Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by bite, Dec 18, 2018.
Not a tunnel. This is clearly the entrance to Moria. You shall not pass!
Not to mention FireTuner stuff being used to enhance. (like the 90k gold)
So there's a Balrog under that mountain? That would explain why volcanoes are such a big part of GS...
Not really. Mountains are low production. Maybe a mountain surrounded by terrace farms will be worth working? Otherwise mountains will only be used late, late game when you have nothing else for citizens.
When you're pulling 4 food, 2 production from every hill and mountain you'll likely have the citizens to spare to work another. Plus those insane 10 food domestic trade routes. I think since mountains can't hold districts, they gave them the ability to work them since settling mountain ranges takes away useable space. Of course, with that kind of food output, you really can just sacrifice your flat land for districts or later, lumbermills. It's nice to see a variation on farm/mine that isn't just "outback stations: why not get both?!"
The mountain tiles will be the weakest you have, though, especially if you build an aqueduct.
They could completely remove the mountain thing. As long as the aqueduct/fresh water thing is in there, the Inca will be really good. Just building terraces in those limited situations would push them pretty far since afaik you get terraces basically right away. (And aqueducts come early too.) I wish mountains just got bonus hammer from terraces instead of food, but oh well!
And everybody knows it is easier to send a Llama under a limbo pole than a Camel through a Qapac...
I hope they change the citizen names for the Mapuche (they are currently using Quechua names).
I really wish people would stop calling the Qhapaq Ñan a tunnel, since that is not what it's supposed to be.
I stand corrected. I've taken a closer look at the preview. You can definitely see the unit can choose which tile to teleport. OK, this is super cool.
If you don't build mines but build Terrace farms, I guess you'll have less production instead of good production. Terrace farms don't add production.
Despite what the first look video showed, of course you can't just replace all your mines with Terrace Farms because you'll lose that production. I think the advantages of the TF are going to be early in the game next to fresh water and mountains.
One TF next to fresh water has equal production to a mine before apprenticeship, plus you get the food an housing. So basically you're getting an early farm/mine combo for one builder charge. If you build an aqueduct, which seem like they'll be marginally more useful in GS, then you're up to equal production to a mine until Industrialization. The rest of your hills will still be mines, and ideally you'll have the extra pop to work them earlier than other civs.
I don't think the TF is the best UI, but it certainly has its uses.
Incorrect, terrace farms add production if adjacent to fresh water or an aqueduct
And mountains themselves have production, not to mention hills that are not adjacent to mountains.
Yes, early on putting a Terrace Farm on a hill by a river is like placing both a Farm and a Mine. It doesn't seem to get the later production boosts that Mines get (it does seem to get the Farm boosts), but in the early game, the Inca can make Grassland Hills into 3F/2P tiles or Plains Hills into 2F/3P tiles for one Builder charge. That may be their best ability. It's offset somewhat, unfortunately, by that Builder charge not also triggering a boost the way improving a tile with a resource does.
Terrace Farms by Aquaducts are like a Farm plus a Medieval Mine. You need to invest in the Aquaduct to get that bonus, of course. That's less of an issue if the Aquaduct is to a river and not taking up a tile beside a mountain.
Later on, the Terrace Farms don't scale like Mines, but they are a pure option: you don't lose the ability to place Mines, you just get the option to use them when they're better than Mines.
Just being able to take a grassland or plains hill and turn it into a growth tile (grass) or a self-sustaining (plain) tile with 1-2 production is a big plus. That's like early civil engineering.
But you'll only need to plop down a few terraces near some mountains to be swimming in food. Like in the first look, a terrace next to 2 mountains on a grassy hill? Bam, 5 food. This leaves you with more surplus food so you can work things like mined plains hills.
The aqueduct thing is just so killer. You're turning 0-5 3 yield hill tiles in a city into minimum 6 yield, maybe more if there's mountains or a terrace triangle. We also don't know if terraces and farms work with each other for feudalism/replaceable parts. If they do then these things will be crazy.
They at least get food adjacencies, and they help get those mountain tiles up to snuff.
It's just like why they were so OP* in civ5: they could add food to production bearing tiles early and get growth and hammers. Now, all hills gave flat 2 prod in civ5, but even still, this is just great. Add in machu picchu and you're basically the Dwarven civ with how into mountains and hills you'll be.
*The real reason inca were OP in 5 was because of the free roads. I recall a comment here describing the ability:
also some bs about hill movement
but more importantly, FREE MONEY!!!"
Whoever wrote that like 4 years ago is my hero.
In Civ5 food is important, in Civ6 food is useless somehow. In Civ5 AQ is the most important building, the Civ6 nobody build AQ. That's the main difference making Terrace not that good.
That would be more appropriate if it were the Maori, but oh well.
How is food useless if that's what would make you able to work all those mines in the first place?
Also I admit I've built an aqueduct before.
There and back again: Kupe's Voyage
Separate names with a comma.