Housing and rivers, am I missing something?

[pholtz]

You start next to a river - +3 housing: you add an aqueduct - +2 housing: total +5

You start away from river or coast, no plus: you add aqueduct - +6 housing: total +6

Edit: Ok, if I understand this correctly now, an aqueduct in this case would bring the +2 housing any city gets up to +6. NOT increase it by 6. Compare this with a city on a river, add the +2 starting housing and it gets +7. So you can ignore the rest of the post

So it seems that in the long run you do better starting away from river? Although especially in early game the loss of housing, until you can build an aqueduct may be more important.

You start next to coast +1: you build an aqueduct +6: total +7? Is this the best?

Not considered, the aqueduct uses up a district slot. Except for Rome, it doesn't with the Bath. With the Bath being also cheaper to build, should the Romans stay away from rivers?

 

[King Jason]

A city built on a river that then constructs an Aqueduct would have 7 housing.

A city built anywhere else with an Aqueduct would have 6.

 

[pholtz]

A city built on a river that then constructs an Aqueduct would have 7 housing.

A city built anywhere else with an Aqueduct would have 6.

As I said in my title, I'm sure I'm missing something. You may very well be right but could you explain the math please? I don't see it.

 

[ExemplarVoss]

Your numbers aren't complete or are incorrect. Cities start with base 2 housing (which means an instant growth penalty). Coastal gives +1 (for 3), Fresh water gives +3 (so 5)

Cities with fresh water start with 5 housing (capital gets +1 for palace, for 6 total), aqueducts add +2 for 7 (or 8 for capital)

Aqueducts for cities without fresh water simply change whatever value they have (2 or 3 coastal) to 6.

So a non-fresh water aqueduct city (6) is better than a freshwater city without an aqueduct (5), but behind a freshwater city with an aqueduct (7).


Growth in civ 6 is a little strange. You get a 50% penalty on growth if the pop is 1 less than the housing cap. This gets bigger at the housing cap, and (as I understand it) approaches 0 as you get to 5 above the housing cap.
So a starting city with no water gets a 50% growth penalty when founded. Which is awful, even if you do build an aqueduct there. You pretty much need to drag along a builder to instantly build farms to get rid of the growth penalty.

 

[King Jason]

Like the above poster mentioned, it didn't look like you were calculating the base 2 housing that every city starts with. So 2+3+2 = 7 for an aqueduct river city.

 

[pholtz]

Aqueducts for cities without fresh water simply change whatever value they have (2 or 3 coastal) to 6.

Ok, that is what I was missing. I thought aqueducts for cities without fresh water added 6 instead of increased to 6.

 

[pholtz]

Like the above poster mentioned, it didn't look like you were calculating the base 2 housing that every city starts with. So 2+3+2 = 7 for an aqueduct river city.

No, that would make no difference in my calculations. If all cities start with +2 it would increase non freshwater cities also.

 

[tiaopepe]

So a fresh water city don't force you to build an aqueduct for growing while a no fresh water city often needs one.

With fresh water city you can save one district location or choose to build an more profitable one first.

 

[pholtz]

I've edited my original post, pointing out my misunderstanding. Thanks!

 

[Cyberian]

Its basically pretty simple:

Always build your city on a river or where you can get fresh water with an aqueduct. All other cities are rubbish.

 

[King Jason]

Always build your city on a river or where you can get fresh water with an aqueduct. All other cities are rubbish.

Before urbanization, maybe. Afterwards you can get the same kind of housing increase from a Neighborhood that you can an Aqueduct whether there is a nearby water source or not.

 

[joncnunn]

Growth in civ 6 is a little strange. You get a 50% penalty on growth if the pop is 1 less than the housing cap. This gets bigger at the housing cap, and (as I understand it) approaches 0 as you get to 5 above the housing cap.

Not quite: +2 and higher : full growth
+1: 50% penalty
0 to -4 :75% penalty
-5 and lower : ZPG

 

[Big J Money]

Before urbanization, maybe. Afterwards you can get the same kind of housing increase from a Neighborhood that you can an Aqueduct whether there is a nearby water source or not.

Yeah but depending on how many districts you have at this point, building a neighborhood in a brand new city could be prohibitively expensive for that neighborhood to build on its own, no?

Although I suppose the same could be said for an aqueduct.

 

[stiiknafuulia]

It may be a bit extreme and the numbers may have to be tweaked, but I like the idea that cities away from fresh water will never amount to much (before modern times, anyway). It's realistic and means you'll have to think whether the new city will be worth it at that particular point in the game (otherwise there's little thought to spamming new cities in Civ VI, it seems). Also, it opens up a potential UA for an upcoming Civ; something like a unique Well district that preserves terrain yields, acts like a weaker, cheaper Aqueduct and can give fresh water anywhere.

 

[Kevin Rohrer]

So here are two stupid questions:

1. Are (salt water) Oceans considered "fresh water"?
2. Does each Capital automatically come with a Palace?

 

[Browd]

Each capital comes with a palace, but each civ can have only one capital. If your original capital is conquered, another city (usually the next largest) automatically becomes your capital, your palace automatically "teleports" to your new capital, and your old palace is destroyed.

Ocean tiles are not considered fresh water for any purpose other than housing in a city that is founded on the coast and that is not adjacent to a "real" source of fresh water (river, lake or oasis). For this purpose, the adjacent ocean tile will provide +1 housing to that city, as compared to +3 housing that the city would get if it settled next to a "real" fresh water source.