Aqueducts

[Naokaukodem]

I fail to see the logic behind having to build an aqueduct when a city is near a mountain/river, nor too far from them.

When I see Civ4, aqueducts could be built many tiles away a mountain/river. Plus the effect was kind of nice on the map, and it was organical, I like organical.

So I thought we could do something about it.

Either we build them "on mountains" or near rivers (still consumes a tile in that case), it is to say we have to build them in a 3 tiles range on any mountain or near a river, and then the graphics of the aqueducts goes all along from the mountain/river to the core city, flying over other improvements, but i'm not sure if this is feasible with the Civ6 graphical engine.

Either more simply, we attribute the benefits of an aqueduct to any city right next to a mountain or a river, because other way it sounds kinda silly.

Or both.

Not included in the poll, but we might be able to build aqueduct from districts and neighborhoods also ?

Please feel free to comment these suggestions.

 

[meatball20]

a worker should be able to remove it to make more room for yet another district

 

[Naokaukodem]

You mean like neighborhoods ? Not sure you would gain (that) more in cities without fresh water.

 

[Zeno Baroda]

My favourite !

I'd build it even if it takes out a farm/mine.
Makes sense where location-preferred is, dont change that.
But why is it still there during Modern times ? Option-replace it with a water-works system and free up one tile. That's useful being next to the city-centre.

Allow spies to pollute it ( hey .... its espionage dudes )

Give us some design choices please ... not just the same green-roof building.

Can we build one from an oasis in the desert ? Would be nice.

Include an adjacent structure next to it like a Turkish Bath .... and make that a tourist attraction .... like the real thing ( been there, done that .... it was nice )

More later perhaps ....

 

[Lord Lakely]

The aqueduct should have buildings, I feel. Like, would it hurt to have a fountain / bathhouse / spa?

 

[criZp]

Roman bath kind of occupies that function.

 

[Zaarin]

Roman bath kind of occupies that function.

Because the Romans are the only ones who ever built or used public baths. I concur: Rome should have gotten a Unique Government Plaza, the Forum, and Baths should be buildings in Aquaducts.

I'm fine with building Aqueducts, but I think they should be able to extend much farther. I'm also not sure they should take up a tile; Aqueducts ought to be able to coexist with other districts/improvements--like Roads. (In fact, historically aqueducts were often built along roads so...)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Because the Romans are the only ones who ever built or used public baths. I concur: Rome should have gotten a Unique Government Plaza, the Forum, and Baths should be buildings in Aquaducts.

So Rome should have been pushed back for the 1st Expansion?

I like the idea that if a city is in range of a mountain or river (3 tiles) it should be able to build an aqueduct district. The tiles that would be considered an aqueduct district would be the tile adjacent to the mountain or river and let the "aqueduct" graphic go to the city center over any other districts or improvements.

 

[Zaarin]

So Rome should have been pushed back for the 1st Expansion?

Others might not be, but I'd be fine with it. Or they could have changed Rome's UD to Forum when R&F was released and added the Bath as a building. Or left it as the Roman Bath and added a Bath as a building because Firaxis has done things like that before.

 

[Sostratus]

Because the Romans are the only ones who ever built or used public baths. I concur: Rome should have gotten a Unique Government Plaza, the Forum, and Baths should be buildings in Aquaducts.

I'm fine with building Aqueducts, but I think they should be able to extend much farther. I'm also not sure they should take up a tile; Aqueducts ought to be able to coexist with other districts/improvements--like Roads. (In fact, historically aqueducts were often built along roads so...)

I think the "civil works" districts (AQ/dam/canal) are an amazing add to the civ series and the district system, but I think in a Civ7 the necessary evolution will be to allow these things to be built in their own layer of a tile, and then something else to go on that same tile. Then we can have canals running through commercial hubs or whatever, and Aqueducts zipping over the top of other stuff. And other stuff one might want - if you had an engine that could accommodate that sort of graphical flexibility, you could get really crazy and do stuff like showing a monorail /mass transit system late game, or truly irrigated cropland.

In civ6 as it stands I think i would ultimately like to see the AQ and Canal able to have a "combo" district that's AQ/canal with a neighborhood plopped on top of it, so it gives a bigger housing bonus. No reason to let "canal street" sit empty! Edit: to clarify, I mean the ability to upgrade the tile, not start it out that way.

 

[Nizou]

Some mods and users give a good idea of what the Aqueduct should be : food+gold as base district yield increasing when being adjacent to water, rivers, amenity districts, IZ, theatre square (maybe something else if you prefer), provides GE point, can have buildings providing gold, food, prod, culture, amenities... (public bath -> Roman UB Thermae, Hungarian UB Thermal Bath ?, sewers, water treatment plant), a better and funnier placement : just on a moutain next to CC ; on any land tile next to CC+an aligned moutain 2 tiles away from CC ; on 2 aligned land tile, the first next to CC+an aligned moutain 3 tiles away from CC (each aqueduct tile would provide somethign between 2 and 5 housing depending game balance (maybe use appeal as for neighborhood ?), some amenities

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I think the "civil works" districts (AQ/dam/canal) are an amazing add to the civ series and the district system, but I think in a Civ7 the necessary evolution will be to allow these things to be built in their own layer of a tile, and then something else to go on that same tile. Then we can have canals running through commercial hubs or whatever, and Aqueducts zipping over the top of other stuff. And other stuff one might want - if you had an engine that could accommodate that sort of graphical flexibility, you could get really crazy and do stuff like showing a monorail /mass transit system late game, or truly irrigated cropland.

In civ6 as it stands I think i would ultimately like to see the AQ and Canal able to have a "combo" district that's AQ/canal with a neighborhood plopped on top of it, so it gives a bigger housing bonus. No reason to let "canal street" sit empty! Edit: to clarify, I mean the ability to upgrade the tile, not start it out that way.

I'd make the Aqueduct and Canal simpler: make them Improvements instead of Districts.
Both could be built, like roads, in their own Layer so that other Improvements/Buildings could be built in the same tile.

Aqueducts would have to start at a water source: Mountain, River, Oasis, Lake - then go across any flat tile to the City Center. It would enhance (fresh water) any Neighborhood it passes through or adjacent to, AND enhance any Farms or Plantations in tiles it passes through or adjacent to - Irrigation.

The Roman Bath (and the Turkish Hamam) could be constructed in any Neighborhood or City Center. And, as with most Buildings, I'd like to see the Roman Bath 'topped' by a Wonder: The Baths of Caracalla. (+10% Population Growth in the city because people are healthier, + 3 Culture, + 2 Amenities, + 1 Amenity for every Neighborhood in the city; must be built on flat land next to an Aqueduct and adjacent to the City center or a Neighbrhood District))

A Canal could be built any length, but originally (Classical Era) only over flat tiles, cost a sizable sum in Maintenance Gold per tile, and take 2 - 3 Builder Charges per tile to build. In other words, building a long Canal (like from the Nile to the Red Sea, as several Pharaohs tried, or starting China's Grand Canal, which took centuries to finish) will rarely be worth it.
In the Industrial Era you get Locks and can build Canals over hills but it will cost even more - you'll need those +2 Charge Builders by then!
Canals provide the same benefits to Trade Routes along them that Sea Trade Routes provide, and really should also provide a Food Bonus because they were the first 'overland' transportation that could move enough food (dozens of tons an hour) to make a difference to a city.

Dams would remain a District, because the District would include the Reservoir/Lake behind it, and additional Buildings could include:
Irrigation Source (Classical Era) - sweeps and screw pumps to 'raise' water from the reservoir to irrigate any adjacent tile of Farms or Plantations.
Hydroelectric Plant (Modern Era) - provides 'clean' power AND Aluminum - because hydroelectric power was the most efficient way to process aluminum ores throughout the 20th century.
Resort (Atomic Era) - as in, consider the resort/vacation industry built up around the artificial Lake of the Ozarks or Lake Meade. Provides Tourism and Amenity.

 

[GunsGermsandSteel]

I agree about making aqueduct/canal simpler in that they should be improvements and not districts. Aqueducts went on for many miles. Romans are quite famous for them and there are some roman aqueducts that are still in use today. Aztecs also built a number of aqueducts over great distances.

The thing that's weird to me about canals is how late they show up in the mid-game. Canals were a very early engineering project in Mesopotamia, Egypt and China. Or rather "engineering that altered the flow of water for transport/irrigation/urban water supply".

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I agree about making aqueduct/canal simpler in that they should be improvements and not districts. Aqueducts went on for many miles. Romans are quite famous for them and there are some roman aqueducts that are still in use today. Aztecs also built a number of aqueducts over great distances.

The thing that's weird to me about canals is how late they show up in the mid-game. Canals were a very early engineering project in Mesopotamia, Egypt and China. Or rather "engineering that altered the flow of water for transport/irrigation/urban water supply".

"Aqueducts" are not just Roman, although they are best known. The Assyrians had an elaborate system of artificial reservoirs, channels and aqueducts to bring water to their cities from up to 100 km away. Both the Khmer and (from the latest LIDAR explorations) the Maya had long-distance channels to 'funnel' water to cities where it was needed - or to crops.

Which brings up another point: Aqueducts, canals and Irrigation are linked mechanisms and constructions. "Water Management and Supply" was crucial to cities and agriculture of all kinds from the beginning to the present day, but it's given pretty cavalier treatment in the game. The earliest 'canals' and dams (Mar'ib being a good example) were built to provide irrigation water to fields, and only later were larger canals contemplated for trade and movement. I would definitely like to see more 'interaction' between Aqueducts and Canals and Irrigation Bonuses to Farms and Plantations. Irrigation projects that included extensive channels could also be used to tame the river floodwaters, so a Major Irrigation Project (or, simply, an Irrigation Project Improvement by your Builders on a tile) could 'tame' the flooding now associated with all kinds of Floodplains. It should be expensive, because such projects required major workforce organization and the channels required constant maintenance, but it would be a more general alternative to Great Bath Wonder (1 Civ per game) and Rebuild Everything every X Turns, which are the only alternatives now.

Finally, you are right in that Canals now are artificially late in the game. Here's the timeline (most early dates approximate, of course)
5000 BCE - primitive irrigation canals in Mesopotamia and Egypt
3000 BCE - more sophisticated system of canals and artificial revervoirs to channel water to crops in the Indus Valley Civilization (Harappans)
1900 BCE - canal around the cataracts on the Nile so boats could use the river- this is the first example of a canal strictly for transportation that I know of - and while it's very short range, it's also in the Ancient Era.
551 - 273 BCE - Canal of the Pharaohs - started by Necho II, not finished until Greco-Egyptian engineers under Ptolemy II invented a lock to keep salt water out of the Nile - canal between the Nile and the Red Sea. Classical Era, and one way to sneak this 'early canal' into the game might be to simply make it a Classical Era Wonder.
581 - 618 CE - Jung-Hang De Yunhe, or Grand Canal in China. Last sections not complete until 1633 CE, but started at the very beginning of the 'Medieval Era' and is still the longest river canal in the world - 1770+ kilometers long. Transformed trade and transportation in middle China, and enabled Food by the 1000s of tons to be sent where it was needed between cities farm far apart.
The Grand Canal also featured the first Locks in regular use to allow canals to be built over hills, so the 'early Canal' for China in the game is a good call, but Canals in general simply appear too late. I would rather see Canal Building vary by Tech: early you could only build them over flat terrain, only in the Medieval Era could you build them over hills at great expense and very high Maintenance cost.

But note from the timeline: Canals were at first associated almost entirely with Irrigation and food production and only later (and at first for very short distances, except for the Canal of the Pharaohs) for transportation and Trade.