When should I sack?

**henyo10** · February 22, 2009, 06:26 AM

Sacking seems to be overshadowed by occupy which does not destroy any buildings. I wonder why would you destroy a region when you can use it?

**Caesar Clivus** · February 22, 2009, 06:35 AM

When you need a quick cash injection. Sacking settlements nets you a LOT more florins than either occupying or exterminating. So when you need some money quick you can sack but over the long term it's better to occupy: more infrastructure and more population (= more taxes).

**PerXX** · February 22, 2009, 06:39 AM

Well, as you know, there's 3 ways to take over a city.

Occopy is the 'good' one. It gives chivalry, and helps your factions reputation. Public Order can be bad though.

Sacking is the 'neutral' way. It gives the most money, and helps somewhat with the Public Order. It has no effect on your factions reputation.

Exterminating is the 'evil' way. It is the best way to keep Public Order under control, but also adds dread, and lowers your factions reputation.

**Caesar Clivus** · February 22, 2009, 06:47 AM

Sacking decreases your rep.

**henyo10** · February 22, 2009, 06:54 AM

Sacking also increases dread it's not neutral

**Caesar Clivus** · February 22, 2009, 06:59 AM

Just a little less evil than extermination...for the discerning despot

**henyo10** · February 22, 2009, 07:01 AM

Makes me wonder though how come exterminating nets lesser florin but destroys the most buildings while sacking destroys some buildings and gets a lot more florins.

**Caesar Clivus** · February 22, 2009, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by henyo10

Makes me wonder though how come exterminating nets lesser florin but destroys the most buildings while sacking destroys some buildings and gets a lot more florins.

Because sacking = pillaging, i.e. you are looking for riches. Whereas extermination is wanton destruction: more things get destroyed in the madness so there is less that you can profit from afterwards.

**Musthavename** · February 22, 2009, 07:34 AM

I tend to Occupy everything at the start in order to build up Chivalry, as growth helps more at the start. After i've defeated a faction or two, I start sacking. I've already got a core economic base to build on so the cash injection of a sack helps keep my military going. Then I can start expanding quickly. Likewise, as i'm now a distance from my capital, the sack helps keep order so I don't have to leave several units there, just 1 or 2. Late game or where i'm in a complete foreign region (in terms of religion), start Exterminating. I'm too big at this point for anyone to stop me so order matters most.

**Santiago de Pola** · February 22, 2009, 08:10 AM

Occupy - when the target settlement has the same religion, or is a castle(enemy fortresses or citadels with rival religion should be considered for sacking, due to possible unrest)..increase in rep and chivalry

Sack - when target settlement has a rival religion(i.e. you're a catholic, and the conquered settlement is pagan or muslim), or when you need money..small decrease in rep and chivalry

Exterminate - rarely, when conquering huge cities with a rival religion(due to likely unrest)..high decrease in rep and chivalry

**Tacitursa** · February 22, 2009, 08:11 AM

Sacking is always good if u think the settlement will be unhappy. It reduces population just enough to help with squalor / unrest etc

Sacking also reduces the ammount of garrison a building needs sometimes just occupying and putting 2-3 units in can lead to a revolt and is quite common. For instance when your going on a rampage with a full stack and take a region but can continue and get another 1 in the same turn. Sacking allows you to just leave 1-2 units garrison with no risk of a revolt so your stack can remain strong and continue.

Sacking is a must when taking muslim regions especially those like Jerusalem that are jam packed with population its very hard to keep settlement happy if u dont. You can avoid sacking muslim regions though if beforehand you send a boat full of priests to convert the religion to 80% or more

**Viscule** · February 22, 2009, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Wizav85

Sacking is always good if u think the settlement will be unhappy. It reduces population just enough to help with squalor / unrest etc

Sacking also reduces the ammount of garrison a building needs sometimes just occupying and putting 2-3 units in can lead to a revolt and is quite common. For instance when your going on a rampage with a full stack and take a region but can continue and get another 1 in the same turn. Sacking allows you to just leave 1-2 units garrison with no risk of a revolt so your stack can remain strong and continue.

Sacking is a must when taking muslim regions especially those like Jerusalem that are jam packed with population its very hard to keep settlement happy if u dont. You can avoid sacking muslim regions though if beforehand you send a boat full of priests to convert the religion to 80% or more

Took alexandria and it ended up in rioting because i didnt sack it. But i sent a family member and that sort it out.

**Mega Tortas de Bodemloze** · February 22, 2009, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by henyo10

Sacking seems to be overshadowed by occupy which does not destroy any buildings. I wonder why would you destroy a region when you can use it?

Unless your going Full Bore Dread or on the opposite side of the globe, I would strongly NOT advise sacking....Hmmmm..:hmmm: Strange words form a self-professed

DreadMaster

...