Note: There is (was?) a known issue where Antiquity Sites will not spawn on River tiles. This is a bug that is separate from this proposal, but has resulted recently in some situations where an Antiquity Site didn't spawn.
Currently, Egypt's new UA places Antiquity Sites using two tables which function in a slightly different way:
Trait_FreeResourceFirstXCities
Trait_FreeResourceOnWorldWonderCompletion
And this one, which places the Antiquity Sites from constructing World Wonders (which are subtracted from the global total), simply skips to step 2, so it spawns anywhere in owned territory.
I initially implemented it this way following azum4roll's implementation instructions rather than actually thinking about it. I presume the intention was that, since the capital is where most Wonders will be produced, it would be a problem if Antiquity Sites fill up the capital's tiles. Clarification: It was also to avoid spawning resources in neutral tiles where other civs could claim them. However, this implementation causes a specific issue when you have a small city where every tile has a resource on it - you won't get your Antiquity Site. This is possible with certain map settings and becomes more likely if you start on the coast, since Antiquity Sites can't spawn on water.
Additionally, the different spawn requirements aren't specified to the player and seem rather arbitrary from an outsider perspective. And an Egypt player is almost certainly going Tradition, which synergizes well with a strong, yield-heavy capital full of unique Improvements.
In addition, I added a differing condition of my own: the city Antiquity Sites, since they use the unique class ARTIFACT_SARCOPHAGUS in order to avoid counting against the global cap, will avoid overwriting tiles that have historical records where things happened (Barbarian Encampment, battle, etc), while the Wonder Antiquity Sites will prioritize those tiles if they exist. This ultimately benefits the Egypt player by slightly biasing towards older eras for artifacts, leading to higher Landmark yields.
I propose the following as a solution for standardization.
Tile placement priority for both tables (random within each priority bracket):
1. Owned tiles within new city / Wonder city's working range, no resource (including unrevealed)
2. Owned tiles outside working range (including tiles owned by other cities), no resource (including unrevealed)
3. Neutral tiles within new city / Wonder city's working range, no resource (including unrevealed)
4. Don't place it
This avoids the issue where you won't get an Antiquity Site outside of some really weird settings, seems more consistent to the player, allows filling the capital with more unique Improvements, and allows more control over where Antiquity Sites appear if the Egypt player wants them elsewhere - something that of all players, Egypt has the best chance of pulling off due to their bonus.
This revised version also minimizes the risk of giving an Antiquity Site to an opponent when founding a new city - an Antiquity Site will only spawn in neutral territory if there are no valid tiles in owned territory.
My unique added condition stays in place as this doesn't hurt the player and doesn't sacrifice how the mechanic outwardly "looks" intuitively.
Note 1: I considered that this might be harmful for GPTIs, but since you can build GPTIs on resources and Antiquity Sites won't spawn on tiles with resources - and the capital is likely to have a good deal of resources - this should be fine. It hurts Bonus Resources, but that's an acceptable sacrifice.
Note 2: This could possibly cause issues if the World Wonder table is repurposed for other resources - putting all the resources together - though I think that still isn't really an issue for the same reason as for GPTIs. If that does end up being an issue, I'm fine with having this be a special rule for Antiquity Sites specifically.
Amendment #1: For priority 1, neutral tiles are no longer valid placements. Added priority 3.
Currently, Egypt's new UA places Antiquity Sites using two tables which function in a slightly different way:
Trait_FreeResourceFirstXCities
(This one places the Antiquity Sites from founding or conquering cities, which are added to the global total.)
Trait_FreeResourceOnWorldWonderCompletion
And this one, which places the Antiquity Sites from constructing World Wonders (which are subtracted from the global total), simply skips to step 2, so it spawns anywhere in owned territory.
I initially implemented it this way following azum4roll's implementation instructions rather than actually thinking about it. I presume the intention was that, since the capital is where most Wonders will be produced, it would be a problem if Antiquity Sites fill up the capital's tiles. Clarification: It was also to avoid spawning resources in neutral tiles where other civs could claim them. However, this implementation causes a specific issue when you have a small city where every tile has a resource on it - you won't get your Antiquity Site. This is possible with certain map settings and becomes more likely if you start on the coast, since Antiquity Sites can't spawn on water.
Additionally, the different spawn requirements aren't specified to the player and seem rather arbitrary from an outsider perspective. And an Egypt player is almost certainly going Tradition, which synergizes well with a strong, yield-heavy capital full of unique Improvements.
In addition, I added a differing condition of my own: the city Antiquity Sites, since they use the unique class ARTIFACT_SARCOPHAGUS in order to avoid counting against the global cap, will avoid overwriting tiles that have historical records where things happened (Barbarian Encampment, battle, etc), while the Wonder Antiquity Sites will prioritize those tiles if they exist. This ultimately benefits the Egypt player by slightly biasing towards older eras for artifacts, leading to higher Landmark yields.
I propose the following as a solution for standardization.
Tile placement priority for both tables (random within each priority bracket):
1. Owned tiles within new city / Wonder city's working range, no resource (including unrevealed)
2. Owned tiles outside working range (including tiles owned by other cities), no resource (including unrevealed)
3. Neutral tiles within new city / Wonder city's working range, no resource (including unrevealed)
4. Don't place it
This avoids the issue where you won't get an Antiquity Site outside of some really weird settings, seems more consistent to the player, allows filling the capital with more unique Improvements, and allows more control over where Antiquity Sites appear if the Egypt player wants them elsewhere - something that of all players, Egypt has the best chance of pulling off due to their bonus.
This revised version also minimizes the risk of giving an Antiquity Site to an opponent when founding a new city - an Antiquity Site will only spawn in neutral territory if there are no valid tiles in owned territory.
My unique added condition stays in place as this doesn't hurt the player and doesn't sacrifice how the mechanic outwardly "looks" intuitively.
Note 1: I considered that this might be harmful for GPTIs, but since you can build GPTIs on resources and Antiquity Sites won't spawn on tiles with resources - and the capital is likely to have a good deal of resources - this should be fine. It hurts Bonus Resources, but that's an acceptable sacrifice.
Note 2: This could possibly cause issues if the World Wonder table is repurposed for other resources - putting all the resources together - though I think that still isn't really an issue for the same reason as for GPTIs. If that does end up being an issue, I'm fine with having this be a special rule for Antiquity Sites specifically.
Amendment #1: For priority 1, neutral tiles are no longer valid placements. Added priority 3.
Last edited:
