[GS] Quick Question On Districts And Tile Yields

[bubbagumpsith]

As is this my inaugural post here at this community, please excuse me if I am posting in the inappropriate section.


I am new to Civilization as a whole, first investing any real time into the series with Civilization VI. With quite a few hours logged I have managed to begin picking up on the finer nuances of the game mechanics, with the goal of one day mastering them (a la settling a city and knowing in my mind precisely where I want to place districts and more importantly when).

Generally speaking, I can find answers to any inquiries I come across via this forum or Google at large. But, I can't find clarification on this particular question I am faced with now. So, I figured what better time than to make my first outreach to this wonderfully insightful community!

I am giving a CV with Brazil a shot (I'm currently on King difficulty) and ran into this situation that got me thinking:

In the picture, I provided I have two available spots to put down a +2 Harbor. Tile A has a +5 gold/+2 food yield (crab bonus) and Tile B is a simple +1g/+1 food. My instinct tells me to use the 1/1 tile for the Harbor, and then my curiosity kicked in. So, to clarify: when you place a district does it then negate all preexisting tile yields? Or do they maybe get incorporated into the district somehow?

If that's the case, then is it correct to assume that for future district planning I should ideally aim for the lowest yielding tiles to build upon (not excluding adjacencies of course)?

Any other general tips and tricks for greenhorn city planning and intermediate methods of maximizing production are also welcome . I am not sure what is considered a 'good' amount of production for the city, but I can't help but feeling mine is always lacking.

Thanks in advance, and apologies if this isn't the appropriate venue to ask these questions!

 

[BenitoChavez]

So, to clarify: when you place a district does it then negate all preexisting tile yields?

Yes, it will negate those yields. So in your screenshot you could place the harbor on the tile to the east and still be able to work the crab tile for extra gold per turn. If you ever do need to place a district on a tile that has a resource or woods/rainforest you can use a builder to harvest/chop to get a large boost in food/production/gold. That is what I usually try to do.

 

[Ceydezed]

A district will negate any preexisting tile yields. However, if there was a non-discovered strategy resource under, you will also gain the strategic resource, as if there was a mine / camp.
So, yes, you want to pay attention to where you place your districts - typically if you are low on production and don't have a lot of mines, it is probably worth it keeping the hills district-free. I usually never want to place districts on hills, except for super high adjacency (typically campus or holy sites as they benefit a lot from mountain and hills are often close to mountains) - other case would be districts that can only be built on hills, like the acropolis from Greece.

Best way to place districts is next to each others, with the plaza in the middle if possible, and the CH next to a river. To maximize productions, you can play not only with mines, but also river lumber mills (and all lumber mills with patch incoming), industrial zone (surrounded by mines), or trade routes. But for the moment mines are so important than overwriting them with districts should as much as possible be avoided.

For your question, i cannot see your picture, but i would rather not put the harbor on the resource if you have the same adjacency somewhere else. Putting a district on a resource will remove the resource altogether. If you want to at least get benefit of removing the resource, you should harvest it first before placing any district 'on top'.

Hope this helps!