Districts

[spfun]

Will districts give bonuses next to other districts from other cities? Example you could build 2 culture districts next to each other would they receive bonus? Could you build a couple of wonders in one city and build 2 culture districts adjacent to these wonders ( from 2 different cities )

 

[stiiknafuulia]

Presumably yes to the latter. Not sure about the former, but I see no reason why it shouldn't work that way.

We do know that one city can only build one copy of each district, and that a city cannot work a district that has been built by another city.

 

[joncnunn]

I would guess yes to both questions simply because it's somewhat easier to code that way.
But we'll have to wait for Firaxis to confirm.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Very interesting question. Most likely the answers are "no" for both. Districts and Wonders are calculated for a single city only.

 

[AriochIV]

Very interesting question. Most likely the answers are "no" for both. Districts and Wonders are calculated for a single city only.

I agree. The alternative would be to reward players for packing as many cities as closely as possible, which I think it something to be avoided.

 

[Schuesseled]

I recon they would

 

[stiiknafuulia]

I agree. The alternative would be to reward players for packing as many cities as closely as possible, which I think it something to be avoided.

Ïmo, this is a actually a good thing, as long as the effect is mild enough. If the adjacency bonuses work between different cities, that is an incentive to pack cities closer together in the short term; but in the long run those cities will suffer from having less workable tiles than if they were spaced so as to avoid any overlap. So, it becomes an interesting decision between short-term vs. long-term benefits -- which is the kind of decision that you want to be making in a Civ game.

 

[skyclad]

If you have 3 farms in between cities, 1 city works 2 of them and 1 city works 1. They should get the bonus right? I think it should work the same for wonders and districts! Its intuitive and rewards planning ahead and good infrastructure.

 

[Felis Renidens]

I think the factor against packing cities apart from potentially losing tiles (when every tile is going to be important) is potentially having a good spot a bit farther away (river for growth, mountain for science, luxuries etc.), the need to claim more land, getting eureka moments and such things. I don't think mechanical limitations should be the way to do it and I hope you could get the adjacency from districts and wonders of different cities. What, just because the faith districts is in another city the scientists won't talk to the people in the holy site? People in the culture district will fail to see and be inspired by the giant pyramids behind municipal lines?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

If you have 3 farms in between cities, 1 city works 2 of them and 1 city works 1. They should get the bonus right? I think it should work the same for wonders and districts! Its intuitive and rewards planning ahead and good infrastructure.

There's a adjacency bonus for Cluster of Districts.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I think there would be no reason for the game to check which city/civ the adjacent tiles belong to.

For an example, in the earliest video, when they place a holy site, there is a 3 mountain option and a 4 mountain option(that they would need to buy)

Not all of the 4 mountain option mountain tiles are in the city border (they might not all be in the 3 tile city radius either.

 

[Martin Alvito]

There's a adjacency bonus for Cluster of Districts.

Somebody's been playing Soren's game.

Count me in the group that thinks that it's fine to have adjacency bonuses irrespective of city/civ. If the bonuses are of the magnitude of those in Offworld Trading Company (50%+), it would be likely that ICS would become an issue. But they'll find that in testing, and we'll get more appropriate bonus values that reward planning ahead without breaking city placement. Probably.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Somebody's been playing Soren's game.

Count me in the group that thinks that it's fine to have adjacency bonuses irrespective of city/civ. If the bonuses are of the magnitude of those in Offworld Trading Company (50%+), it would be likely that ICS would become an issue. But they'll find that in testing, and we'll get more appropriate bonus values that reward planning ahead without breaking city placement. Probably.

Given that all districts benefit from being in different locations, chances are that clusters won't be nearly as strong, as well as that it's going to take a long time to get them.

You can't build all 12 districts immediately, you need to get those pop-ups, when you ICS you will most likely not only hit the Housing Cap quickly on but probably also suffer from penalties from low Amenities count, so you won't even get to being able to even benefit from the cluster-district bonuses.

 

[Babri]

Ïmo, this is a actually a good thing, as long as the effect is mild enough. If the adjacency bonuses work between different cities, that is an incentive to pack cities closer together in the short term; but in the long run those cities will suffer from having less workable tiles than if they were spaced so as to avoid any overlap. So, it becomes an interesting decision between short-term vs. long-term benefits -- which is the kind of decision that you want to be making in a Civ game.

That is a solid point. Plus I don't think the extra lines of code wouldn't be worth it to stop adjacent districts getting bonuses from other district if they are from separate cities. I mean there is a valid trade off. If you pack cities too tightly you claim less land -> less tiles available for mid-late game as well as less resources.

I really do hope though that this time around resources are much more crucial for developed army & infrastructure. In ciV you only needed a handful of each strategic resource even for a significantly large empire.