Thundra and Snow

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Two pretty much useless tiles in previous civilization games but do you think they will find some good use for these now with the new district system and focus on city specialization?

Making these atleast somewhat useful could help civilizations that start near them alot, making them useless is not necessarily fun even if it is realistic.
Well making jungle good for science and making desert good for markets is not nessicarly realistic anyway.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I doubt there will be anything beneficial to districts on those tiles, but there will probably be research boosts associated with them.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Research and faith could be boosted by these.

 

[Zaimejs]

I have been waiting for them to add skiing and winter tourism for 3 games now. Make mountains and snow somewhat useful. Add a skilift. Boost tourism.

 

[Matthew.]

Well you can't have "good" city locations if there are no bad to compare them to, right? I'd be pretty upset if they purposely made snow and tundra good tiles.

That said, if there was a policy or game mechanic that wanted to benefit ICS expand far and wide, I wouldn't mind seeing tundra/snow cities be a viable option in that niche scenario. After all, humans have settled pretty much every part of the globe, even some of the more inhospitable places, but there is still a clear difference in settled areas between fertile grasslands and tundra.

 

[Kobra]

Civilizations like Russia or Mongols could have some bonuses in Tundra.

 

[Leonel]

I know with some pantheon beliefs in Civ 5, you get a bonus from tundra tiles. Dance of the Aurora to be exact.

 

[Makenshi]

Adding some snow luxuries [if the happy system is in, and I hope so] like Seals and Bears would improve the use of snow without needing any magic solution. Snow is snow, after all, worse than desert.

Tundra would be more interesting if it had highly increased chance of Deer, Lakes and Fish [on adjacent coasts somehow]. Also, more rivers so farms are viable [or just remove the fresh water requirement]. That would solve the low food, but the low hammers would still be an issue. Maybe more hills and/or mineral resources?

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Tourism would be interesting as that would make thundra amongst the most valuable tiles in the late game.

 

[MadDjinn]

neither tundra nor snow have made any civilization 'great' let alone 'ok'.

Russia has massive lands (former top side of mongol/horde lands) and it's all basically empty aside from some random resource extraction.

Most of Russia's pop live in the not-tundra area.

Canada has massive tundra lands but maybe .02% of the pop live up there.

the lands people went for historically were not frozen wastelands.

So while Tundra, in prior civ games, usually got more deer/forests/etc, the flat non-forest tiles were worth very little, which makes sense.

snow tiles are completely useless and should stay that way.


Also, most ski resorts are in mountains near good lands, not in the middle of the north.

 

[Makenshi]

Agree, but since this is a game, these terrains should at least be reduced in size, to favor gameplay a bit. Maybe two 'lines' of tundra, two of slow and two of ice. That's 6 'lines', in each pole, of useless terrain.

Hell, I say cities should not be allowed to be settled on/close/within two tiles of snow/ice. Settling on tundra is far enough already, spammy Hiawata!




* Please correct my grammar, I think I made some mistakes up there, guys...

 

[m15a]

I think it makes more sense to deal with the unfuness of tundra by making it less likely to start surrounded by it. Civs will still have the option of settling deeper into the tundra if they want more tiny cities or access to resources (either in the tundra or water).

And maybe in some cases, putting districts in the tundra might be not so bad - like a city half surround by tundra could farm the non-tundra tiles instead of having to "waste" that space on districts.

 

[BttLsht]

Tundra spawn shouldn't exist at all and tundra tiles should remain useless but we need a transition tile between temperate tiles to arctic ones aka taiga, also tundra is too common in civ 5.

 

[Krajzen]

Tundra spawn shouldn't exist at all and tundra tiles should remain useless but we need a transition tile between temperate tiles to arctic ones aka taiga, also tundra is too common in civ 5.

Exactly. In civ5 tundra is somehow a huge biome where entire civilisations may fit in, while this is the map of extent of real tundra on Earth

Please note the entire population of those areas in real life is less than one million, so actually civ5 tundra is proportionally much more inhabitable than real life tundra.

Tundra shouldn't have some magical use in civ6 because well for the entire human history it sucked terribly, as MadJinn mentioned, no great civilisations ever arose in tundra or far north because those lands are simply physically bad for humans and vegetation.

There is not a single example of civilisations flourishing in polar regions, and those few countries that are at far north (because somebody has to be ) - Canada, Russia, Norway - all have extremely small population density, with all population living in the non-tundra lands.
And don't bring Inuits as an example. Inuits have millions of square kilometres to inhabit, yet their population is iirc less than miserable 150 000 people, and they all live in the warmest, fringe parts of polar areas. Their adaptation to that climate didn't mean they flourished here, but that they were able to biologically survive and maintain their extremely low numbers living in small tribes without urban centres etc. That's a society, but not a civilisation.

There are also no tundra-specific city districts or tile improvements - research stations are nonsense, as if every random barren area of rocks and snow had magical science abilities but biologically richer lands not And mountain resorts are nonsense too, as if far north of real life Earth was covered in hundred thousands of square kilometres of tourist resorts (that's the scale of civ maps)

IMO tundra/snow lands should be reduced in size to end up similarly as real life Earth shown on the image, and their only purpose should be mining resources and maybe very occasional research stations.

Of course that creates the problem empty areas of map by the late game, but this could be solved with for example special type of settlements buildable in polar areas that extend borders and allow resource mining but cannot be developed as normal cities.

 

[m15a]

Empty areas of the map, assuming that is undesirable, wouldn't be a problem since borders could easily expand beyond city radiuses, like in Civ 5 where your territory reaches to 5 tiles out from a city even though only 3 tiles out are in the city radius.

Sent from my LG-V410 using Tapatalk

 

[UWHabs]

Exactly. In civ5 tundra is somehow a huge biome where entire civilisations may fit in, while this is the map of extent of real tundra on Earth [emoji14]

Please note the entire population of those areas in real life is less than one million, so actually civ5 tundra is proportionally much more inhabitable than real life tundra.

Tundra shouldn't have some magical use in civ6 because well for the entire human history it sucked terribly, as MadJinn mentioned, no great civilisations ever arose in tundra or far north because those lands are simply physically bad for humans and vegetation.

There is not a single example of civilisations flourishing in polar regions, and those few countries that are at far north (because somebody has to be [emoji14] ) - Canada, Russia, Norway - all have extremely small population density, with all population living in the non-tundra lands.
And don't bring Inuits as an example. Inuits have millions of square kilometres to inhabit, yet their population is iirc less than miserable 150 000 people, and they all live in the warmest, fringe parts of polar areas. Their adaptation to that climate didn't mean they flourished here, but that they were able to biologically survive and maintain their extremely low numbers living in small tribes without urban centres etc. That's a society, but not a civilisation.

There are also no tundra-specific city districts or tile improvements - research stations are nonsense, as if every random barren area of rocks and snow had magical science abilities but biologically richer lands not [emoji14] And mountain resorts are nonsense too, as if far north of real life Earth was covered in hundred thousands of square kilometres of tourist resorts [emoji14] (that's the scale of civ maps)

IMO tundra/snow lands should be reduced in size to end up similarly as real life Earth shown on the image, and their only purpose should be mining resources and maybe very occasional research stations.

Of course that creates the problem empty areas of map by the late game, but this could be solved with for example special type of settlements buildable in polar areas that extend borders and allow resource mining but cannot be developed as normal cities.

I think the areas you have marked as tundra are "snow" in civ terms, while what civ calls tundra is more like the Canadian Shield. There's some vegetation, but can rarely support agriculture.

If that's more the thinking, then you can support some population in the tundra, but not too much. And of course because civ doesn't have a proper globe, it emphasizes that zone more than it is in real life.

 

[MadDjinn]

well, if they called it 'taiga' it'd be more useful land.

 

[Hans Lemurson]

I wouldn't call Thundra useless if I were you!

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Giving thundra some use is not much more magical then giving jungle a use (it was useless before Civilization V and Petra togther with desert folklore making desert useful).

Given how city specialization work and that we can transport food now it would not be hard to give thundra some use as being good for science or being good for tourism, given the lack of food you still have to transport food to the thundra city but that is the reason for city specialization.

In the end Civilization VI is a game so realism arguments don't make much sense to here.

 

[Kid R]

I don't see a problem with different terrains becoming useful with increasing tech through the game, that's interesting for strategy. Or even some terrains being always useless - ocean is a large part of some maps and is totally useless except as transit between other more interesting areas.