It's funny how capturing the last city of a civilization gives everyone else 150 grievances against you but when a city state razes the last city, it doesn't do anything.

I was playing as Chinese Kublai and though I was gonna have a somewhat peaceful game pursuing a science victory since Pedro was neighbor and so was Amanitore though she was much further away and would have likely be at war with Pedro rather than me.

Well I guessed wrong, Pedro surprise warred me but I outteched him so I had an easily time killing his heavy chariots with crossbowmen and then captured his capital and a city, I was waiting to use my prophet until I had enough holy sites since Pedro kept spamming missionaries and my faith was pretty low but now that I was at war, I founded a religion and just kept pillaging his other cities while converting it and breaking his walls so that they either faced loyalty pressure or get razed by the city states I am suzerain of. I ended up flipping 3 of his cities due to loyalty pressure as well as. being in a golden age and I brought one of his cities to 0 health which one of the city states razed. I decided to just not bother with his last city since it was far and he was pretty much crippled but the two city states I was suzerain of came with bombards to his last city and then proceed to destroy his walls and raze it wiping him out of the game.

The best part after Pedro was gone is to see everyone act friendly still with the exception of Alexander since he was upset that I wasn't in war anymore but he was at the other continent. Had I captured the city instead, I'd be denounced by everyone. You'd think a city getting captured is better than being razed.