providing us very detailed information Waykot!

You're welcome, glad that helped !

roger212 wrote:
As of now, you can indirectly do it if you are a military-aligned culture, by levying militia/citizens, which cost pop, and then moving them to another city & disbanding.

You're absolutely right, that's a good point ! In Stadia OpenDev build, building units actually costed 1 pop. So disbanding this unit in another city would increase the pop by 1 in that city. And you're right, Militarist cultures/civilizations have the ability to levy militia, which could then be used to populate another city. I didn't try these mechanics, but if the general mechanic of 1 unit = 1 pop is kept for the final version of the game, that's definitely a way to relocate population in your empire.

Eulogos wrote:
VIPs can confirm nothing. We are under strict NDA not to release new information. Cat-O-Nine-Tails controls info released so you'd have to ask her but she's pretty busy these days.

Fair enough, thanks @Eulogos. Perfectly understandable.

Personally, I wouldn't bother Cat-O-Nine-Tails about it, we'll eventually have more infos about the whole game mechanics in the coming months, up until release. And, hopefully, we'll have another round of OpenDev to test more things as well.

Waykot wrote:
I didn't try these mechanics, but if the general mechanic of 1 unit = 1 pop is kept for the final version of the game, that's definitely a way to relocate population in your empire.

Does military units = free population storage without food maintaince, whereas if the military unit wasn't produced there would be a food tax on the unit of population in the city?  So, the upside to having a large military would be more Super Growth cities due to less population food tax, while the downside would be the loss of other resources.  Also, as you pointed out, relocating the resources and population freely to whichever city, when you decide to disband obsolete military units to whichever cities.  In fact, another way of looking at it maybe, disband 4 obselete military units = buying a wonder of the world!  So, given that military units is stored production too, its simply a matter of when to "buy" a city improvement or wonder, which can be useful when there's nothing else to build, and the military unit is obsolete.

Waykot wrote:
Well, as of Stadia OpenDev, military units when disbanded only generated 1 population each, there were no Industry "refund".

With the 1 extra population generated from disbanding a unit, can't you purchase with each population unit other stuff that your city can build, even wonders of the world?  So, its basically an either or:  Either use a disbanded unit to gain population or use it to get an Industry "refund."  Being that a unit costs both population and resources to produce - getting back only 1 of them (population or stored industry) wouldn't make it worth the while, generally, I'd think - unless that unit is obsolete.

Progress wrote:
With the 1 extra population generated from disbanding a unit, can't you purchase with each population unit other stuff that your city can build, even wonders of the world?

Gained population in the city by disbanding a unit could be assigned wherever you wanted : to Food, Industry, Money or Science.

Once again, it was true in Stadia OpenDev, but it doesn't mean at all that this will be the current mechanic in the final version of the game.

Waykot wrote:
I wouldn't say a military unit is a free population storage though. You need Industry to build the unit. Once the unit is build, it consumes 1 population in your city. So basically, not free at all ! 

If a city can always build a unit in 8 turns and always grow in 8 turns; then that city can always produce stored 'non-taxable food' population at that rate.  Even though its not free population because it took 8 turns of industry to build; hypothetically, that unit of stored population is perhaps better than having the same city down the road at a bigger size with stagnant growth, if there's nothing else better to produce with that industry.

Krikkitone wrote:
However, the population being "stored" doesn't cost any food/stability maintenance.... but it doesn't produce anything either.

Right - it doesn't produce anything!  Therefore, to have the military unit uncontraversally worth it beyond having military for the sake of military would be a matter of a cost/benefit analysis of a pop.  If the cost of food/stability maintaince to the city for a pop is greater than the benefit of working that food/stability for the city's pop; then producing the military unit to store the population should be a no-brainer.