"Appeal" values from screenshots

[Nixalo]

I just had a thought... what if instead (or in addition to) city flipping, there was a migration mechanic of some sort? Related to Tourism and happiness, to distance between cities, and possibly to religion (e.g. people of a certain religion would move to a city with a majority population in that religion; or conversely, people migrating and mixing between cities, leading to religions spreading)?

With science not being the end-all, be-all of progress (and culture having its own tree), maybe such a mechanic would make food cease to be the sole determiner of empire population.

I doubt actual pop migration.

But I could see trade routes to ugly cities being weaker. That town you founded just to 6 Iron with no appeal might get a weaker rate of food, gold, and religion from traders. While that city with 2 beaches, a natural wonder, and a temple might grow fast to work good tiles via a trader.

 

[oddtail]

I doubt actual pop migration.

But I could see trade routes to ugly cities being weaker. That town you founded just to 6 Iron with no appeal might get a weaker rate of food, gold, and religion from traders. While that city with 2 beaches, a natural wonder, and a temple might grow fast to work good tiles via a trader.

You're probably right, and in the end, I doubt there will be pop migration in the game, too. It was mostly a random, crazy-ish idea.

But hey... I can dream, right?

As to your theory - I think it's much more plausible, and I actually would like that approach very much.

 

[Amrunril]

This formula does seem to explain the values explained so far, but I'd caution against treating it as a definitive explanation. This is ideally the point where we should want to test the formula against more tiles to see if it's truly predictive, and that just isn't an option with the information we have so far.

As another possibility, I'd suggest the possibility that each individual tile has its own inherent appeal value: not just that forests are more appealing than plains but that one specific forest tile happens to be more appealing than another.

Finally, of the formula is correct, I have to protest the lack of respect for grasslands (not the grassland terrain type specifically, but the ecological region represented by grassland and plains tiles). Prairies, particularly expansive prairies uninterrupted by, well, anything can be stunningly beautiful, especially at the many times when some subset of the plant community is flowering. They are (in my probably biased subjective opinion) at least as appealing as forests and far more so than farmland. If I recall correctly, neglect for grasslands aesthetic and conservation potential was also an issue in Civ IV with its nature reserve system, but I wish they'd do better this time, and I think the idea of an appeal bonus for unused tiles would be an excellent place to start.

 

[stealth_nsk]

What interests me is - if the game represents recreational tourism (based on geographic location) in addition to the culture one. So it doesn't look like the culture victory will be based on tourism. I don't think it's a kind of victory too, because it would be quite lame to dominate the world by having biggest beaches.

More likely the tourism will be a source of money and, possibly, culture with the civilizations we have peace with.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

The Venture Beat article has Ed Beach discussing Lenses and mentions a settlement lens that shows the best places for settling a city and it sounds like different types of tiles may have different housing numbers and I wonder if that is what is indicated by the appeal.

 

[shaglio]

The Venture Beat article has Ed Beach discussing Lenses and mentions a settlement lens that shows the best places for settling a city and it sounds like different types of tiles may have different housing numbers and I wonder if that is what is indicated by the appeal.

Funny you say that. That first thing I thought of when I saw the Appeal value on tiles was that it probably related to city placement recommendations. But then Quill thought it had to do with Tourism, so I dismissed it . . . Unless it does both.

 

[Staal]

My impression was that it had to do with population growth, similar to amenities. It will be easier to have a large city in a beautiful area. No doubt it also has a tourism connection in the latter part of the game.

 

[Ikael]

There's far too many things that we don't know yet. I mean, we all imagine that "appeal" probably has an effect over local happiness and tourism (and possibly culture and inmigration as well), but:

- We do know that happiness is calculated on a per city basis, but we ignore which kind of effect does it provides to the cities that it affects
- Same can be said about tourism
- We don't even know if there will be any kind of inmigration system yet

Still, "appeal" seems like a really intriguing mechanic to add into a civilization game. Many ancient cities were built with appeal on mind, and it does surely affect modern tourism and even internal inmigration (think people moving to California and Texas). I would really love to know more about it!

 

[stiiknafuulia]

Appeal seems to be a mix between the beauty and fertility of the landscape. We know from one of the articles that only small cities are possible in deserts, which makes sense from both perspectives (although for those not used to them, I'm sure a desert can also be a breathtaking environment).

Small island cities are a bit of a questionmark atm because of both appeal and the district system. It seems that they won't amount to much, since there's hardly any space for districts, and only a few tiles (if any) with limited appeal numbers to utilize for housing purposes. It's ofc realistic, but I'd still like the possibility of founding a 'Honolulu' with more residents than, say, Guam or the like.

 

[masda_gib]

If appeal really affects city happiness, I would love some techs/buildings/Civ UAs to modify it.

Quick example: There have been complaints in CiV about russia's starting bias towards tundra sucking. Imagine, they had an UA that give them +1 appeal on tundra or something along those lines. They would be a civ that could actually settle there nicely.

 

[Felis Renidens]

Or maybe they will have a UA that low appeal does not limit their growth that much.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Appeal seems to be a mix between the beauty and fertility of the landscape. We know from one of the articles that only small cities are possible in deserts, which makes sense from both perspectives (although for those not used to them, I'm sure a desert can also be a breathtaking environment).

Small island cities are a bit of a questionmark atm because of both appeal and the district system. It seems that they won't amount to much, since there's hardly any space for districts, and only a few tiles (if any) with limited appeal numbers to utilize for housing purposes. It's ofc realistic, but I'd still like the possibility of founding a 'Honolulu' with more residents than, say, Guam or the like.

I wouldn't be surprised if some districts can be placed on water (I could see a harbor district requiring being placed on the water, with beach adjacent.. Tourism and Commercial Districts might at least have "water beach adjacent" placement as an option)