[R&F] I played with Ancestral Hall wrong all the time

[Naeshar]

I had always had a feeling AcH is not working properly. I built it and the times for settlers stayed the same!

So I ran a test today. Also, on these forums are posts about the issue spread out (https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...ticed-on-playing.628086/page-22#post-15033184 https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...scussion-thread.624894/page-260#post-15031905).

On T93 I either chose Colonization policy or not. On T94 I let or not let Hobart build the Ancestral Hall.
The result is, that while the wording is the same, Colonization policy gives +50% production towards settlers in all cities while AcH only in Hobart, the city it is built in. There is no effect of AcH on other cities, be it capital Canberra or another city XIAN.

Here excerpts from xml files:
<Row>
<ModifierId>COLONIZATION_SETTLERPRODUCTION</ModifierId>
<Name>Amount</Name>
<Value>50</Value>
</Row>
<Row>
<ModifierId>GOV_SETTLER_COST_REDUCTION</ModifierId>
<Name>Amount</Name>
<Value>50</Value>
</Row>
The name GOV_SETTLER_COST_REDUCTION is misleading, the cost of settler stays the same, production increases, just like with Colonization policy. I find mindboggling, why the hell do both have the same descriptions:
<Row Tag="LOC_POLICY_COLONIZATION_DESCRIPTION">
<Text>+50% [ICON_Production] Production toward Settlers.</Text>
</Row>
<Row Tag="LOC_BUILDING_GOV_WIDE_DESCRIPTION">
<Text>50% increased [ICON_Production] Production toward Settlers.[NEWLINE]New cities receive a free Builder.[NEWLINE]Awards +1 [Icon_Governor] Governor Title.</Text>
</Row>

The text is misleading. It should be reworded to "in this city" for clarity, dont you agree? All other government buildings have global effects (GW slots buildings excluded), why not this one?

I certainly played myself due to this many times already.

 

[ZeroSuitSenpai]

Haha that's so funny. Just last night I re-read ancestral hall and thought I had been using it wrong all this time by thinking it only applied to the city it's built in. Glad I read this post before moving forward with that assumption.

 

[Boyan_Sun]

This bug has been for a long time since R&F releases. Only the city with AH is effective.

 

[Vandlys]

Because it's a government building, I guess I understand the confusion. I never had this problem, because I figured, just like a barracks or such, the effect applies on the city, not the empire.

 

[Disgustipated]

News to me, I may rethink building this. Though the free builder is still pretty powerful. Often my government district city is not the one producing settlers.

Strange because Warlord's throne applies to all cities, or am I wrong about that one as well?

 

[arthur486]

The settler building bonus affects only the AH city, but the extra builder goes for all cities established after the AH is built. e.g. if you capture a settler, build the AH while it is en-route and then found a city, you get the builder. I think the bonus builder is vastly more important, as with Feudalism it gives you 5-build builders exactly where you need them.

 

[acluewithout]

Well two things. First, I can’t believe I didn’t know about this.

Second, I think I actually prefer this to how I thought it worked (bonus in all cities) because now I have to think more carefully where I build it.

Thanks CivFanatics!

 

[Giskler]

I didn't know about this, but I also never noticed because I usually put it in my capital and rush settlers from it.

 

[Naeshar]

News to me, I may rethink building this. Though the free builder is still pretty powerful. Often my government district city is not the one producing settlers.

Strange because Warlord's throne applies to all cities, or am I wrong about that one as well?

I agree it is probably right as it is, as the global effect is the free settlers. Warlords throne should also apply to all cities, as stated in its description. Too bad the production is pretty worthless as when you conquer in Civ6 you rarely need reinforcements you couldnt buy.

Thanks for the appreciation, CivFanatics!