Elohim Tweak Suggestions

[Imuratep]

If I think of the opposite, that is not bathing at all like in 17th century, the higher hygiene standards should at least compensate the health penalty caused by veneral diseases. Also it isn't like a brothel/bath house increases the number of sexual services of a city, but if they didn't exist people would go to street prostitutes - with a much higher probability of getting veneral diseases.

 

[DioAurion]

Haha hard to imagine this thread could get any more derailed

 

[Luckmann]

If I think of the opposite, that is not bathing at all like in 17th century, the higher hygiene standards should at least compensate the health penalty caused by veneral diseases. Also it isn't like a brothel/bath house increases the number of sexual services of a city, but if they didn't exist people would go to street prostitutes - with a much higher probability of getting veneral diseases.

Wouldn't the probability of veneral disease remain constant, maybe even rise, due to the sanitary conditions in the bath house?

After all, I don't know any veneral diseases that are cured by a bath, yet I know of several that can spread by touch or touching-whatever-touched, so to speak. That's still just veneral diseases, of course. Unless we're talking about an outrageously promiscious society, the general increase in cleanliness should more than make up for it.

 

[sharper_knives]

A lot of pedia entries are outdated, so I'm not using it, I made too much mistakes.



Roman baths were really a terrible invention, but the sanitation system saves their health: aqueducts for fresh water, sewer system to evacuate waste, latrines...
Have a look there and see what i mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitation_in_Ancient_Rome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloaca_Maxima
P.S.:At the same time, so-called "Barbarian" Celts washed them in rivers, in the place where they drop the ashes of their deads relatives: early form of soap.

That article is...pretty irrelevant. The fact that you get Public Baths from Sanitation is indicative that the civ understands the need for clean water. I would use this article instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_baths. It's not just a huge pool of water that everyone jumps into and is never changed. Dur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Baths_(Bath). This bath (all ancient baths) has multiple rooms and a constant flow of water, for example. I can't believe I'm having to try and prove that public baths were a huge step forward in sanitation and cleanliness.

And I get the point that the civilopedia brings up, that "more than bathing goes on here", but the fact that it adds to a city is totally nonsensical.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

I always figured that the public baths building represents... a shift in laws and culture, an acceptance of whoring, and the effort needed to make that happen, as well as the infrastructure needed to streamline the process. In other words:

Also it isn't like a brothel/bath house increases the number of sexual services of a city

Wrong

 

[JonathanStrange]

Haha hard to imagine this thread could get any more derailed

It's careening all over the place! Elohim Tweak Suggestions has taken a whole new meaning.

 

[Imuratep]

I always figured that the public baths building represents... a shift in laws and culture, an acceptance of whoring, and the effort needed to make that happen, as well as the infrastructure needed to streamline the process.

If you connect it to a changing acceptance of whoring you are probably right, but on the other hand that means you could also argue that public baths represent a higher value of hygiene in the whole society and thus the health malus still is compensated by that.

 

[Kainkenny]

That article is...pretty irrelevant. The fact that you get Public Baths from Sanitation is indicative that the civ understands the need for clean water. It's not just a huge pool of water that everyone jumps into and is never changed. This bath (all ancient baths) has multiple rooms and a constant flow of water, for example. I can't believe I'm having to try and prove that public baths were a huge step forward in sanitation and cleanliness.

I know it was a huge step forward, but:
1. The constant flow of water need 2 things (Aqueduct, or spring, and evacuation system) Without these, it's just a a pool, as you said.
2. In game terms: Sanitation allows to build Public baths AND Aqueduct, so you're right, it's an indicative of of how hygienic a civ is. But they are not build at the same time, and are you sure you build an aqueduct in every city where you've built a public bath? The bonus of 2 when the aqueduct is operative compensate(sorry if this word doesn't exist, english is my third language) the 1 provided by the public bath.
3. Rich and healthy people don't goes in public bath, they got their own baths. If not, there were special rooms for them in the public therms for security reasons. The rest of the people bath together, without no one to control if they are contaminated with scrofula, papillomavirus, or another contagious disease... You can replace water every hour, those who are together in the same pool at the same time risk contamination.( not to mention those who urinate in water, or worse...)
4. In modern world, with chlore, antiseptics, and so on, we still fear plantar wart when we go to the swimming pool, or the shower in sports clubs,...

These, plus a lot of reasons that I'm not really able to write in nearly correct (?) English, make me think that the 1 penalty is correct.
Even more correct if they have sex with public women near, or in the water...

 

[Honor]

It doesn't matter whether public baths historically made people healthier or not, the +1 unhealthy in the game is there to make the structure more interesting gameplay-wise.

 

[Verdian]

It's careening all over the place! Elohim Tweak Suggestions has taken a whole new meaning.

Darn it all!

 

[Luckmann]

[...]
4. In modern world, with chlore, antiseptics, and so on, we still fear plantar wart when we go to the swimming pool, or the shower in sports clubs,...

Lies. You only fear plantar warts if you're utterly and completely brainwashed by the commercials warning you about the unsanitary conditions of public bathouses and how 'medicine X' can help you avoid/cure/purge "these horribly disfiguring warts that may spread to your face and eat your girlfriend". While not an adamant argument in itself, I've visited public bath houses (which is for recreation rather than cleanliness, these days) all my life and never had a wart, the fear of a wart, and nor do I know anyone who's gotten any warts or otherwise fear such. Even so, plantar warts are relatively harmless and should result in a happiness penalty rather than a health penalty.

[...]
Even more correct if they have sex with public women near, or in the water.

Bwahaha. 'Public women'.

 

[Charlie_B]

I know it was a huge step forward, but:
1. The constant flow of water need 2 things (Aqueduct, or spring, and evacuation system) Without these, it's just a a pool, as you said.
2. In game terms: Sanitation allows to build Public baths AND Aqueduct, so you're right, it's an indicative of of how hygienic a civ is. But they are not build at the same time, and are you sure you build an aqueduct in every city where you've built a public bath? The bonus of 2 when the aqueduct is operative compensate(sorry if this word doesn't exist, english is my third language) the 1 provided by the public bath.
3. Rich and healthy people don't goes in public bath, they got their own baths. If not, there were special rooms for them in the public therms for security reasons. The rest of the people bath together, without no one to control if they are contaminated with scrofula, papillomavirus, or another contagious disease... You can replace water every hour, those who are together in the same pool at the same time risk contamination.( not to mention those who urinate in water, or worse...)
4. In modern world, with chlore, antiseptics, and so on, we still fear plantar wart when we go to the swimming pool, or the shower in sports clubs,...

These, plus a lot of reasons that I'm not really able to write in nearly correct (?) English, make me think that the 1 penalty is correct.
Even more correct if they have sex with public women near, or in the water...

Well said.
The idea of a public bath does not intrinsically necessitate running water, and without an aqueduct it's even less likely. The only things we know are that a) a public bath involves a large group of (probably dirty) people getting together in the water and b) 'something else', presumably (half)legitimised prostitution, was also occurring. Both of these things suggest social benefits (eg ) and negative health benefits. Certainly, in no sense does the idea of a public baths necessitate the absence of private baths, and it's fairly foolish for people to impute historical facts from specific empires to a purely fantasy setting.