Why cant both these cities build a stoneworks?

Status
Not open for further replies.
On a side note, unless you are desperate for 1 extra happy, stoneworks really isn't worth building unless you have at least 1 marble or stone to work. The extra hammer you get from the building will take you a ton of time to get back if you aren't working any stone/marble tiles and 1 happy for 1 gold is about as bad as it can get.
 
Solution is simple, in the third screenshot, it shows that Ollan currently have authority over that stone hex, you see the arrows over it? Press it to flip the control of that hex over to Machu, That should permit Machu to build the stonework.

Exactly I see it now. I never came across this before, nice to know though.
 
just curious - why would you want stoneworks in both cities anyhow? Stoneworks costs maintenance, and only gives +1 hammer per stone tile worked .. so you'd want a city with stoneworks to work as many stone tiles as possible to reduce the cost per bonus gained.

Er? 1 gold maintenance? I'd trade 1 gold for 1 production any day of the week. Consider that it additionally adds 1 happiness and another production on the stone tile -- and that's base production that will be additionally modified by %s. In my opinion, the stone works is always worth building within the first 100 turns of the game.
 
On a side note, unless you are desperate for 1 extra happy, stoneworks really isn't worth building unless you have at least 1 marble or stone to work. The extra hammer you get from the building will take you a ton of time to get back if you aren't working any stone/marble tiles and 1 happy for 1 gold is about as bad as it can get.

1 gold maintenance is absolutely nothing for +1 happiness and +1 production, its something that I would build wherever possible.

The tooltip for the building "City must not be in plains". Perhaps this means that a majority of the tiles surrondiing the city must not be plains, not that the city itself can't be built on plains.

My capital proves that this isnt the case:

Spoiler :



Its either because the stone is 3 tiles away, or because it falls into two city radii, even though it wasnt within ollans borders.
 
I specialize my cities and like to have them run as efficient as possible, so 1 production for 1 gold isn't always a 'no-brainer'. In your case, i'd specialize the city with the 2 stone on production and the other probably on gold (with the river 'that' seems like a no-brainer).
 
Its 1 production and 1 happiness for 1 gold, not 1 production for 1 gold.

Thats is a very efficient gain for only 1 maintenance, you gain an extra producction and room for another population point. I want to build stoneworks whenever possible.
 
In general:

The city that gains the tile, via cultural border expansion or tile purchase, gets the resource and will 'lock' any special buildings as long as it is within the 3-ring of the city.

But:

Dropping a city near a 'special building' resource will cause the game to recalculate which city 'owns' the tile. This is very obvious for tiles within the first ring (all cities 'own' the tiles right beside the city) but can be slightly less obvious for 2nd and 3rd ring tiles. I've seen new cities steal resources from my capital when they were 3 ring in my capital and only 2 ring in my new city.

Someone will have to explore it further to figure out exactly when a tile would flip from one to the other.

As per the OP Q:
You capital has marble and not stone. So it's not the same, given that you can marble build the stoneworks. This could be a 'bug' if marble based stoneworks can be built on any tile, but stone based stoneworks must be built on non-plains tiles.
 
My marble capital and both stone cities are all built on grassland tiles.
 
I cannot build stonework in either of these two cities (one is on plains one is on a hill) they are 8+ tiles apart with no other cities near them. The help entry says non-plains tile so I should be able to build a stoneworks on the hill city.

They both have improved stone tiles and I have the required tech for building a stoneworks.

Is there another pre-requisite for building a stoneworks?
 
You cannot build Stoneworks in cities that are founded on plains tiles. That explains the one city that you say is was built on a plains tile. If the hill city is built on a plains hill (mouse hover to see the terrain type), there you are.

If the hill city is not built on a plains tile, it may be that the improved quarry tile does not "belong" to it, but rather "belongs" to a neighboring city, in which case that neighboring city is the only one that can build a stoneworks. And if that neighboring city is the one you built on a plains tile, you are, again, out of luck.
 
You cannot build Stoneworks in cities that are founded on plains tiles. That explains the one city that you say is was built on a plains tile. If the hill city is built on a plains hill (mouse hover to see the terrain type), there you are.

If the hill city is not built on a plains tile, it may be that the improved quarry tile does not "belong" to it, but rather "belongs" to a neighboring city, in which case that neighboring city is the only one that can build a stoneworks. And if that neighboring city is the one you built on a plains tile, you are, again, out of luck.
But the hill city (which is on a hill) has no other city anywhere near it! By near I mean they are 7-8 tiles away, there were never any other cities there either ...so it seems broken for me :(

Edit ...ah plains and hill ...it can be both :confused: yes that was it ...those maps are damn tricksy :wallbash:
 
MadDjinn is right about, the ownership goes to the first city to claim it.

It's an aggravating mechanic of the game that has me consistently going back to playing Gandhi and Tradition-based games instead of Liberty-based. I try to plan cities with production/food balance, but I always feel obliged to give the resource to the city with the extra +1 production. I wish they changed it so the player could assign ownership, via selecting the working citizen or some other ui, and when that happens the resource-dependent building of the previous city will go 'inactive', it's benefits and costs ignored until ownership returns. That being said...

But:

Dropping a city near a 'special building' resource will cause the game to recalculate which city 'owns' the tile. This is very obvious for tiles within the first ring (all cities 'own' the tiles right beside the city) but can be slightly less obvious for 2nd and 3rd ring tiles. I've seen new cities steal resources from my capital when they were 3 ring in my capital and only 2 ring in my new city.

Someone will have to explore it further to figure out exactly when a tile would flip from one to the other.

This is very interesting. I didn't know about this, other then when puppetting captured cities. Could it be possible to build a circus, then flip the ownership to the new city and build a second circus? Or does the existence of the circus lock ownership to that city? Which goes back to what I get annoyed about: if I have a stables built for the sheep by my capital, then accidentally claim a horse, will my new city not get the horse and neither a stable nor a circus?
 
Moderator Action: Please do not revive a 3 year old thread. Let the dead rest in peace. Thread closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom