Na-vuh-gah-bull rivers

[pokiehl]

Yeah….change it to “Wooded” and change the Grassland Wooded type to ”Forest”.

That doesn’t work for Sagebrush or other potential features they might add. Also “wooded” connotes general forests to most people; they wouldn’t associate with jungle.

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah….change it to “Wooded” and change the Grassland Wooded type to ”Forest”.

Scrubland isn't wooded.

 

[Krikkit1]

Scrubland isn't wooded.

Yes but grassland and plains and tundra are all Vegetated.

And scrublands can have some woody shrubs (not trees)

 

[Zaarin]

Yes but grassland and plains and tundra are all Vegetated.

I mean, yes, but I also understand what they mean: a tile with a specific vegetated feature.

And scrublands can have some woody shrubs (not trees)

Yes, but we don't call that a "wood" in English.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Anyway "vegetated" is four syllables, so it's right out.

What is it with these Civ designers and their hypertrisyllabism?

If a river is navigable up to a vegetated tile, does that make exporting its vegetation easier? Oh, and if so, what market is there for sagebrush?

Spoiler :

You all have to forgive me. I find the OP for this thread so amusing that I can't stop making it the basis of new raillery.

 

[Krikkit1]

I mean, yes, but I also understand what they mean: a tile with a specific vegetated feature.


Yes, but we don't call that a "wood" in English.

We don’t call it vegetables either (or vegetated…which sounds like it’s been put in a coma)

 

[pokiehl]

I think there are a lot of ways to slice language; as long as whatever they're using is explained clearly and applied consistently in-game, there's not an issue IMO.

 

[Zaarin]

We don’t call it vegetables either (or vegetated…which sounds like it’s been put in a coma)

While "vegetated" isn't exactly an everyday term, yes, in a technical sense we would call it "vegetated." While I think "navigable" is the correct term for rivers, I'm less partial to "vegetated," but I can't think of a better word. "Wooded" excludes both rainforest and scrubland. The only alternative I can think of is "ecoregion," and that's even less specific.

 

[GeneralZIft]

If they want to be smart about it, which I'm sure they will be, they will tooltip the category of tile underneath the name of the tile

 

[Zaarin]

If they want to be smart about it, which I'm sure they will be, they will tooltip the category of tile underneath the name of the tile

Yes, we've already seen this is the case.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

While "vegetated" isn't exactly an everyday term, yes, in a technical sense we would call it "vegetated." While I think "navigable" is the correct term for rivers, I'm less partial to "vegetated," but I can't think of a better word. "Wooded" excludes both rainforest and scrubland. The only alternative I can think of is "ecoregion," and that's even less specific.

what kind of tiles aren't vegetated? Water, desert, and snow?

 

[Zaarin]

what kind of tiles aren't vegetated? Water, desert, and snow?

They seem to be using the term to mean it has a feature on it; like I said, it's imprecise but I can't think of a better catch-all term.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Serious question (for one moment): Do we know the game effects of riverine navigability? Is it just movement of units? Or will, say, a city get economic or production bonuses if it is on a traversable waterway? Water trade routes, presumably.

 

[Siptah]

Serious question (for one moment): Do we know the game effects of riverine navigability? Is it just movement of units? Or will, say, a city get economic or production bonuses if it is on a traversable waterway? Water trade routes, presumably.

One effect might be on roads or completely blocking crossing at first. The tech tree had a bridge icon towards the second half of the antiquity age. I assume until then, it’s blocking movement and you don‘t benefit from trade routes that would have to cross.

Didn‘t Songhai and Egypt have bonuses next to NRs - or was that Rs in general?

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Serious question (for one moment): Do we know the game effects of riverine navigability? Is it just movement of units? Or will, say, a city get economic or production bonuses if it is on a traversable waterway? Water trade routes, presumably.

The Songhai unique ability:

Tarki Al-Sudan: +15 Trade route range to cities on navigable rivers and your trade ships cannot be plundered on navigable rivers. +30% production towards constructing the Tomb of Askia

It should be 'Tarikh', not 'Tarki' by the way

 

[Gori the Grey]

One effect might be on roads or completely blocking crossing at first. The tech tree had a bridge icon towards the second half of the antiquity age. I assume until then, it’s blocking movement and you don‘t benefit from trade routes that would have to cross.

Good point. The scout in the release video, once he's in the water, can presumably get out on either side (and thus effectively cross the river), but maybe until long bridges can be constructed, navigability enhances water travel but impedes land travel.

 

[UWHabs]

It's also in ability descriptions, like Maya's Skies of Itzamna (The Palace gains Science for adjacent Vegetated tiles.)

From what I've seen and what JNR and others have put together, it seems like "Vegetated" is the catch-all for "dry" features.

The ones that I can name so far are:

Rainforest (vegetated Plains; maybe Tropical too?)
Woods (vegetated Grass; maybe Tundra too?)
Sagebrush (vegetated Desert)

There is also a "Wet" feature category. I do not believe "Rivers" belong to this category. Rivers seem to always be called out as their own thing. The "Wet" features spotted so far are:

Watering Hole (Plains)
Marsh (Grass)
Swamp (Tropical)
Oasis (Desert)

I'm not sure where coastal features fit in. (We've spotted reefs, or something that looks like them at least)

Overall, my take on this categorization is that it's a great reflection of the streamlining philosophy of Civ 7. It will make it easier to apply and figure out feature-based bonuses, like in Maya's ability.

If they actually are spreading out the diversity (separating swamp and marsh, adding in a specific sagebrush), then I'm guessing it's mostly to avoid having to spell out the features entirely. In 6 they could get away with "forest and rainforest" since there were only 2 types (3 if they had to list marsh as well), but if you have 3-4 types of feature in regular usage, then you need a catch-all term.

 

[The_J]

Just to check: The first time that "navigable rivers" appeared in a title here at CFC was anno 2004 https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/navigable-rivers-for-civ4.80475/ .
So I think it's settled : The communtiy wants "navigable rivers".

 

[Gori the Grey]

Right, but did that post take a position on whether they should be called navigable? That's the point in question here.

And now, looking at it, notice how deftly the poster avoided ever using the term! Makes ya think.

 

[The_J]

I think everyone previous to this here has called it "navigable rivers" in all the civ-forums.
I'd not dare to run a lexical analysis over the forum though.