[vanilla] Tiles, Resources and Improvements - A guide to explaining Yields

[member66170]

There was a lot of confusion before Civ5 was released about how much different tiles would be worth, and about the effects of building improvements on resources. This guide is an attempt to explain definitively how this all works. The information in it is based on testing things out by playing the game and from the XML.

Base Terrain
There are 5 base terrain types in Civ5. Below is a list of what they are and the base yields that they give (F=Food, H=Hammers, G=Gold)

Grassland (2F 0H 0G)
Plains (1F 1H 0G)
Tundra (1F 0H 0G)
Desert (0F 0H 0G)
Snow (0F 0H 0G) - Stays as 0 0 0 even with features on top, but is affected by resources
Mountains (0F 0H 0G)
Coast (1F 0H 1G)
Oceans (1F 0H 1G)


Features
Below are a list of features. Note that unlike in Civ4 the yields given below over ride the base terrain yields and are not commutative. A plains forest and a grassland forest have the same yields. In case of two features existing on the same hex, the one furthest up the list takes precedence.

Natural Wonders (0F 2H 3G)
Forest (1F 1H 0G)
Jungle (2F 0H 0G) - When cut always goes to Plain
Hill (0F 2H 0G)
Marsh (1F 0H 0G) - When drained goes to grassland
Flood Plains (2F 0H 0G)
Oasis (3F 0H 1G) - Note: unlike civ4 these only cost 1 movement point
Ice (0F 0H 0G) - Can only appear on coast/ocean tiles

Any tile next to a river gets +1G (is cumulative with everything else). Any tile next to a lake, river or oasis counts as having fresh water for the purpose of having a farm on it and Civil Service.


Improvements
These are built by workers (who have the relevant technology) and provide the benefits listed below. These are cumulative and stack on top of the natural yield of a tile. The information below is what improvements give as an added benefit if there is NO resource on top of it.

Farm - Can be built on flat desert, grassland, and plains and on Hills with access to fresh water - +1F 0H 0G. +1F if has fresher water and Civil Service, +1F if has no fresh water and Fertilizer

Mine - Can be built on non-Forested Hills - 0F +1H 0G

Lumber Mill - Can be built on any forests - 0F +1H 0G. +1H if has Steam Power

Trading Post - Can be built anywhere on land expect Snow - 0F 0H 2G. +2 Science if Free Thought Social Policy is active.

Fort - Can be built anywhere but forests. +50% defence bonus.

[roads, railways and GP improvements will be added later]

Resources
These can exist on top of features, and give benefits that are cumulative and stack with everything else. The only improvements that can be built on a hex with a resource is a fort and the corresponding improvement (listed below). In each case below is the effect that the resource has on a tile (in addition to the natural yield), and in brackets after it is the additional affect that an improvement built on that tile gives. Note that the last bit of information is given nowhere in the civilopedia or manual (what is given is the base bonus that these resource give - ie the numbers not in brackets). You need to have a worker on that hex to be told what it is.

NB: All of the items listed below which have a * by there name requires any jungle/swamp/forest to be chopped down. If you are trying to work out what the final yield will be of a tile after you build an improvement.

Bonus Resources:
Bananas (Plantation*) - +1F 0H 0G (+2F -1H 0G)
Cattle (Pasture*) - +1F 0H 0G (0F +1H 0G)
Deer (Camp) - +1F 0H 0G (+1F 0H 0G)
Fish (Fishing Boats) - +2F 0H 0G (0F 0H +2G)
Sheep (Pasture*) - +1F 0H 0G (+1F 0H 0G)
Wheat (Farm*) - +1F 0H 0G (0F 0H 0G)

Luxury Resources:
Cotton (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Dyes (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Furs (Camp) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Gems (Mine*) - 0F 0H +3G (0F 0H +1G)
Gold (Mine*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Incense (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Ivory (Camp) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Marble (Quarry*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F +1H +1G)
Pearls (Fishing Boats) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Silk (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Silver (Mine*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Spices (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)
Sugar (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (+1F 0H +1G)
Whales (Fishing Boats) - +1F 0H +1G (0F 0H +1G)
Wine (Plantation*) - 0F 0H +2G (0F 0H +1G)

Strategic Resources:
Aluminium (Mine*) - 0F +1H 0G (0F +1H 0G) - Revealed by Electricity
Coal (Mine*) - 0F +1H 0G (0F +1H 0G) - Revealed by Scientific Theory
Horses (Pasture*) - 0F +1H 0G (0F +1H 0G) - Revealed by Animal Husbandry
Iron (Mine*) - 0F +1H 0G (0F 0H 0G) - Revealed by Iron Working
Oil (Well*/Off Shore Platform) - 0F +1H 0G (0F +1H 0G) - Revealed by Biology
Uranium (Mine*) - 0F +1H 0G (0F +1H 0G) - Revealed by Atomic Theory


Apart from the base yield everything is cumulative. So a Mine, on a Gem, on a Plain Hill by a river gives 0F 3H 5G

City Tile Yields
The yield given by the hex that the city is on works in the same way as in Civ4.

The city tile gives the largest between 2F and the amount of food produced by the tile. The largest between 2H and the amount of hammers produced by the tile. The largest between 1G and the amount of gold produced by the tile. Obviously, building a city automatically clears any forest/jungle/marsh on that tile. Cities built on a resource, and with the technology to 'harvest' that resource gain access to that resource.

What this means is that a city built anywhere always gives at least a minimum of 2F 2H 1G. Building a city on, for example, Cattle or Bananas, gives rise to a city that produces 3F 2H 1G. Note, however, that unlike in Civ4, building a city on a plain hill does not give the city any extra production, not unless some strategic resource is also found on that tile.

Food given by city buildings (Granary/Water Mill) is added to the city tile, and so is food given by City States.


Golden Ages

Golden ages give +1H to every tile which already produces at least 1H and +1G to every tile that produces at least 1G.

 

[member66170]

[Reserved for later]

 

[Feyd Rautha]

Excellent writeup. I'll contribute what I can.

 

[Jaraxle]

Wheat (Farm*) - +1F 0H 0G (0F 0H 0G)


- So there is no point in improving a tile with Wheat or is this a mistake?

 

[Dizzy75]

Wheat (Farm*) - +1F 0H 0G (0F 0H 0G)


- So there is no point in improving a tile with Wheat or is this a mistake?

I think he means additional bonus beyond what the normal improvement bonus is. So a farmed wheat adds +1 food (the normal bonus from a farm), but nothing beyond that.

 

[Ahriman]

Plains (1F 1H 1G)

Are you sure plains have a gold yield base when not adjacent to a river?

Note that unlike in Civ4 the yields given below over ride the base terrain yields and are not commutative. A plains forest and a grassland forest have the same yields. In case of two features existing on the same hex, the one furthest up the list takes precedence.

I just hate this. This is the single biggest "dumbed down" feature I've seen, of anything. There was just no reason to make this change except to make things simpler for noobs.

Also, does no-one else find it weird that jungles become plains?
Jungle, by definition, is basically always in areas with high rainfall.

I also really dislike that the yield improvements from the special buildings (plantation, pasture, etc.) are so small.

I think he means additional bonus beyond what the normal improvement bonus is. So a farmed wheat adds +1 food (the normal bonus from a farm), but nothing beyond that.

I think this is confusing, because pastures and plantations have no base yield other than their yield on a bonus, but farms do.

I think it would be less confusing to have it as wheat = +1food, farm on wheat = extra +1 food.
And then similarly for mines on gems.

I would also add in the techs that affect improvement yields.

 

[member66170]

Wheat (Farm*) - +1F 0H 0G (0F 0H 0G)


- So there is no point in improving a tile with Wheat or is this a mistake?

No, the (0F 0H 0G) just means that a Farm does nothing extra on a wheat resource than it does anywhere else.

If you have a grassland tile it provides 2F. A wheat resource provides another +1F. And the farm provides yet another +1F regardless of whether this is a resource there or not.

From the OP to get the final yield you have to add up the base yield+the resource yield+the base improvement yield+the extra improvement yield from being on top of that resource.


To take the gems by a river side hill with a mine on top example.
Hill (2H) + River (1G) + Mine (1H) + Gems (3G) + Mine on a Gem (1G) = 0F 3H 5G

 

[DaviddesJ]

I just hate this. This is the single biggest "dumbed down" feature I've seen, of anything. There was just no reason to make this change except to make things simpler for noobs.

I don't think it's better or worse to have plains forests have the same yield as grassland forests. And it's not more or less simple. It is just different. Why do you think it was better the other way?

 

[Ahriman]

Why do you think it was better the other way?

Because it meant terrain always mattered, no matter what feature was on top of it.

Its ridiculous that a tundra forest is the same as a grassland forest. Trees grow very slowly in taiga.

Also, the old way meant that the impact of chopping down the forest was always the same. But now, chopping down the forest changes tile yields differently depending on the tile.
Chopping forest on plains has no impact, for example, whereas chopping on tundra is devastating.

Note repeated edits in my previous post, btw, which were ninjaed.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Also, the old way meant that the impact of chopping down the forest was always the same. But now, chopping down the forest changes tile yields differently depending on the tile. Chopping forest on plains has no impact, for example, whereas chopping on tundra is devastating.

Doesn't that mean the new system has more depth and complexity, while the old system was "dumbed down" by comparison?

 

[Ahriman]

Doesn't that mean the new system has more depth and complexity, while the old system was "dumbed down" by comparison?

No. In the old system, you had to think about what to do. Now, its a no-brainer. There is no direct loss from chopping forest plains, but there is never a reason to chop forest tundra.

 

[DaviddesJ]

There is no direct loss from chopping forest plains, but there is never a reason to chop forest tundra.

Why not? You might want the hammers.

The new system seems to me to have somewhat more depth. It's ok if you disagree, though.

 

[member66170]

Fixed the plains typo.

"Also, does no-one else find it weird that jungles become plains?
Jungle, by definition, is basically always in areas with high rainfall."

Actually areas that used to be jungles and got turned into farmland have very low yields and the soil is very poor. This is partly because most of the nutrients were in the trees that get chopped off and carried elsewhere; and partly because the very high rainfall causes the nutrients in the soil to flow away. Brazil is a case in point. The geographers have a special name for this I've forgotten.

Game play wise, it means you might want to keep the jungle alive (specially with universities)

"There is no direct loss from chopping forest plains"

You lose the ability to build a lumber mill there and gain a very useful 1F 2H tile. Same as a farmed hills, and normally they're arent too many of those around.


In general Ahriman, you seem dislike change because its different, not because its worst. Personally I think there's a more depth to the new system for two main reasons:
a) Resources are less important - so with bad land you are disadvantaged for the first 80 turns or so, but once you have built farms/trading posts everywhere the disadvantage dies down. In Civ4, if you had enough food resources for 3 good cities close to your capital, it was like moving 2 difficulty levels down. New method is fairer.
b) Chopping everything in sight is no longer an optimal strategy. In fact, with hammers being much rare, forests are actually very useful to keep. So are jungles but for different reasons.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

Comparing grassland, plains, and tundra forests...

Most of the food from grasslands and plains comes from farming and (in grassland areas) the ability for crops to grow without being farmed. Forests, however, have always been a source of food in the form of small game, larger game, and hunting/gathering. That only gets you so far, however. The side benefit is that they also have bountiful production resources (AKA trees) and cna provide a benefit to nearby peoples in addition to the food.

The only reason there is so much clearcut land around the world is that we've never seen population growth as a negative thing. As a result, we have a long history of creating as many farms as we can to feed all the people.

 

[Ahriman]

Actually areas that used to be jungles and got turned into farmland have very low yields and the soil is very poor

Which does not mean that they're arid plains. But anyway, minor issue.

In general Ahriman, you seem dislike change because its different, not because its worst.

In general? Wow. What a horrible misreading of my take on Civ5. What are you basing this on?

I support nearly all of the changes they've made. I like 1upt. I like how they're moved the slider. I like removing religion and espionage and health. I like social policies. I like how happiness works.
I'm ok with the much lower tile yields (and enforced specialization).

I just don't like:
a) how they've hollowed out diplomacy
b) how they've simplified terrain yields (but this is a pretty minor point)

You lose the ability to build a lumber mill there

Read again please, no DIRECT loss.

a) Resources are less important - so with bad land you are disadvantaged for the first 80 turns or so, but once you have built farms/trading posts everywhere the disadvantage dies down

I think this is less depth.
I think depth is about creating meaningful choices. Should I put my city here, where it gets the cattle, or there, where it gets the incense? Now, city placement matters less because basically all terrain is good (except non-forest tundra and deserts)
Rivers are the only thing that massively guide development (and I think rivers are a bit too important).

b) Chopping everything in sight is no longer an optimal strategy.

I'm fine with that. But why should you *never* want to chop say a forested tundra, even next to a river? And why should the yields of a forest be utterly invariant to the biome its in?

The only reason there is so much clearcut land around the world is that we've never seen population growth as a negative thing.

And because:
a) Timber was used as a non-renewable resource. Much of the deforestation of the UK for example was for building ships. Much of the deforestation of Africa is from consumption for fuel wood.
b) Once we moved to fossil fuels (coal, eventually oil), the value of forests declined. We didn't need timber sources, so there was no clear reason that people saw to preserve the forests.
c) There is no central planner, as in Civ. Even if "society" is best served by the forest, the individual land owner wants what is most profitable for him, and farming has typically been more profitable land use than sustainable forestry.

 

[bgbruce]

Wow - thanks for this!

Some of these are a little strange, at least I'm not sure of the reasoning they used. For example, putting a pasture on cattle gives you one hammer but putting a pasture on sheep gives you one food? The other way around seems more realistic to me. And a plantation on bananas removes one hammer unlike any other improvement on anything else?

 

[Ahriman]

For example, putting a pasture on cattle gives you one hammer but putting a pasture on sheep gives you one food? The other way around seems more realistic to me.

I guess they think leather is more useful than wool.

And a plantation on bananas removes one hammer unlike any other improvement on anything else?

Presumably because banana shows up only on jungle, which becomes plains when chopped?

 

[bgbruce]

I just think of cattle being a bigger food source than sheep.

 

[BladeRnr]

Excellent work, very useful (especially since, as you noted, improvement info is nowhere to be seen in the civilopedia)! Thank you.

 

[Aretii]

You're missing Oil in the Strategic Resources section.

Excellent job, bookmarked. Thanks for putting this together!