Cannot build on artifact tile

[pastor Fran]

Hi guys this has never happened m, in my game i could not build on an artifact tile, has this ever gappened ro anyone, and also i had rwice as much culture and tourism but i did not move up on the rank, instead anither player kept going up toward culture victory,

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

You have to send an archaeologist to extract the artifact before you can build anything.

 

[pastor Fran]

You have to send an archaeologist to extract the artifact before you can build anything.

But i have build on it before, without extracting, is this a new update? I had like 6 tiles i couldnt work because i ran out of archeologists haha

 

[Tobizi]

But i have build on it before, without extracting, is this a new update? I had like 6 tiles i couldnt work because i ran out of archeologists haha

Iirc it was always like this. Old modernisations stay on the tile but you can't build new ones (or remove old ones) before you extract the artifact.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

is this a new update

Not as far as I can recall, it's always been like that.

 

[pastor Fran]

Wow been playing for almost 2 years and just realized this haha just when i though i knew everything

 

[gazo]

Hi guys this has never happened m, in my game i could not build on an artifact tile, has this ever gappened ro anyone, and also i had rwice as much culture and tourism but i did not move up on the rank, instead anither player kept going up toward culture victory,

All the time. Back when maps were still of a decent size and your empire could have 70+ cities, you could get 100 plots spoiled by dig sites

Just one more example of lazy development.

 

[Daniel Boone]

All the time. Back when maps were still of a decent size and your empire could have 70+ cities, you could get 100 plots spoiled by dig sites

Just one more example of lazy development.

I can’t imagine how much micromanagement you’d have to do for 70+ cities

 

[Iberian]

All the time. Back when maps were still of a decent size and your empire could have 70+ cities, you could get 100 plots spoiled by dig sites

Just one more example of lazy development.

Not claiming there isn't some lazy development, but I don't think this is one of those cases. Makes sense that you wouldn't be able to build on an archeological site.

I mean have you tried getting a building permit for the Acropolis or the Pyramids? Probably not going to get the approval you had hoped for.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Not claiming there isn't some lazy development, but I don't think this is one of those cases. Makes sense that you wouldn't be able to build on an archeological site.

I mean have you tried getting a building permit for the Acropolis or the Pyramids? Probably not going to get the approval you had hoped for.

I don't think it's lazy that you can't build an archeological site.

I do think it's lazy that you have no way of clearing them outside of Archeologists that require an entire District to be built in order for them to exist, and that they are ONLY useful for that purpose.

In 5, you they at least re-purposed Landmarks for extra Culture, a system they should have never removed between iterations.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I do think it's lazy that you have no way of clearing them outside of Archeologists that require an entire District to be built in order for them to exist, and that they are ONLY useful for that purpose.

In 5, you they at least re-purposed Landmarks for extra Culture, a system they should have never removed between iterations.

I think it could have been done by allowing them to be in National Parks. If that happens then the name in game could be " <insert city name here> Battle Site National Park", depending on which city owns it etc.

 

[Naokaukodem]

I think the way archeological sites are implemented is lazy, unless they are supposed to represent evidence of being archeological sites without digging. But in that case, they should represent wonders of the world, and sending archeologists there should definitely forbid later construction and give you some unique benefit. Although this would still not be perfect as it would trigger a war of legitimacy between ancient wonders you can build and archeological wonders... Maybe cities with wonders that have been razed can be accounted for archeological sites ? Map should be a lot more populated and falls of civs more numerous though. To say city-States, tribal village and barbarians have their own sets of wonders is maybe pushing too much forward.