Given they have nearly the same effect as granaries did in civ4 and there is more overall food available sooner in civ5, this building is going to be an obv. must build in almost every city, even if it's 200+ hammers.
No. Let me show you why.
I can pay 150
for Colosseum in a new city, ultimately yielding 3 pop at a cost of 2
(assuming non-India). Alternately, I can pay X
for an Aqueduct in an existing city, yielding 2 pop for a cost of 2
. Granted, I have to pay 80ish combined
and
(after Collective Rule) to get the Settler to make the new city, but the improved
numbers mean that investment's going to pay off in the long run. Also notice that the existing city is eventually going to grow, Aqueduct or no.
It follows that some X exists where it makes sense to build another city rather than an Aqueduct, given the
constraint. That's before we account for the effects of capturing additional luxuries, additional specialists and bonus Maritime
.
As X gets large, ICS remains optimal. A more reasonable
cost on the Aqueduct forces the player to make a choice early on: go vertical and risk losing out on luxuries in order to get some large
streams for slapping up multiplier buildings, or stay horizontal and try to grab the luxuries before they get gobbled up.
2KGreg said it was going to be at Engineering (and the icon for the Engineering tech even shows an aqueduct), which seem slightly late, although from a game playing perspective Engineering was the only tech that didn't give either a building or a unit.
Engineering's pretty deep. That requires a serious commitment to unlock early. Another point in favor of horizontal play.
at Construction. I can't see them having any impact on the flow of the game at a cost above 120
