Placing an Aqueduct

[qadams]

Okay, here's another situation re placing an aqueduct. With this one I already see the problem — but I think it's ridiculous that the problem is allowed to exist.

I have a city, Trier, within one tile of Mount Kilimanjaro. I'd like to build an aqueduct for that city. According to the tooltip, Kilimanjaro "appears as a Mountain." And that should mean it provides access to fresh water via an aqueduct, correct?

No, apparently that's not correct. Because when I try to place an aqueduct district there, guess what? Now I am told there is "no suitable location" for this district. Arghh!!!

 

[Browd]

Here's an example of what I mean.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5g90q3hiww4w3qt/IMG_3603.JPG?dl=0

So you would like to build a chain of aqueducts (in your image, two aqueducts) to connect a remote water source to the city center? Seems like an expensive use of valuable tiles and city production, but I see no particular gameplay reason to object to that, if that's what a player wants to do.

 

[Browd]

Umm, the answers above are ridiculous supposition and completely incorrect.
You can build an aqueduct on ANY tile that is adjacent to the city-centre, AND adjacent to a Mountain or River. End of Story.

The issue with the picture above, is the way the map has been depicted. Rivers do not flow THROUGH tiles in Civ6, they effectively flow along the edges. Some "graphical licence" is allowed in depicting this, to give the rivers natural curves.
I suspect that what the OP will find if he mouses over the tile in question, is that there is NO river. The river actually flows along the opposite edges of the adjacent hexes.
(I assume it is the over-growth of the city-hex that has pushed out the curves in the river.)

You would be wrong about that. When a river runs between tiles, both tiles have a river edge and will show "river" in their tooltip.

Also, like other districts, you cannot place an aqueduct on a tile with a strategic or luxury resource.

 

[Browd]

Okay, here's another situation re placing an aqueduct. With this one I already see the problem — but I think it's ridiculous that the problem is allowed to exist.

I have a city, Trier, within one tile of Mount Kilimanjaro. I'd like to build an aqueduct for that city. According to the tooltip, Kilimanjaro "appears as a Mountain." And that should mean it provides access to fresh water via an aqueduct, correct?

No, apparently that's not correct. Because when I try to place an aqueduct district there, guess what? Now I am told there is "no suitable location" for this district. Arghh!!!

Yes, this is very irritating - Natural Wonder mountains (like Everest and Kilimajaro) do not function as mountains for aqueduct purposes, even though they are labeled as "mountains." This was an early complaint (I won't bother searching for the Bug Report thread on that, but it exists). It still hasn't been patched, but hopefully it will be.

 

[shaglio]

Okay, here's another situation re placing an aqueduct. With this one I already see the problem — but I think it's ridiculous that the problem is allowed to exist.

I have a city, Trier, within one tile of Mount Kilimanjaro. I'd like to build an aqueduct for that city. According to the tooltip, Kilimanjaro "appears as a Mountain." And that should mean it provides access to fresh water via an aqueduct, correct?

If you look at the tooltip where you circled "mountain" in red, at the top you'll see that the tile is actually grassland for some reason.

 

[Siptah]

Umm, the answers above are ridiculous supposition and completely incorrect.
You can build an aqueduct on ANY tile that is adjacent to the city-centre, AND adjacent to a Mountain or River. End of Story.

The issue with the picture above, is the way the map has been depicted. Rivers do not flow THROUGH tiles in Civ6, they effectively flow along the edges. Some "graphical licence" is allowed in depicting this, to give the rivers natural curves.
I suspect that what the OP will find if he mouses over the tile in question, is that there is NO river. The river actually flows along the opposite edges of the adjacent hexes.
(I assume it is the over-growth of the city-hex that has pushed out the curves in the river.)

No, it is your answer that is incorrect - as you can see in the second screenshot, the hex where OP wants to build is indeed next to a river. The first screen with the superimposed hex is misleading here. The answers above are indeed correct.

 

[glaivemaster]

Yes, this is very irritating - Natural Wonder mountains (like Everest and Kilimajaro) do not function as mountains for aqueduct purposes, even though they are labeled as "mountains." This was an early complaint (I won't bother searching for the Bug Report thread on that, but it exists). It still hasn't been patched, but hopefully it will be.

Was it ever fixed in Civ 5? I know that Lake Victoria never counted as a lake for farming purposes, did they ever make Kilimanjaro etc. into proper mountains (for Observatories, mostly)?

 

[Browd]

Lake Victoria was patched to have it function as a source of fresh water for farm purposes, but I don't recall whether any of the observatory issues with mountain wonders were ever fixed.

 

[Leyrann]

Simply said:

An aquaduct needs to be on a tile adjacent to your city center that is also adjacent to a mountain, river, oasis or lake. All those tiles are allowed, with one exception: If the only river border of the tile is the one that borders your city, it can't be built on that tile, as the aquaduct needs to go from the origin to your city, and they can't be the same.

 

[qadams]

Simply said:

An aquaduct needs to be on a tile adjacent to your city center that is also adjacent to a mountain, river, oasis or lake. All those tiles are allowed, with one exception: If the only river border of the tile is the one that borders your city, it can't be built on that tile, as the aquaduct needs to go from the origin to your city, and they can't be the same.

Very nicely explained!

 

[CD7]

You would be wrong about that. When a river runs between tiles, both tiles have a river edge and will show "river" in their tooltip.

What a stupid post. Might as well say "1+1=2"
Read my post, I'm suggest the tile in question has no river, because as I clearly said, the river runs on the OPPOSITE sides of the adjacent tiles.

Also, like other districts, you cannot place an aqueduct on a tile with a strategic or luxury resource.

Not even sure if that's true, but even if so, WTH has that got to do with the price of eggs? Did you even bother looking at the OP???

Moderator Action: Please try to be more civil in your response. This could be considered trolling. leif
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[CD7]

Sorry, the OP threw me with his first picture. I'm ashamed to admit I failed to realise he had drawn the hex incorrectly, which is what had me confused.

 

[CD7]

I have a city, Trier, within one tile of Mount Kilimanjaro. I'd like to build an aqueduct for that city. According to the tooltip, Kilimanjaro "appears as a Mountain." And that should mean it provides access to fresh water via an aqueduct, correct?

No, obviously not. Kilimanjaro is a Natural Wonder, as such it behaves as a Natural Wonder.

 

[ShinigamiKenji]

No, obviously not. Kilimanjaro is a Natural Wonder, as such it behaves as a Natural Wonder.

It behaves as a Natural Wonder, yes. But Dead Sea is also a Natural Wonder and provides fresh water (despite being the saltiest water body in the world, IIRC). So why wouldn't Mt. Kilimanjaro (and other mountainous Natural Wonders as well) provide mountain adjacency?

 

[sugerdady87]

Here's an example of what I mean.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5g90q3hiww4w3qt/IMG_3603.JPG?dl=0

Did you really draw those pictures then uploaded them for this simply explanation? lmao

 

[TruthfulCake]

I personally hope that they "demote" aqueduct from a district to a tile improvement in the next expansion. It should provide yields as if it's a farm, but also give you extra housing. A city can only benefit once from the aqueduct bonus, in that having three aqueduct improvements will be effectively the same as having one aqueduct and two farms.

Right now, aqueducts are awkward and inconvenient. You can only build one of them, and that necessitates you to only be one tile away from fresh water, even though there really is nothing wrong with being further away - just build a longer aqueduct. The bonus also isn't significant enough to warrant losing entire yields from a tile.

 

[c4c6]

It behaves as a Natural Wonder, yes. But Dead Sea is also a Natural Wonder and provides fresh water (despite being the saltiest water body in the world, IIRC). So why wouldn't Mt. Kilimanjaro (and other mountainous Natural Wonders as well) provide mountain adjacency?

I suppose, that would need the correct [terrainType]. As shaglio pointed out in case Kilimanjaro this is 'grasslands' instead of 'mountain'. (NaturalWonder=Mt. Kilimanjaro is just an attribute like Feature=Marsh or Bonus=Spices).

Btw, what does the tooltip tell about the terrainType of DeadSea?

 

[UWHabs]

I personally hope that they "demote" aqueduct from a district to a tile improvement in the next expansion. It should provide yields as if it's a farm, but also give you extra housing. A city can only benefit once from the aqueduct bonus, in that having three aqueduct improvements will be effectively the same as having one aqueduct and two farms.

Right now, aqueducts are awkward and inconvenient. You can only build one of them, and that necessitates you to only be one tile away from fresh water, even though there really is nothing wrong with being further away - just build a longer aqueduct. The bonus also isn't significant enough to warrant losing entire yields from a tile.

I find in some cases, the yields can justify it if you city has no other source of fresh water. But for every other city, I can usually get enough housing with a granary and a few farms to survive until I get neighbourhoods. But yeah, it would be nice to function more as a tile improvement that you could potentially plow later. Or even if it was a special district that you could build early, and then "build over" later on if you decide you don't want it anymore. Maybe give it another bonus (extra culture/tourism?) in the modern age if it's still around, but otherwise would be great to be able to re-purpose it. Then I think I'd build them a lot more often.

 

[RealAntithesis]

I personally hope that they "demote" aqueduct from a district to a tile improvement in the next expansion.

Or it could just be a building that that can be built in the city centre, and the aqueduct graphic will then appear on the map connecting the city centre to a river or mountain within two tiles. Something like the aqueduct, which is a fairly minor structure and isn't really a wonder or a tile improvement, or a district, shouldn't be built as any of these things and shouldn't be taking up a whole tile (except for the graphic for immersive purposes).

 

[ShinigamiKenji]

Just a question that popped out of my head: How would you then balance the Roman Bath?

A +4 Housing, +1 Amenity that still gives the land yield is pretty OP. Same for a building, which essentially frees up a tile. But more importantly, those would actually be purchaseable (directly for a building, indirectly with land improvement via Builders).