Aquaculture

[STMO]

Governor Liangs Fish Ponds are they useful at all? I don't understand, why not simply farm instead?

 

[Chefofrats]

They are the only way to improve non-resource coast tiles if you're not Gitarja/Wilhelmina. And in case you missed it, you can't build farms on the water.

 

[STMO]

Thank you very much. I misunderstood the issue. I thought they should be build on land tiles close to the sea now I realize they must be build in the Sea! That makes it much more clear to me.

 

[Depravo]

They are immensely powerful. Remember, the adjacent sea resource doesn't have to be within your territory, or (IIRC) even within the three-hex ring.

My current game as America, I have Auckland too and Liang is on a constant progression through the empire spamming fisheries.

 

[kaspergm]

They are immensely powerful. Remember, the adjacent sea resource doesn't have to be within your territory, or (IIRC) even within the three-hex ring.

My current game as America, I have Auckland too and Liang is on a constant progression through the empire spamming fisheries.

I agree. Meanwhile, do anybody actually use the city park? I put down a couple in my recent game just to try them out, but they didn't seem worth it. The description is also particularly vague, it says it "increases appeal by 2", but obviously it cannot be on the target tile, since that would be pointless. I got the impression it works on neighboring tiles, but not on all city tiles (as some reports have claimed) - have anybody tested this in greater detail?

 

[Naktis]

I even think fishery ability is OP , I kinda hope they add option to "mine" mountain tile in future.

 

[kb27787]

I agree. Meanwhile, do anybody actually use the city park? I put down a couple in my recent game just to try them out, but they didn't seem worth it. The description is also particularly vague, it says it "increases appeal by 2", but obviously it cannot be on the target tile, since that would be pointless. I got the impression it works on neighboring tiles, but not on all city tiles (as some reports have claimed) - have anybody tested this in greater detail?

I did use them before. It works on adjacent tiles. Basically a paridaeza.

I do not remember it not working; well, with the current patch though there is a bug (not sure what it is caused by) which causes the appeal of a tile to be fixed at zero when strategic resources appear; for such tiles the appeal will not go up no matter how many woods you plant around it. But it is not a park-related thing per se, it's just a general bug regarding all sources of appeal.

Great for Australia I suppose (specifically for theatre squares and commercial hubs; as campi and holy sites usually already are breathtaking, due to being built near mountains), and maybe for Mapuche for doing cultural victory, but for other civs I would think there are other more useful promotions to get (this being Liang's ultimate lvl 3 promotion).

 

[kaspergm]

I did use them before. It works on adjacent tiles. Basically a paridaeza.

I do not remember it not working; well, with the current patch though there is a bug (not sure what it is caused by) which causes the appeal of a tile to be fixed at zero when strategic resources appear; for such tiles the appeal will not go up no matter how many woods you plant around it. But it is not a park-related thing per se, it's just a general bug regarding all sources of appeal.

Great for Australia I suppose (specifically for theatre squares and commercial hubs; as campi and holy sites usually already are breathtaking, due to being built near mountains), and maybe for Mapuche for doing cultural victory, but for other civs I would think there are other more useful promotions to get (this being Liang's ultimate lvl 3 promotion).

Thanx. I don't think anything didn't work as intended, I just feel with such a pitiful tile yield (I mean, +1 culture, FGS, could it be more laughable?), it's not really worth using a full hex on, not to mention the governor promotion(s) to unlock it and all the hassle of moving around between towns to put them down.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Honestly it looks like a waste of a builder charge and a governor promotion. I rarely promote Liang. But then again I also think farms are also a waste of a builder charge too and rarely build them, unless over a resource, or to get an inspiration, or some kind of other odd gimmick. Like in an OCC I may want to improve every tile.

It might come in handy for those tundra/desert coastal cities but it's really hard to care about growth for them, much less devoting an entire governor to that task.

 

[bite]

I do like covering my map with them since I can't do that with polders

 

[isau]

Those fishing boats are divine if you roll a map with the Galapagos Islands natural wonder. Especially if there's sea resources adjacent. You get +1 food per adjacent sea resource. Two resources adjacent a fishery gives as much food as a 6-hex boosted Farm I believe.

 

[Victoria]

What they allow is a much fatser city growth now, this city here currently has +93 food but is -4 amenities.
Yellow square shows that adjacency can be 4 tiles and outside your border.

 

[Leyrann]

Honestly it looks like a waste of a builder charge and a governor promotion. I rarely promote Liang. But then again I also think farms are also a waste of a builder charge too and rarely build them, unless over a resource, or to get an inspiration, or some kind of other odd gimmick. Like in an OCC I may want to improve every tile.

It might come in handy for those tundra/desert coastal cities but it's really hard to care about growth for them, much less devoting an entire governor to that task.

Doesn't that greatly hamper your city growth though?

I mean, a way to look at food production and consumption is to give +1 for worked tiles that grant 3 food, +2 for worked tiles that grant 4 food, etc, and -1 for worked tiles that grant 1 food and -2 for worked tiles that grant 0 food, plus an additional 2 free food from the city center tile.

Assume you have a plains city with 2 adjacent wheat and no other food resources. That means you have two +1 tiles (because wheat+farm gives 3 food), while all other tiles (being plains) have -1, as they only produce 1 food. This means your city gets to grow to size 6 (+2 from wheat, +2 from city center, -4 from the other four worked tiles) before growth stagnates completely. Size 7 if you have a Granary, size 10 if you can and do build a Water Mill. If an average city has access to it's two inner rings (while the third ring is in another city's second ring) then you have access to 18 tiles. You can build 3 districts, assuming Granary but no Water Mill, plus 7 worked tiles, which means you still have 8 unworked tiles out of 18. That's almost half of them. Assuming the wheat tiles are next to one another, one single extra farm would give you an extra 4 food per turn, allowing you to grow to size 11 and build another district, meaning you're already at 15 out of 18 worked tiles. That's just how much difference some farms make; any 3 farms in a triangle would give you 6 more food from those tiles, enough for 2 more districts and 6 more city size (assuming 1 food standard from the tiles and working them either way).

Of course it's a waste to build them on hills compared to mines, but almost none at all? I don't see how that's close to viable. I will say that I tend to only really start building them from Medieval-Renaissance Era on though, by the point that resources aren't enough to feed cities anymore.

 

[Softly]

They are situational. I've made great use of them in food poor coastal cities in tundra or dessert where you often have production/luxuries but not enough food otherwise. They can also be quiet powerful when combined with lighthouse/seaport/Auckland/Huey.

 

[shaglio]

Thank you very much. I misunderstood the issue. I thought they should be build on land tiles close to the sea now I realize they must be build in the Sea! That makes it much more clear to me.

That's the problem with the game's ambiguous use of the term "Coast." When I here the word "Coast," I think of land that is adjacent to water. But the game refers to the light blue water tiles adjacent to land as "Coast." They probably should have used another term like "Shallows" or "Continental Shelf" instead.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Doesn't that greatly hamper your city growth though?

I mean, a way to look at food production and consumption is to give +1 for worked tiles that grant 3 food, +2 for worked tiles that grant 4 food, etc, and -1 for worked tiles that grant 1 food and -2 for worked tiles that grant 0 food, plus an additional 2 free food from the city center tile.

Assume you have a plains city with 2 adjacent wheat and no other food resources. That means you have two +1 tiles (because wheat+farm gives 3 food), while all other tiles (being plains) have -1, as they only produce 1 food. This means your city gets to grow to size 6 (+2 from wheat, +2 from city center, -4 from the other four worked tiles) before growth stagnates completely. Size 7 if you have a Granary, size 10 if you can and do build a Water Mill. If an average city has access to it's two inner rings (while the third ring is in another city's second ring) then you have access to 18 tiles. You can build 3 districts, assuming Granary but no Water Mill, plus 7 worked tiles, which means you still have 8 unworked tiles out of 18. That's almost half of them. Assuming the wheat tiles are next to one another, one single extra farm would give you an extra 4 food per turn, allowing you to grow to size 11 and build another district, meaning you're already at 15 out of 18 worked tiles. That's just how much difference some farms make; any 3 farms in a triangle would give you 6 more food from those tiles, enough for 2 more districts and 6 more city size (assuming 1 food standard from the tiles and working them either way).

Of course it's a waste to build them on hills compared to mines, but almost none at all? I don't see how that's close to viable. I will say that I tend to only really start building them from Medieval-Renaissance Era on though, by the point that resources aren't enough to feed cities anymore.

Size 7 is way more than enough for a poor plains only city like that, I would think. A lot of those tiles wouldn't be worth working anyways unless they are hills. It'd be basically working farms to work even more farms, and if a city was good enough to say, have like 10 hills, then that might be worthy of reconsideration, but in those cases I think it would be more efficient just to pack 2 smaller, say 2 overlapping pop 4 cities that can share the food, and at worst use a trade route.

Being able to build more districts is nice, but I don't really see the need for most cities to have 5-6 districts. Amenities are also a big problem in this game too. At most we're looking at a Campus, a theater, a industrial, and a commercial and some would already consider that to be superfluous.That's pop 10.

Plus in this situation in the coast, a lighthouse would already solve most food problems.But I don't know. Food is just not the hardest thing to come by in this game. It's even possible just to gather food with Magnus and use a housing card; using the temporary boost in population to build an extra district. I mean, it's going to starve down, but the districts would be there.

And if you think about it, that's exactly why I don't build farms, because cities like these are very low priority. They just don't have the potential anyways and are often the last settled spots, or you let the AI settle and just flip it from them. If your whole map is like that, then I think you have bigger priorities. I mean there are certainly cases where it'd be a good idea if the city doesn't grow to how big you want it to be, but I find this to be pretty rare and I play fractal/shuffle quite a bit so there are plenty of bad starting locations.

 

[STMO]

This raises a debate about how tall your cities should be.
I think around 4-6 cities typically are build by own settlers - the rest is conquered. My feeling is that maybe 4-5 cities should grove much (1xmain city with Government Plaza, 1xscience, 1xCulture, 1xMilitary). The rest depends a lot about Amenities.

 

[kb27787]

I might use the fishery a bit more if they gave it a housing bonus. As is, coastal cities have low housing and so getting food for them is kinda pointless.

 

[Magma_Dragoon]

Can they be built atop reefs? That's the only place I would consider building them.

 

[Disgustipated]

This raises a debate about how tall your cities should be.

I usually do it for RP reasons, even if it's not optimum. I want my empire to be great after all. And oftentimes it gives me something to do late game.

Can they be built atop reefs? That's the only place I would consider building them.

No unfortunately

This thread gives me the opportunity to show off my work of art (or disturbing obsession) of fishing every single fish from the sea. Sadly the game never goes on long enough for me to take advantage of this many fisheries, and I probably didn't have enough housing to work them all, but it still looks cool. I will not stop until every fish is gone from the oceans.