Resource buildings and swapping tiles between cities.

[Verified_Confection_Being]

I started a game (multiplayer) as Brasilia the other day. I had xenomass 3 tiles out from my capital. I then founded a new city adjacent to this xenomass tile.

I started building the xenomass tile boosting buildings in my second city, then i decided to swap the xenomass tile back to my capitals ownership. However i could not then build the xenomass boosting tiles in my capital.

This seemed a little strange to me since this was perfectly viable in Civ V, so is this a bug anyone else has encountered?

 

[Browd]

Actually, in CiV there were numerous instances where you could not use a tile resource to enable particular buildings in two cities. For example, even if a marble tile was within range of two cities, only one city would be entitled to the marble bonus, not both. Same with horses (for circus). There were other examples as well, so this should not be surprising.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Actually, in CiV there were numerous instances where you could not use a tile resource to enable particular buildings in two cities. For example, even if a marble tile was within range of two cities, only one city would be entitled to the marble bonus, not both. Same with horses (for circus). There were other examples as well, so this should not be surprising.

That's not entirely the same though. You could, for example, swap a stone tile to another city and build a stoneworks then. That's what isn't now happening in BE.

In my instance as well, the annoying bit in particular is that my capital had that tile before i settled my new city, but it got flipped because the other city was closer. The other city also had a second source of xenomass improved, so there is no issue of conflict i can see.

By all means if a tile is is able to be worked, and improved (the only pre-requisites for the buildings) then they should be able to be built surely?

 

[Browd]

But you could not, IIRC, build stoneworks in two cities by swapping the same tile back and forth between the two cities. In every case I can recall, as happened in your xenomass example, you could not force a different city to "own" a particular tile for this purpose. There was a recent Civ V thread that discussed this issue at length: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=533414

Particularly note WHoward's response in that thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=13438728&postcount=12). Even though we don't have the BE source code, there's every reason to believe that BE is coded the same as Civ V for this purpose.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

But you could not, IIRC, build stoneworks in two cities by swapping the same tile back and forth between the two cities. In every case I can recall, as happened in your xenomass example, you could not force a different city to "own" a particular tile for this purpose. There was a recent Civ V thread that discussed this issue at length: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=533414

Particularly note WHoward's response in that thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=13438728&postcount=12). Even though we don't have the BE source code, there's every reason to believe that BE is coded the same as Civ V for this purpose.

Ok, thanks for the source! That's helpful and my memory must be going.

Little disappointed that this seems to be the way it is, since if there is enough xenomass sources for each city to viably do it i don't see why you can't. Technically i could have waited to build the second city later and got the xenomass wells in my capital first, then i could have settled and still been able to build them in the new city off the same source based on this coding supposedly. That seems bafflingly punishing to an uninformed player for no good reason

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Yeah just tried this myself in civ with stone and can confirm this isn't new

But i stand by the fact this is terrible implementation of exploit suppression vehemently.