Finished my first culture victory

[MonkeyPaw]

Going for tourism doesnt benefit your empire at all, what a sad waste.

?

You won the game. That's the benefit.

 

[Victoria]

Early theaters as well as quelling the opposition massively push culture and the +2 great writer card and Pin/Oracle just push you faster.
that culture may not give you advanced weaponry but it gives you faster envoys, governors, governments, Apostles, adjacency bonus, corps/armies, better builders, faster knights, cheap upgrades... just lots.
... the thing is there is a price in rushing too fast, culturing above the current era costs more right?, your districts cost more etc.... the overall strat (not always best) is to push settlers and culture (and the Coli + pyramids) until you can get to Feudalism for cheap builders... then start chopping and massively explode your science/.culture/whatever in a few turns. The early theater is really a denial of great writers to any other civ... so really aimed at a culture victory.

Its so easy to want to complete early districts but apart from one for the eureka you are slowing down your civs overall development by doing so.

 

[kaltorak]

?

You won the game. That's the benefit.

Same with score victory, and I doubt that's a popular victory condition.

If I build a city, research a technology, capture a city, build a factory, do whatever, I want it to make my empire better. Not just add to a point count for final score and winning.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

?

You won the game. That's the benefit.

A big part of the issue is the interim steps along the way, their impact on the game, and the relative benefits towards other victory conditions. None of the victory objectives are particularly good compared to what they could be by this stage in the series' evolution, but Culture feels the most removed from the game, perhaps because it's the one with the most notable step backwards from Civ 5.

Domination: capture a capital, now you have more territory, good for any victory condition, other civs fear you (warmonger points) which influences your relationship with them, and you may trigger an Emergency

Religion: convert a civ, now you have more cities following your religion which provides bonuses that may be useful for any victory condition, you may trigger an Emergency, and loyalty flipping them is easier (although, sadly, there's no other impact for having religious affinity with another civ, like alliance bonuses or the like)

Science: Satellites opens the map (good for attacking and sometimes provides access to a lost City State somewhere), Moon Landing gives culture, first Mars component gives era score, albeit overall building the 3 Mars components feels cold and ho hum and like a solitaire game unless you're playing whack-a-mole with another Civ's Spaceports; the failure of other civs to acknowledge or respond to your efforts leaves a lot to be desired

Culture: getting cultural influence over another civ does nothing and has no in game impact, neither does generating tourists unless you're going for a cultural victory, and both events are ignored by other civs. The difference compared to Civ 5 is stark, where cultural influence over another civ could force a revolution and bring them into your sphere of influence / military alliance. There could be other / better ways to model the impact of cultural influence than the one used in Civ 5, but putting no game impact on tourists or cultural influence contributes to the whole thing feeling very ho hum.

 

[chazzycat]

I don't understand why tourism has to "do something" other than win the game. Tourism & culture go hand in hand. If your end goal is cultural victory, basically the entire game what you're actually pursuing is culture (great works) not tourism per se. Only at the very end of the game when you get seaside resorts is it even possible to generate tourism without also generating a ton of culture. We can all agree that culture is supremely useful, so this is really just a silly argument over semantics. Regardless of the distinction between culture & tourism, the path to culture victory gives you TONS of benefits through faster civic research. They literally added a whole new civic tree to the game with tons of obvious benefits, so that players get something out of pursuing a culture-heavy strategy.

 

[Disgustipated]

I'm pretty happy with it as is. For those who want it to do something, what is it exactly you want it to do? Do you want gold? Do you want people to attack you (they already removed the you are winning mechanic because we complained).

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

For those who want it to do something, what is it exactly you want it to do? Do you want gold? Do you want people to attack you (they already removed the you are winning mechanic because we complained).

I don't think there's a simple solution, the way Civ 6 is structured.

At the heart of the matter, if tourism is going to be a route to winning the game, then I would like tourism to matter, regardless of whether I'm pursuing a cultural victory or a different victory. Right now, if I'm going for a religious victory, I don't worry if another civ gets cultural dominance over me. If I'm going for a cultural victory, I don't worry about another civ having higher science than me. And if I'm going for a science victory, I don't worry about someone getting religious control over all my cities.

If the AI was more efficient at pursuing victory, at least at the highest difficulty levels, then I would have to worry about those things, and that would be a close enough approximation for our current purposes, as at least I would be motivated to slow the AI down. And trying to slow the AI down (other than through military action) would go a long way towards helping the game feel like a cohesive whole.

The "everybody hates me because I'm winning" mechanic is a good illustration of the problem. That's such a blunt, and frankly stupid, approach to how the AI should respond to a civ that's taken a cultural lead. Why not implement a more natural defensive response, like trying to generate more domestic tourists, when faced with a cultural aggressor?

Unfortunately, the current mechanics don't allow for a lot of "she's doing this, therefore I'd better do that" decision making. The game hasn't particularly been designed around the idea that you should pay attention to the actions of your neighbours and respond accordingly, except for the military aspect of the game. (And even there, I'm not sure the AI bases it's military size on the threat posed by it's neighbours.)

And maybe that's even closer to the heart of the matter: tourism feels disconnected from the rest of the game, because you can play any victory other than cultural and not pay any attention to this counter. Part of that is game design, and part of it reflects the current ability of the AI to efficiently pursue it's own victory.

 

[acluewithout]

I don't think there's a simple solution, the way Civ 6 is structured.

At the heart of the matter, if tourism is going to be a route to winning the game, then I would like tourism to matter, regardless of whether I'm pursuing a cultural victory or a different victory. Right now, if I'm going for a religious victory, I don't worry if another civ gets cultural dominance over me. If I'm going for a cultural victory, I don't worry about another civ having higher science than me. And if I'm going for a science victory, I don't worry about someone getting religious control over all my cities.

If the AI was more efficient at pursuing victory, at least at the highest difficulty levels, then I would have to worry about those things, and that would be a close enough approximation for our current purposes, as at least I would be motivated to slow the AI down. And trying to slow the AI down (other than through military action) would go a long way towards helping the game feel like a cohesive whole.

The "everybody hates me because I'm winning" mechanic is a good illustration of the problem. That's such a blunt, and frankly stupid, approach to how the AI should respond to a civ that's taken a cultural lead. Why not implement a more natural defensive response, like trying to generate more domestic tourists, when faced with a cultural aggressor?

Unfortunately, the current mechanics don't allow for a lot of "she's doing this, therefore I'd better do that" decision making. The game hasn't particularly been designed around the idea that you should pay attention to the actions of your neighbours and respond accordingly, except for the military aspect of the game. (And even there, I'm not sure the AI bases it's military size on the threat posed by it's neighbours.)

And maybe that's even closer to the heart of the matter: tourism feels disconnected from the rest of the game, because you can play any victory other than cultural and not pay any attention to this counter. Part of that is game design, and part of it reflects the current ability of the AI to efficiently pursue it's own victory.

I generally agree with having just one overarching victory type, but I do think having separate victory types does have some merit.

I’d love to see a single “primary” victory type. This would work like the cultural victory at a very very high level, with military and religious domination no longer being separate victory types but instead tools for helping you achieve your cultural victory. (As an aside, although not necessary, I’d be happy for tourism to have some diplomatic and loyalty effects along the lines of Civ V; and would be very happy for tourism and cultural influence to be widened out to some sort of more global influence / cultural force victory condition.)

But it might be good to still have say two “opportunistic” victory conditions. Say, two different science victories or a science victory and some sort of cultural or religious project (ie that works like a science victory, but isn’t strictly dependent on science). I think this would allow smaller or weaker empires to stay in the game. It would also force players to keep their eyes out for someone (particlularly the AI) winning a sneak victory, forcing them to take action (and get out if their comfort zone). It would be a bit like a chess player who can’t win being able to force a draw.

Anyway. We’re not getting something like that at this stage, although I expect the next expansion might make tourism have a more general effect - players have asked for that for ages, Civ 5 BNW had it (and Ed was designer for BNW ), and loyalty, the current happiness system, and alliances just seem completely built for a Mechanic like that.

 

[c4c6]

players have asked for that for ages, Civ 5 BNW had it (and Ed was designer for BNW ), and loyalty, the current happiness system, and alliances just seem completely built for a Mechanic like that.

As you mention Ed and not Anton - have I dreamed the new tradition being, that the designer for the 2 expansions and the base game of then next generation shall be the same? ...

 

[Disgustipated]

A possible solution is for tourism to add to your score, although it's possible it already does, I haven't checked. Of course not everyone cares about score and final ranking. But I do.

 

[shaglio]

If they changed Domination Victory to Conquest Victory, they could create a new VC called Dominance Victory that could be an amalgamation of the other VCs. To win it you'd need to own half the Capitals, have Cultural influence over half the civs, have your Religion be the primary religion in half the civs, and have launched a Satellite and achieved a Moon Landing. It would basically be a jack-of-all-trades victory, but it would at least require you to put importance into all facets of the game that the other VCs need.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Civ 5 already did it right with tourism.

Not sure why it was needed to reinvent the wheel

 

[Victoria]

I don't understand why tourism has to "do something" other than win the game.

You comment made me realise.... I live in London and just do not visit the museums or art galleries.... to my life they have no value and so they in fact no nothing but attract domestic and foreign tourists.... I guess it reduces the crime on the local population

I cannot see Ireland ever turning English due to the paintings we have, I think 6 has it right in that regard but does miss the level of impact music has on culture.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

You comment made me realise.... I live in London and just do not visit the museums or art galleries.... to my life they have no value and so they in fact no nothing but attract domestic and foreign tourists.... I guess it reduces the crime on the local population.

Because the criminals are too busy robbing the tourists? Or because the would be criminals have all been hired as museum tour guides?

I cannot see Ireland ever turning English due to the paintings we have, I think 6 has it right in that regard but does miss the level of impact music has on culture.

Don't forget the impact of the artifacts from other cultures housed in your museums. Those Egyptian artifacts, properly themed, are sure to convince Egyptians of the superiority of English culture.​

 

[Archon_Wing]

Well, the effects of English culture is and was strong.

After all, we are all able to speak it here.

Obviously it seems absurd a musuem would convince anyone of anything, but culture is not just one thing; it's a way of life that defines people. The way people read and write, and interpret things is heavily based upon culture.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Well, the effects of English culture is and was strong.

After all, we are all able to speak it here.

Obviously it seems absurd a musuem would convince anyone of anything, but culture is not just one thing; it's a way of life that defines people. The way people read and write, and interpret things is heavily based upon culture.

I agree with this, but I think you could make a compelling argument that the military dominance of the globe by the British Empire combined with the victory of the English colonists over the French colonists and native nations of North America is what led the globe to gravitate to English as the linqua franca, rather than some other language. In other words, it's a reflection of economic and military might more so than of cultural achievements.

But yeah, it's complicated.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

You comment made me realise.... I live in London and just do not visit the museums or art galleries.... to my life they have no value and so they in fact no nothing but attract domestic and foreign tourists.... I guess it reduces the crime on the local population

Don't forget the impact of the artifacts from other cultures housed in your museums. Those Egyptian artifacts, properly themed, are sure to convince Egyptians of the superiority of English culture.

I think Victoria and Trav'ling Canuck may be on to something here, but I don't think it will reduce the crime on the local population. Quite the contrary, I think it might spurn some present day nonlocals to become more actively involved in opposing the by-and-large defunct English imperialism of the past.

 

[Disgustipated]

All I know is we still have too much English culture in the U.S. Really got bombarded by Prince Harry wedding this year. Dammit, we fought a war just so we wouldn't have to hear dumb royal family wedding stuff. Yes, that's exactly why we declared war on the English.

 

[kaltorak]

All I know is we still have too much English culture in the U.S. Really got bombarded by Prince Harry wedding this year. Dammit, we fought a war just so we wouldn't have to hear dumb royal family wedding stuff. Yes, that's exactly why we declared war on the English.

Says the country that most other countries get bombarded with news from the most ^^

A possible solution is for tourism to add to your score, although it's possible it already does, I haven't checked. Of course not everyone cares about score and final ranking. But I do.

As the OP of this thread, that is exactly the opposite of what I want. My problem with tourism is precisely that it is just a score that doesnt make my empire better at all. Converting it into another useless score wouldnt help at all.

What I want for example is that each X tourism from a country siphons 1 yield of each type from that civ. Or each X tourism is +1 diplo from that country. Or anything useful.

 

[Kryxal]

Tourism equating to gold transfer would make sense, maybe .2 per point or something, or maybe per point per era (possibly starting at 0 for ancient).