Screenshot analysis!

[kaspergm]

Pretty convinced the "orange zone" is entertainment?

 

[AriochIV]

That "Industrial Zone" appears to have stalls selling colorful fruits and vegetables. Perhaps it is a food district instead

Some of the buildings have rolled up bolts of cloth, so if it's not industrial, then perhaps it's a market district.

Also, the thing with the tents has balloons, which makes me more think it is a Happiness type district rather than a commercial one.

Certainly possible. The tents might be Circus or something similar.

The groups of 4 units are interesting because they are not all of the same type.
The units in the 2 archery groups and the 4 swordsmen group all look the same.
While 1 group has probably 2 spearmen + 2 pikemen (if I'm not wrong) and the most interesting group is the one with 2 samurai + another 2 different units.

Civ V has minor variations in the individual figures within a unit that are just cosmetic. I'm guessing that's what we're seeing here.

Maybe it's a coincidence, all groups have 4 units which is probably a graphic representation of the amount of single units in the army.

That seems unlikely, since an Army is only 3 units, and it's not available until later in the game. The figures probably represent the unit strength, just like in Civ IV and V.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It would not surprise me if Corps have 8 figures and Armies have 12.

 

[Tatran]

From another source :
2 units of the same type = a corps
3 units of the same type = an army
Both are available later in the game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

From another source :
2 units of the same type = a corps
3 units of the same type = an army
Both are available later in the game.

Yeah, I'm talking about figures in the model on the tile.

 

[Tatran]

Never mind.

 

[Venger]

Some of the buildings have rolled up bolts of cloth, so if it's not industrial, then perhaps it's a market district.

Jeez, look at those rooflines, all concave, how Clash of Clashes PLAY FREE ON YOUR MOBILE NOW!!!

 

[darko82]

Jeez, look at those rooflines, all concave, how Clash of Clashes PLAY FREE ON YOUR MOBILE NOW!!!

Look at those trees. OMG

A lot of android games look a lot better.

This is an insult to many players.

 

[King William I]

There's already a thread for whining about graphics, this is for analyzing screenshots for info....

 

[nyyfootball]

Jeez, look at those rooflines, all concave, how Clash of Clashes PLAY FREE ON YOUR MOBILE NOW!!!

Moderator Action: This site has a strict rule against public discussion of moderator actions. Do not do this again.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Spoiler :

Moderator Action: Image deleted. When told not to post an image as spam, don't repost it.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

CIV VI's aesthetics looks very much like a freemium game that people with too much disposable income play because they are bored waiting in line.


The fun of Civilization is derived, at least for me personally, from the intellectual stimulation which the game invokes, not the mindless repetition of pretty pictures.

 

[dexters]

Some of the buildings have rolled up bolts of cloth, so if it's not industrial, then perhaps it's a market district.

That looks like a textile district. There are rolled up bolts of cloth as you said and jars of dye?
The carts of fruits look more like textiles being stretched over some sort of table to dry

Could still be 'industrial' or commercial depending on where textile production falls in the game.

Or it could be a market for textiles.

 

[King William I]

I'm calling economic district

 

[nyyfootball]

I'm calling economic district

What does that even mean?

Is it a stock exchange? A supermarket? A restaurant district? Is that a trading port? Is there a railroad station? Gold mines? Banks? Credit unions? Shopping? What kind of economics would occur in an "economic district"?

 

[DefiantMars]

Well in the interview, it was stated that the blue "science district" are called campuses, I feel that that yellow districts here are going to be markets. Since they're color coded, Yellow could represent Gold so Market Districts? I don't think it would be industrial as Civ V associates production with Orange... Unfortunately that conflicts with the orange circus tents we're seeing.

So I honestly have no idea.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

@AriochIV - I really appreciate your work in breaking down the screenshots, and admire your strength and resolve in being able to look at them for more than 5 seconds without vomiting uncontrollably.

Seriously, this looks like a bad mobile game from back when the Black Eyed Peas were popular.

 

[m15a]

What does that even mean?

Is it a stock exchange? A supermarket? A restaurant district? Is that a trading port? Is there a railroad station? Gold mines? Banks? Credit unions? Shopping? What kind of economics would occur in an "economic district"?

Mines are probably a separate improvement rather than a district. We know that districts can hold multiple types of buildings (e.g., those resembling a shrine and temple in a religious district), so having a "restaurant district" is even less likely than a restaurant building, which personally I find pretty unlikely. Sea port buildings look like they are going in a different coastal district.

Markets, banks, stock exchanges, and supermarkets are all buildings from previous Civ games that could fit in the same theme. I might call it commercial district, though.

 

[nyyfootball]

Mines are probably a separate improvement rather than a district. We know that districts can hold multiple types of buildings (e.g., those resembling a shrine and temple in a religious district), so having a "restaurant district" is even less likely than a restaurant building, which personally I find pretty unlikely. Sea port buildings look like they are going in a different coastal district.

Markets, banks, stock exchanges, and supermarkets are all buildings from previous Civ games that could fit in the same theme. I might call it commercial district, though.

Why not make districts more specific? Is the goal to dumb down the game?

There is a difference between complicated and complex. Having broad definitions just makes the game more confusing.

 

[m15a]

Why not make districts more specific? Is the goal to dumb down the game?

There is a difference between complicated and complex. Having broad definitions just makes the game more confusing.

No, there's no I don't think the fact that the game is adding districts serves to "dumb down" the game, assuming by "dumb down" you mean "simplify". Districts can't be too specific because each one sits on a tile and therefore there must be a limited amount so that they can be built. Additionally, like any other aspect of Civ that has any sort of cost (whether it is building time or gold or whatever), it has to provide a quantifiable benefit within one of the small number of factors (gold, science, culture, faith, XP, city defense . . . anything else measured in points).

My guess based on the small amount of information we have is that a district can contain a number of buildings, many of are familiar and commonly grouped based on function from previous Civ games. For example, the library, university, public school, and research lab are a set of buildings from Civ 5 that all increase science. And later ones have the prerequisite of earlier ones. Even without an official term like "campus" or "science" district, that broad set of buildings is already conceived of by players as belonging to the same set. Therefore, I don't think referring to those buildings as being part of the same district will make the game more confusing.

At the same time, districts will add new decisions. For example, having to trade off between adding a district to a tile or an improvement or the possibility to (or not defend) districts.

 

[dexters]

Districts is the equivalent of 1UPT for cities. Instead of all the buildings being in the center tile, they're spread out on the city's radius (though the central tile still have buildings- we've seen granaries, & monument), with actual improvements showing and gameplay implications. ie: Wonders take up entire districts. It's impossible to build all the districts in one city. Districts themselves have themes ie: science, commerce, harbour etc. and get bonuses when placed next to certain terrain elements they have affinity to. I think each district can hold 4 buildings of a specifc theme. Which is more than enough given our known Civ upgrade path for basic buildings goes something like 1) library 2) university 3) schools 4) research labs or alternatively 1) market 2) bank 3) stock exchange

So this serves as specializing a city in more than the 'check if near river' type thing we're used to,. and adds a layer of depth to the game as an attacking force cannot simply march to the city tile, take it, and call it a day. The devs were quite explicit about fighting for control of districts, and military districts in the outskirts of a city producing the units, rather than the units coming from the city tile itself.

Lots of depth there.

 

[nyyfootball]

No, there's no I don't think the fact that the game is adding districts serves to "dumb down" the game, assuming by "dumb down" you mean "simplify".

I want the game to be simpler. Having broad definitions for game mechanics only serves to confuse and complicate. Specificity would greatly simplify the game.

Districts can't be too specific because each one sits on a tile and therefore there must be a limited amount so that they can be built. Additionally, like any other aspect of Civ that has any sort of cost (whether it is building time or gold or whatever), it has to provide a quantifiable benefit within one of the small number of factors (gold, science, culture, faith, XP, city defense . . . anything else measured in points).

Why there have to be such a small number? That seems confusing.

My guess based on the small amount of information we have is that a district can contain a number of buildings, many of are familiar and commonly grouped based on function from previous Civ games. For example, the library, university, public school, and research lab are a set of buildings from Civ 5 that all increase science. And later ones have the prerequisite of earlier ones. Even without an official term like "campus" or "science" district, that broad set of buildings is already conceived of by players as belonging to the same set. Therefore, I don't think referring to those buildings as being part of the same district will make the game more confusing.

So buildings like libraries and universities will no longer be able to be built in cities and I will only be able to build them in rural "campus districts" miles away from the center (and most populated area) of my city? Doesn't it make more sense to put your most vital institutions as close to as many people as you can, instead of arbitrarily placing them a part from your city?

At the same time, districts will add new decisions. For example, having to trade off between adding a district to a tile or an improvement or the possibility to (or not defend) districts.

Districts are unnecessarily complicated what was once a complex and fun game. Why shouldn't a large metropolis be able to exponentially expand?