Do theatre squares need an additional adjacency bonus?

[IMADAJ]

Culture is one of the last focuses of my civilizations so the bonus from adjacent districts are usually enough.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I like the idea of TS getting adjacency bonuses based on surrounding appeal (+1 per charming tile, +2 per Breathtaking tile) . Artists very often draw their inspiration from beautiful environments, be them natural or man-made.

 

[oSiyeza]

I actually think culture and ammenities should not be different things. And theater squares and entertaiment complex should not be different types of districts. But that is just my opinion.

 

[iammaxhailme]

This has probably been said in here, but the theater square really should get additional adjacency from entertainment complexes/water parks, and any unique tile improvement that gives culture (like a chemamull, chateau, etc)

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I actually think culture and ammenities should not be different things. And theater squares and entertaiment complex should not be different types of districts. But that is just my opinion.

Culture in Civ VI seems to represent ideas rather than Entertainment, although it is hard to say how the great works is more about ideas than what Civ VI call amenties and the same can be said about the theater Square district itself.

Ironically Theatre Square is perhaps the most important district while the Entertainment complex is pretty useless.

Entertainment complex need some sort of adjacency or maybe buff its effect on appeal to +2 or make its a better support district like buff to other districts as I suggested Before. The arean building also need a major buff, its lack of specialist, great people and the lackluster nature of +1 amentiy for a massive 150 production cost is just sad to see and I doubt the developers will do anything here given all the years stuff like Entertainment complex, neighbourhoods and all other kind of stuff have been useless and they even created more useless stuff such as the food market.

The Theatre Square poor adjancency generally get a pass because how important Culture is, but making more ways to acquire adjancency can still make and placement more interesting.

 

[Victoria]

they even created more useless stuff such as the food market.

The food market is awesome for creating mega cities, if that’s not your game then sure, but it does plug that gap.

the Entertainment complex is pretty useless.

Bread and circuses has its place and an ED also increases appeal.
I am not sure how having roller coasters and water slides next to a music concert or arts festival buffs it.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

The food market is awesome for creating mega cities, if that’s not your game then sure, but it does plug that gap.

I see Civ VI as a strategy game and I don't think food market is Worth its cost and thus a useless thing.

Bread and circuses has its place and an ED also increases appeal.
I am not sure how having roller coasters and water slides next to a music concert or arts festival buffs it.

Well sometimes they are in the same place and Argubly their purpose is the same. I'm less sure how a musical festival or an art museum with old statues allow me to get stuff like environmentalism quicker.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

The food market is awesome for creating mega cities, if that’s not your game then sure, but it does plug that gap.

It's nice that it's in the game, but why not make it less awful? I feel like everyone benefits from that. It's okay to have some building be worse than others, but it's questionable when some buildings are so bad you only consider them because you're roleplaying The people that build it irrespective of it being awful for fast victories likely won't mind a buff.

 

[Victoria]

because you're roleplaying

Like building aqueducts or mega production cities or a myriad of other things, mock ye not, many of us like to lighten up

I see Civ VI as a strategy game

I see it as a game

I'm less sure how a musical festival or an art museum with old statues allow me to get stuff like environmentalism quicker.

really? Culture begets understanding and empathy. I see environmentalism as being born from this ilk. Depends on how you see culture.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Like building aqueducts or mega production cities or a myriad of other things, mock ye not, many of us like to lighten up

I rp, too, from time to time. Whenever I play MP I usually role-play to some degree, like in my current Maori game where I settled terrible ocean cities just for fun and looks. When I play a new Civ I usually try to play towards its strengths instead of playing "optimally" in order to not fall into the same patterns every game. That keeps you from discovering new stuff, and habitualizing too much stops you from improving. So in a way, rp'ing has also helped further my understanding of the game, of alternate strategies, and in that regard helped me play more "optimal".

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

really? Culture begets understanding and empathy. I see environmentalism as being born from this ilk. Depends on how you see culture.

Argubly the rollercoaster would probably have more impact given it can encourage people to pick up subjects like physics and Argubly science have much more impact upon stuff like development of enviromentalism than some statues created many centuries ago.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Argubly the rollercoaster would probably have more impact given it can encourage people to pick up subjects like physics and Argubly science have much more impact upon stuff like development of enviromentalism

Environmentalism is only a concept in and of itself because "science" (it is already wrong to pin all of our technological progress down to science, but alas) allowed us to destroy the environment in a magnitude never even see before. Environmentalism does not make sense as a concept to a hunter and gatherer society, since they had no meaningful way (besides arson, I reckon) to damage the environment in an irreversible way.

In that sense it is ironic to say that "science" is what gave birth to environmentalism, since "science" (or rather human "progress") also gave birth to the destruction of the environment, aka the condition, the need of environmentalism in the first place. It's essentially a truism.

The very idea of man seperate from nature is, almost doesn't seem worth mentioned, also obviously just a construct. All the dichotomies made between natural and artificial are arbitrary, and the very idea of environmentalism is based on this false dichotomy. (Nature vs Culture, Natural vs Artificial, Animal vs Human et cetera).

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Environmentalism is only a concept in and of itself because "science" (it is already wrong to pin all of our technological progress down to science, but alas) allowed us to destroy the environment in a magnitude never even see before. Environmentalism does not make sense as a concept to a hunter and gatherer society, since they had no meaningful way (besides arson, I reckon) to damage the environment in an irreversible way.

In that sense it is ironic to say that "science" is what gave birth to environmentalism, since "science" (or rather human "progress") also gave birth to the destruction of the environment, aka the condition, the need of environmentalism in the first place. It's essentially a truism.

Yes and that is correct, it was not some old statues or museum that created it.

 

[Victoria]

Well look like we are at odds then.
Culture is about just that... our culture is how we act, how we think of ourselves, our beliefs.
Part of that process of getting where we are culturally is reflection upon other cultures
Old dusty statues can inspire or foster feelings to aspire to, they are a sparking point. That’s how I view them and environmentalism is a belief rather than a science so sits in the right tree.

 

[IMADAJ]

Like building aqueducts or mega production cities or a myriad of other things, mock ye not, many of us like to lighten up

Wait, what? Building aqueducts is lightening up? I’m not sure if this is a joke or not, and I only frequent this form a few times a month, but you’re the only screen name I ever recognize so this coming from you has given me pause. Aqueducts have always been a staple for me. You now have me questioning my life.

If you would, please explain how aqueducts are not that important. I must really be missing out on these quick win strategies.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Wait, what? Building aqueducts is lightening up? I’m not sure if this is a joke or not, and I only frequent this form a few times a month, but you’re the only screen name I ever recognize so this coming from you has given me pause. Aqueducts have always been a staple for me. You now have me questioning my life.

If you would, please explain how aqueducts are not that important. I must really be missing out on these quick win strategies.

Housing and growth in general are not very strong in Civ 6, sadly, and most of the time getting a city to more than 10 pop does too little and costs too much. You are likely better off to increase # of cities as opposed to population.

Many players avoid Aqueducts and Neighborhoods in favor of district building, workers and city projects, because those are better investments when going for a fast game. I usually get at least 1 Aqueduct for the Eurekah.

Also, as Victoria mentioned in another thread, you can definitely get a city to 15 or even 20 population even without much extra housing, so for example only a river and a Granary. Chops will do that for ya!

 

[Victoria]

If you would, please explain how aqueducts are not that important. I must really be missing out on these quick win strategies.

They give housing, if you need housing, build them I guess
I rarely do unless playing phat cities. I do not even want the eureka, just seems to come at the worng time.
Glad to be wrong.
Do you build many?

I always question my game and my life, complacency is not a positive thing in my book

 

[The Civs 6]

I actually think culture and ammenities should not be different things. And theater squares and entertaiment complex should not be different types of districts. But that is just my opinion.

This would make sense, because as I mentioned earlier, science track civs get to play with 3 currencies: hammers, beakers and coins, while culture track civs only get doves and musical notes. I think if cultural civs got an advantage for uh tents, that would significantly improve them and make thematic sense as well.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

This would make sense, because as I mentioned earlier, science track civs get to play with 3 currencies: hammers, beakers and coins, while culture track civs only get doves and musical notes. I think if cultural civs got an advantage for uh tents, that would significantly improve them and make thematic sense as well.

Well alot of the amenity stuff is unlocked in the Civic tree:

• Entertainment districts and buildings for them.
• National parks.
• Policy cards and governments sometimes give amenties.
• Same with Governors.
• Ski resorts.
• Some unique improvements that give amenities are unlocked in civic tree.
• Probably other stuff I have missed.

 

[Victoria]

Culture doubles adjacency for all things magical and lowers the price for all things magical, tech is the base and culture is the enhancer, do people not get this fundamental thing?
Your beliefs and ideology make things easier and you learn these things through investigating other cultures and taking what you think is best and improving.
Look at the names on the cards and civics and tell me this is not so.
It’s as fundamental in all civ iterations, Sid got it.