Going for Gold: Tourism

[Gazebo]

What about the tourism/culture ratio for instant tourism yields? Shouldn't it be changed from 1:1?

it’s not 1:1, hasn’t been for awhile. I think it’s 1:4 right now but not at desk to look.

 

[azum4roll]

After digging in the repository, I find that the ratio is 1:3 culture:tourism, but I'm seeing some really weird stuff in CvPlayer::GetHistoricEventTourism. Might report on Github when I have time.

 

[Drakle]

How should wide tourism be fixed?

Wide tourism has been identified as a major issue for a long while, and even the most optimal scenarios of wide tourism, such as Byzantium with Sacred Sites, and 3 religious buildings, still underperforms a basic tall Tradition empire. But it is still stuck in this broken state.

 

[InkAxis]

How should wide tourism be fixed?

Wide tourism has been identified as a major issue for a long while, and even the most optimal scenarios of wide tourism, such as Byzantium with Sacred Sites, and 3 religious buildings, still underperforms a basic tall Tradition empire. But it is still stuck in this broken state.

We suggested a change for order's cultural revolution tenet a while ago, that would be helpful as that policy is a bit weird. It gives tourism to GW, which you don't have many as wide. Doubling science stealing speed is not only useless but also doesn't make sense.

EDIT: @pineappledan 's proposal was:

Department of Publicity

• PolicyCulture cost, technology science cost, and tourism penalties per city are reduced by 15% (effects are retroactive, and affect both incremental and capped totals)
• Unlocks the Propaganda Process (converts 15% of Production into Tourism each turn)

Some of the numbers could be tweaked but it makes sense as a big problem with wide are the penalties. A big strength or order is tourism so the proccess makes sense.

 

[Milae]

How should wide tourism be fixed?

Wide tourism has been identified as a major issue for a long while, and even the most optimal scenarios of wide tourism, such as Byzantium with Sacred Sites, and 3 religious buildings, still underperforms a basic tall Tradition empire. But it is still stuck in this broken state.

Could just use some different maths for the tourism penalty.
Currently if you have n+1 cities (first one doesn't give penalty) you will have:
100 - (n * 5)
For n=10: 100 - (10 * 5) = 50% tourism
Possible options:
100 * (0.95 ^ n)
For n=10: 100 * (0.95 ^ 10) = 59.9% tourism
or
100 / (1 + n * 0.05)
For n=10: 100 / (1 + 10 * 0.05) = 66.7% tourism

 

[azum4roll]

Could just use some different maths for the tourism penalty.
Currently if you have n+1 cities (first one doesn't give penalty) you will have:
100 - (n * 5)
For n=10: 100 - (10 * 5) = 50% tourism
Possible options:
100 * (0.95 ^ n)
For n=10: 100 * (0.95 ^ 10) = 59.9% tourism
or
100 / (1 + n * 0.05)
For n=10: 100 / (1 + 10 * 0.05) = 66.7% tourism

The last one would put it in line with science and culture. I think we should stick to that (and remove the -75% cap). The multiplier should be larger though, I think.

 

[Glassmage]

sacred site reformation is too OP. i consistently get ~90 tourism to AI ~35, and become influential with 8 out of 21 civs by turn 120.

 

[Milae]

sacred site reformation is too OP. i consistently get ~90 tourism to AI ~35, and become influential with 8 out of 21 civs by turn 120.

Yea it is great for early tourism but doesn't give any culture so it will still take a long time to get to two tier 3 ideologies.