Tourism Industry

In civ IV they should include a tourism industry. I know the ancient wonders in civ III make money from tourism but that is too lame. All older buildings should make money from tourism, temples, cathedrals, universities. They should only do this though once they hit about 150 years in age. Not only that but a civ should be able to make money from tourism not just from buildings but also from culture. If the civ has a high culture then it should get more tourism. Civs should also get tourism if they have a nice environment, not much pollution and have some forests/jungles in them. It shouldn't be on a per city basis though it should just be added to the treasury to help eliminate the big civs always win problem.

why didn't i think of this? they have this in Moon tycoon, and i like it. have a new advisor. a tourism one. have 3 values, attraction, morale, and tourists. you could build buildings (i.e. hotel, shopping mall, museum) that would incrase/decrease those factors. stuff like factories would decrease morale. certain techs might increase it. This is a great idea i really hope this is considered for Civ4

They could also incorperate your current military stance into tourism. ie. if you are at war with a lot of people, no one will come and 'visit'.

Good idea...i always wanted to have a tourism industry...it's pretty cool...and it's realistic...look at today's modern cities...New York, Paris, London...They generate millions from the tourism industry...

1) Resurrecting dead threads is

2) So am I.


I was playing Tropico the other day and..

Well, the thought did occur to me. Why hasn't tourism ever been dealt with in Civ? As the above folks posted, it could add a lot of flavor to the game. Here's another motivation to have a stable and peaceful government, to get along with your neighbors, to improve your surroundings. Basically a reward for the Builders. But they already have enough, you say? Yeah I guess.. the space race ho hum. Still think it would boost the fun factor though, and that's the stated intent of the Civ 4 team, isnt it?

So instead of Tourism just increasing commerce at cities with old buildings.. how about cities that have unusual terrain features get a bonus too.. like volcanoes or coral reefs (new terrain subtype from seacoastal areas), or rainforests (jungle with fruit), or mountains even, these could all add to commerce in cities that hold them in their radius. New worker activities could be added, things such as 'build ski slope/national park/fishing camp' in specific terrain types. New resources could be added to specific terrain that would pop upon discovery of various techs. Things like 'hot springs' in a tundra zone or 'dolphin schools' along coast lines, or cave formations in mountainous zones. Each of these could add a bump of commerce from tourism.

Maybe tourists could be graphically represented by AI controlled (automatic) units that moved independenly during the 'barbarian' turn. Such units would have starting nationalities, and would travel on their own from one country to the next, stopping in various 'good tourism cities'. Each tourist that spends a turn in one of your cities might cause the city to experience a we love the king day sort of effect while the tourist is there. The tourist would travel on eventually to another city and so on before returning home. Another possibility is the Tropico paradigm. A tourist starts with X gold coin commerce units and as it visits each city on its trip, it drops some off there. When it runs out of money it goes home.

Tourists would not go into war zones. Tourists could be captured by belligerent states (countries at war with their nation) and held for ransom. Tourists might have a chance to seek asylum if they visit a country nicer than their own, transforming into a worker unit that could be added to a city.

Lots of possibilities here.. Anyone else have ideas?

-Elgalad

If tourism were to be implemented, the transport technology would have to be factored in. In the ancient days tourists didn't go a thousand miles for vacation every year just to see the World's Largest Ball of Twine.

And, of course, you would have to be able to see your opponents' cultural buildings (that always bugged me. How can your cities flip to a culturally advanced opponent if there's no way to tell if they've got a single Temple?)

I don't like the idea of a physical Tourist unit running around, though. Just have tourism revenues represented by commerce increase (there should be a more international commerce system, too, like SMAC).

How about a simple building:

Cities that have generated more than X amount of culture will be able to build a Hotel, generating money based on the city's cultural output.

(And perhaps increasing the amount of culture trade between you and other nations. After all, if enough Germans keep visiting your great city, your city would start to sympathize a bit more with the Germans. And the Germans would start to sympathize more with you. Bless the people coming together.)

(And perhaps increasing the amount of culture trade between you and other nations. After all, if enough Germans keep visiting your great city, your city would start to sympathize a bit more with the Germans. And the Germans would start to sympathize more with you. Bless the people coming together.)

Click to expand...

yea sure until they realise your actually sending spies over not holiday makers

Who needs spies when you can just walk to the nearest kiosk for a map of every city in the country and then pick up a newspaper for detailed military plans? Yes, tourism does create an obvious downside. In order for people to be awed by your culture, they must walk through your streets, which means little or no cost for veiwing the improvements of a city (you wouldn't be able to see build orders or non-MP garrisons unless you doled out the extra cash for Espionage, of course).

Tourists should NOT cause we love the king days. If anything, there is solid evidence that tourism causes unhappiness in destination areas. I studied this at university. I know of what I speak on this matter.

I think tourism is a great idea, but it certainly would not be a part of the Ancient or Medieval eras. I don't think it should be powerful stategy; it should just be perk for building a more peaceful nation. Of the two eras that would that would have tourism obviously the modern era would have more.

Some questions: Would tourism be something that you would have research? or would it be something that you once you reach, say, the industrial era? If it were done by era, how would it work I were the industrial era and everyone was in the medieval era? Obviously culture will be a factor, but how would reputation affect tourism? Would there be an inverse to tourism if I had a very bad reputation?

Actually, tourism was definitely a part of the Ancient world.

"I have set eyes on the wall of lofty Babylon on which is a road for chariots, and the statue of Zeus by the Alpheus, and the hanging gardens, and the Colossus of the Sun, and the huge labour of the high pyramids, and the vast tomb of Mausolus; but when I saw the house of Artemis that mounted to the clouds, those other marvels lost their brilliancy, and I said, 'Lo, apart from Olympus, the Sun never looked on aught so grand.'" (Antipater, Greek Anthology IX.58)
The historian Herodotus, the scholar Callimachus of Cyrene (ca 305–240 BC) at the Museum of Alexandria, and the engineer Philon of Byzantium had made earlier lists but the writings have not survived, except as references. The Greek category was not "Wonders" but "theamata"— closer to "must-sees".

Click to expand...

Thats from wikipedia. It is kind of hard to imagine a 'must-see' outside teh context of tourists.

This is a pretty good idea; shouldn't be too hard to implement in some way, and fact is that tourism is a surprisingly large part of at least modern world economy.

I'm thinking also government type should affect the effects of tourism. For example a facsist or communist society will not be as 'open', thus greatly limiting the amount of tourists both entering and leaving. This leads to two more observations:

1. Mewtarthio, the downside of tourism, as regards to espionage and intelligence, would also be reduced if playing a more 'closed' government type.

2. Tourists could have nationality - and the overall culture rates would affect the willingness of one civ's citizens to visit another civ. (With an obvious connection to migration and defection, but that's another thread).

The culture profits that come from old wonders in CIV3 sort of represent tourism anyway...

I think the way government affects tourism is already reflected in the fact that democracy/republic gets an extra trade arrow in each tile anyway.

Elgalad said:

...

So instead of Tourism just increasing commerce at cities with old buildings.. how about cities that have unusual terrain features get a bonus too.. like volcanoes or coral reefs (new terrain subtype from seacoastal areas), or rainforests (jungle with fruit), or mountains even, these could all add to commerce in cities that hold them in their radius.
....

-Elgalad

Click to expand...

I like the idea, would give an additional insentive to found cities in hostile areas ... maybe those feature can add happyness/culture?

As much as I respect the wikipedia knowledge, and I´m sure there is enough proof of visitors travelling among different civs in the past, tourism as an industry is rather a recent phenomenon. There is a number of reasons for this: first of all, currency was not convertible, so there was no way to pay for your stay and food, if not with tangible goods (and it was terribly hard to travel with a bunch of cows in your backpack). The other problem was the time it took to travel, so "tourism" meant to leave your family, and your source of income. It was more like moving.

I agree with the appearance of tourism in recent expansion packs, but only after the 1850´s, and very gradually.

the original word for the 7 wonders was "thaymata" (not the same as theamata, which indeed means sights, 'worth of being seen' etc). 'Thaymata' means miracles, so wonders is the same i guess.

edit: although i am not entirely sure that "thaumata" wasnt a later word, inspired by the western "wonders". But i hope that it was the original word too

Holy citys should be taken into account, muslims are supposed to make a pilgrammage to mecca if they can afford it,same as jews and christians with jerusalem. Although its not practiced as much as mecca and muslims