Hotels

[Edaka]

Hello everyone. I'd like to touch upon the subject of hotels. Sorry if this has been discussed before. Let's take a look at its properties:

• As per description: '25% of the Culture from World Wonders, Natural Wonders, and Improvements is added to the Tourism output of the City. Tourism output from Great Works +25%'.
• In addition, they cost 6 Gold per turn to maintain.

In my opinion, hotel as a building is a pretty uninteresting one. I realize this is a highly situational building, but, the effects just feel too insignificant and kind of flat. For what it's worth, it hasn't been changed much mechanically from vanilla - not that it's inherently a bad thing, but still something to consider. So, I propose a simple addition:

• '25% of the Culture from World Wonders, Natural Wonders, and Improvements is added to the Tourism output of the City. Tourism output from Great Works +25% (unchanged)
  
• World Wonders, Natural Wonders, Great Person Tile Improvements, Landmarks, and Great Works in the city produce +1 Culture and Gold'

Yield type and amount is up to debate, of course. This would be in line with what hotels already do and even synergize with it a little. It would also grant players something else than pure tourism, which has always been a yield that's difficult to appreciate. So, do you think this is something hotels need?

 

[CrazyG]

I think the description is actually wrong. Its not the culture from improvements, its just all culture from tiles, a tile without an improvement would count towards it.

IDK if they are boring or not. I like having a simple building in the game, lately all these later buildings have become so complicated.

 

[Edaka]

I think the description is actually wrong. Its not the culture from improvements, its just all culture from tiles, a tile without an improvement would count towards it.

Well, yeah, but at that point in the game it doesn't really matter. When are you going to have a tile with culture but no improvement? Don't think so.

IDK if they are boring or not. I like having a simple building in the game, lately all these later buildings have become so complicated.

I hear you. However, that's exactly why I think it should just buff what it already does, for the sake of simplicity. It could give only +1 culture to make it even simpler, for example.

Just something, anything else than the meagre tourism boost. Think about it: it's +1 tourism per turn for every 4 culture from tiles and wonders and +0.75 tourism for every great work in most cases, and that's before tourism reduction for # of cities. That is just too little for an industrial era building. I mean, it comes at the same time as public schools, train stations/seaports, and zoos. Now these buildings are the stuff, I don't think hotels could ever even compete. It seems like even the zoo does tourism better, at least you can feel the immediate effects and see the added tourism on tiles. Hotels just don't have that tangible impact, they are probably the most unsatisfying building in the game to build (opinion).

 

[CrazyG]

Well, yeah, but at that point in the game it doesn't really matter. When are you going to have a tile with culture but no improvement? Don't think so.

A pillaged brazilwood camp is an example. Its actually really important because it means that monopoly culture bonuses contribute towards tourism.

Just something, anything else than the meagre tourism boost. Think about it: it's +1 tourism per turn for every 4 culture from tiles and wonders and +0.75 tourism for every great work in most cases, and that's before tourism reduction for # of cities. That is just too little for an industrial era building. I mean, it comes at the same time as public schools, train stations/seaports, and zoos. Now these buildings are the stuff, I don't think hotels could ever even compete. It seems like even the zoo does tourism better, at least you can feel the immediate effects and see the added tourism on tiles. Hotels just don't have that tangible impact, they are probably the most unsatisfying building in the game to build (opinion).

Its also before tourism bonuses take effect. Hotels have an enormous impact, if you are trying to win from culture you give them a high priority. I've never found them weak, they do their job well. A zoo will be better if you have a ton of forest and jungles, but for most land I think the hotel does more and you are going to build both anyways.

 

[Stalker0]

Hotels have an enormous impact, if you are trying to win from culture you give them a high priority.

Agreed. They are a very niche building, but extremely effective in their niche. If I'm not going CV I never build them. If I am....they are a high priority.

 

[CrazyG]

I would change the text to say 25% of the Culture from World Wonders, and tiles is added to the Tourism output of the City" just because its more accurate.

 

[Edaka]

Perhaps you guys are right about them being strong enough. I guess my biggest issue is that they feel weak. It's just that they only do tourism and they do it in an uninspired, uninteresting way. Maybe it's just me. However, most of other tourism buildings like arenas, zoos, airports, all have other interesting things going on for them, they are versatile an engaging in different ways. Same goes for almost any other building in the game. There are more strategic layers to them, more reasons to build, interactions, etc. I mean, what other building will you never consider building, unless you're going for a specific type victory?

If I'm not going CV I never build them. If I am....they are a high priority.

Anyway, I'll post to github about the text.

 

[tu_79]

Some religious beliefs improve hotels, and I'd swear that one tenet or one world wonder does it too. Still, you only build them when you want tourism.
Tourism is not just for the cultural victory. Any trade route towards an influenced civ grants extra growth, so by having big tourism output you can grow your cities faster, if you are able to trade (works best with vassals). By growing faster you get to work on more specialist slots.

 

[Legen]

Cristo Redentor adds 2 to Hotels. Hermitage adds another 3 .

Tourism also helps with Ideology pressure. Too little tourism and you may not be able to choose the Ideology you want, being forced to follow whatever everyone is picking instead.

 

[CppMaster]

Tourism also helps with Ideology pressure. Too little tourism and you may not be able to choose the Ideology you want, being forced to follow whatever everyone is picking instead.

Are sure about that? I thought you counter tourism with culture to prevent not being content.

 

[Legen]

Both culture and tourism help, since it acts based on the difference of the influence level. If two civs are popular with each other, they won't exert pressure to each other, just as if they were unknown or exotic to each other.

 

[Gazebo]

Perhaps you guys are right about them being strong enough. I guess my biggest issue is that they feel weak. It's just that they only do tourism and they do it in an uninspired, uninteresting way. Maybe it's just me. However, most of other tourism buildings like arenas, zoos, airports, all have other interesting things going on for them, they are versatile an engaging in different ways. Same goes for almost any other building in the game. There are more strategic layers to them, more reasons to build, interactions, etc. I mean, what other building will you never consider building, unless you're going for a specific type victory?


Anyway, I'll post to github about the text.

That's a terrible argument, though. 'Truth is in the eye of the beholder, eh?'

G

 

[Stalker0]

That's a terrible argument, though. 'Truth is in the eye of the beholder, eh?'

G

A while ago we attempted to make tourism a more fundamental aspect of the game. It has helped some, in that early to mid game tourism is now more useful to give you better trade routes and the like. But by late game there are generally better things to spend your hammers and gold on.

Tourism has always been a secondary mechanic in the game. VP bridged that a bit, but fundamentally its still the one yield that is "amazing if you need it to win, and useless if you don't)

 

[CrabHelmet]

@Stalker0 did you mean useless?

 

[CrazyG]

I'll consider a hotel in my capital even if I don't want to pursue a tourism win. The upgrades to trade routes for having influence are significant.

 

[Stalker0]

@Stalker0 did you mean useless?

Yep I fixed the mistake

 

[pineappledan]

Influence with another civ has so many tiny bonuses that I lose track of them all.

• TRs to influenced civs give more and % growth
• Spies are more effective vs influenced civs (though you can't go beyond lvl 3, so it's not as great as it sounds)
• Conquering cities from influenced civs have fewer turns of resistance and lose less population
• Ideological pressure can hit other civs with large amounts of unhappiness
  • This can cause cities from unhappy empires to flip to you for free
  • This can also force civs to re-align their ideology to yours, forcing them to throw away all their policies
• And of course, it can go towards a cultural victory

Are there any I'm forgetting?

I wonder if some other bonuses for influence could be added to make higher influence levels with other civs more impactful for civs that aren't pursuing a CV?

• Influence with a civ could lower that civ's anti-warmonger fervor
  • maybe a flat -5% at popular, and an additional -5% for every level above that? (max of -15% modifier to your warmonger penalty)
  • min of 0% of course
• Being dominant with a civ could give you +1 delegate in the WC, and that other civ could LOSE a delegate.
  • You essentially get to steal votes from other leaders if you have overwhelming cultural sway.
  • Right now it doesn't feel like there's much of a carrot for being dominant with another civ, since most of the perks for being dominant all have to do with conquest
  • If 2 civs became dominant with each other then they both steal 1 delegate from each other, and end up back where they started
• Being influential/dominant with a civ could give +50%/+100% religious pressure from your cities/trade routes/spies

 

[Stalker0]

I feel like we are the past the point of that now.

If this was a year ago I would be all for it, but I think it’s too much change as we push for gold.

 

[Gokudo01]

. I mean, what other building will you never consider building, unless you're going for a specific type victory?

I don't build chancery when going for domination victory ( unless I picked statecraft as second tree which happens from time to time or I want to build NW in the city) , I prefer to puppet CS if I am aiming for world domination, I don't need to work for them, I remove any potential bonus or threat and it's free gold/science/culture/faith whatever belief/policies you picked.

 

[Edaka]

That's a terrible argument, though. 'Truth is in the eye of the beholder, eh?'

G

I know, I know, that alone doesn't make my point any stronger. However, I wanted to see if anybody shared my sentiment, because that would.

Influence with another civ has so many tiny bonuses that I lose track of them all.

• TRs to influenced civs give more and % growth
• Spies are more effective vs influenced civs (though you can't go beyond lvl 3, so it's not as great as it sounds)
• Conquering cities from influenced civs have fewer turns of resistance and lose less population
• Ideological pressure can hit other civs with large amounts of unhappiness
  • This can cause cities from unhappy empires to flip to you for free
  • This can also force civs to re-align their ideology to yours, forcing them to throw away all their policies
• And of course, it can go towards a cultural victory

Are there any I'm forgetting?

I wonder if some other bonuses for influence could be added to make higher influence levels with other civs more impactful for civs that aren't pursuing a CV?

• Influence with a civ could lower that civ's anti-warmonger fervor
  • maybe a flat -5% at popular, and an additional -5% for every level above that? (max of -15% modifier to your warmonger penalty)
  • min of 0% of course
• Being dominant with a civ could give you +1 delegate in the WC, and that other civ could LOSE a delegate.
  • You essentially get to steal votes from other leaders if you have overwhelming cultural sway.
  • Right now it doesn't feel like there's much of a carrot for being dominant with another civ, since most of the perks for being dominant all have to do with conquest
  • If 2 civs became dominant with each other then they both steal 1 delegate from each other, and end up back where they started
• Being influential/dominant with a civ could give +50%/+100% religious pressure from your cities/trade routes/spies

I feel like we are the past the point of that now.

If this was a year ago I would be all for it, but I think it’s too much change as we push for gold.

I agree with Stalker here. While these are some nice ideas, they are too drastic. All I'd like to see is some simple, flavorful addition to hotels that would make them more interesting. They may fill their niche well now, but something inside me dies a little every time I'm finally able to build them and I read their description to remind myself of what they do, and I think 'That's it?'.

I don't build chancery when going for domination victory ( unless I picked statecraft as second tree which happens from time to time or I want to build NW in the city) , I prefer to puppet CS if I am aiming for world domination, I don't need to work for them, I remove any potential bonus or threat and it's free gold/science/culture/faith whatever belief/policies you picked.

That is a pretty good example of a situational building, but it's a beast compared to hotels. It has a specialist, flat yields with interactive mechanics (that rewards interaction with CSs), and, finally, a boost to diplomatic units. It can be useful and it certainly has flavor.

I'd like to once again address the fact that other tourism related buildings each offer something uniquely interesting beside tourism.

• There's the arena, the only (AFAIK) building with flat tourism in base yields, and it comes in ancient era. That's cool, I guess. Oh, and it does a lot of other stuff too - flat culture, boredom reduction, some luxury resource tile yields, synergy with barracks and forges! Wow, now that's hard to ignore.
  
• Caravansaries, harbors, customs houses - these don't buff your tourism per turn, but have a targeted effect on civs you choose to trade. So, the mechanic they exploit is interactive and, therefore, actually slightly more engaging. They also provide a slew of benefits each that are mainly useful for gold, but they all feel unique.
• The zoo gives tourism, it even does it in the dual manner of both instant yields and yields on per turn basis at the same time. You can actually see those yields either pop up in a notification or you see them on the map tiles - all that provides some kind of instant satisfaction. You know, like I can actually feel that a built a building. Oh, and it also gives happiness.
• Broadcast towers gives flat tourism and flat culture, which scales off population. It also reduces boredom. Not the most exciting building, but at least it has something going on for it other than just tourism.
• Airports - now that's what I'm talking about, that's what hotels would want to be if they could dream. The airport does everything the hotel does the same way, but it also gives you the option to airlift, boosts air unit capacity of the city and gives a defensive bonus against airstrikes. So, apart from being a tourism building, it facilitates transportation (greatly) and also acts as something you would definitely want to build on the borders with an unfriendly neighbor.

Correct me if I forgot any tourism related building (not counting wonders). All of the mentioned buildings have more than one strategic layer that makes you consider building them. I just wish that I could say the same about hotels.