Tourism in Civilization VI

[Dux1]

Apart from being the primary factor in achieving a culture victory, does tourism have any impact on strategy at all in Civ VI? It doesn't seem like it, and this smacks of poor design to me. If one isn't going for a culture victory, tourism can be ignored completely, and individual civ unique traits relating to tourism are rendered worthless unless the player chooses to go for a culture victory with these civs every time.

In Civ V, tourism had a secondary function whereby it exerted pressure on other civilizations following differing ideologies. Although it wasn't usually a major concern, it did mean that it couldn't ever be completely ignored, and it allowed for interesting strategic choices involving tourism even without the pursuit of a culture victory.

Am I missing something, or is tourism truly only relevant as a yield for attaining culture victory and nothing else?

 

[gfeier]

Not a bad idea at all. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like that eventually. This is just vanilla, after all.

 

[Halcyan2]

Apart from being the primary factor in achieving a culture victory, does tourism have any impact on strategy at all in Civ VI? It doesn't seem like it, and this smacks of poor design to me. If one isn't going for a culture victory, tourism can be ignored completely, and individual civ unique traits relating to tourism are rendered worthless unless the player chooses to go for a culture victory with these civs every time.

In Civ V, tourism had a secondary function whereby it exerted pressure on other civilizations following differing ideologies. Although it wasn't usually a major concern, it did mean that it couldn't ever be completely ignored, and it allowed for interesting strategic choices involving tourism even without the pursuit of a culture victory.

Am I missing something, or is tourism truly only relevant as a yield for attaining culture victory and nothing else?

In Civ V, you also got additional benefits for having sufficient tourism: better benefits from trade routes, better espionage, and faster assimilation of conquered people.

 

[Arms Longfellow]

I completely agree with you. lol at how Computers, such a hugely important technology in human history gives you nothing but a bonus to tourism, wtf? Okay, hotels.com is great and all but really?

 

[MarcosQuadros]

Also hoping for a comeback of cultural influence replacing x foreigners tourists in your nation.
and Civs that are culturaly Influenced by other Civ could recive a big increase of war weariness while in war with that civ.

 

[empresskiova]

I'm pretty sure that Tourism also helps prevent other players from winning a Culture Victory... provided you actually have a lot of it. So, it's not totally useless to focus a bit on. Ignoring it will generally cause Kongo to win.

 

[Yzman]

Unless I am mistaken, and I probably am, I believe how much tourism someone needs to win is determined by the other civs culture. So while you may be able to ignore TOURISM if you are not going for a culture victory, you can't ignore culture, otherwise you are making it very easy for someone like Kongo to win easily.

 

[antimony]

Everything that generates tourism also has some other benefits to the civ, mostly culture, but also amenities from national parks and gold from resorts. Of course, the latter are rarely built outside of a cultural victory, just as a spaceport is rarely built outside of a science victory.

 

[Tacgnol]

Well, the Mars projects do nothing if you're not going for a science victory. The satellite and moon landing do a little but it's not worth the egregious production cost for a spaceport + the projects.

I do agree that having some minor secondary effect for tourism, reflecting your cultural influence over the other civ, like in Civ V would be nice but regardless, the point of tourism is to win a CV, the secondary effects shouldn't really be enough for you to pursue tourism otherwise just a minor reward for GWW/M/A and artifacts and resorts so they aren't totally useless.

 

[Canadian Bluebeer]

I really did like the ideologies concept in Civ5.
(gunboat diplomacy + germany was nasty, as long as CS weren't embargoed)

Even going for domination, I'd do a lot of culture buildings. Nothing better than having a city switch hands deep in enemy territory.
(buy an airfield, and drop in units. hee)

I don't like that CS can be razed though. That's just nasty. (and the AI loves to do it)

 

[Victoria]

Culture is your defence against a cultural victory. Your culture determines how many domestic tourists you have accumulated.
Tourism itself provides nothing of value.

I agree it would be nice to have something... as long as it's not "blue jeans"

Tourism should pull in money.
Culture should provide amenities to some degree domestically
They should limit war with like minded governments internationally
Tourism should be reduced more during war
Tourism from works of that era should really degrade over time while wonders should increase over time.

 

[Leyrann]

Culture is your defence against a cultural victory. Your culture determines how many domestic tourists you have accumulated.
Tourism itself provides nothing of value.

I agree it would be nice to have something... as long as it's not "blue jeans"

Tourism should pull in money.
Culture should provide amenities to some degree domestically
They should limit war with like minded governments internationally
Tourism should be reduced more during war
Tourism from works of that era should really degrade over time while wonders should increase over time.

Rembrandt, to name some random artist, constantly had debts during his life, while now his paintings are worth millions, so I'm not sure if works should degrade over time.

 

[Victoria]

After their deaths ios typically the same era.... WHich pulls in more tourists do you think? A painting or a wonder. Whats in the tourist shops?...A hockney or Big Ben?

 

[Scaramanga]

It seems most forms of tourism work with other yields throughout the game, typically culture and faith. In addition to their bonuses wonders provide tourism over time. Rewards for tourism seem overkill, like rewards for holding an enemy capital: you're already closer to a victory. Is this really about having some security from aggressive civs while focusing on mostly tourism?

 

[Leyrann]

But then should not great work tourism be flat while wonder tourism scales?

 

[Victoria]

I personally think a Victory is based on all things, violence to start, religion, then science and culture.
Why not have 1 victory ... I guess everyone wants something different from the game

 

[Dux1]

Well, the Mars projects do nothing if you're not going for a science victory. The satellite and moon landing do a little but it's not worth the egregious production cost for a spaceport + the projects.

I do agree that having some minor secondary effect for tourism, reflecting your cultural influence over the other civ, like in Civ V would be nice but regardless, the point of tourism is to win a CV, the secondary effects shouldn't really be enough for you to pursue tourism otherwise just a minor reward for GWW/M/A and artifacts and resorts so they aren't totally useless.

It's true that the Mars project doesn't really provide anything if you aren't going for a science victory, but that's just a set of projects at the end of the game. Like science, tourism is a yield throughout the entire game, but unlike science, it doesn't directly do anything for you unless you plan on pursuing a cultural victory eventually.

The point that others have brought up about viewing tourism as an added incidental benefit to things that are already plainly beneficial (like wonders) is a pretty good one. Still, I think the game could benefit from some additional mechanics tied to the tourism yield that aren't necessarily linked to the culture victory.

 

[Yzman]

After their deaths ios typically the same era.... WHich pulls in more tourists do you think? A painting or a wonder. Whats in the tourist shops?...A hockney or Big Ben?

But why would it DECREASE?

More people go to see the Mona Lisa today then before when it was current.

That would also make very little sense in game. The people that focus on culture would not be as rewarded as the builders that focus on wonders. Hardly seems like a good mechanic. I think it works well now. Wonders do increase and art doesn't and is consistent. Makes sense to me.

 

[bbbt]

We'll most of the things that provide tourism also provide some non-tourism benefits - i.e. great works provide culture, holy sites provide faith/religion, etc. Seaside resorts provide gold, etc.

I agree it would be nice if it also had some ancillary benefits - specifically economically imho, as tourism is generally has a big impact on the local economy. I.e. maybe a 'tourist district' down the line that has a 'gift shop' building that converts a percentage of tourism into gold.

I'm guessing we may see the return of ideological pressure in some way or another. Either directly with government types and the world congress, or reconfigured into something else - i.e. maybe in an economic victory condition as 'demand' (i.e. people are unhappy because they demand America's Toys).

 

[unpossible251]

maybe rather than tying warmonger penalties to era, they could be tied to tourism? So if you pick on unrefined, cretinous civs, the AI shrugs it off, but actually gets quite offended if you go about burning the Mona Lisa.

this would serve a number of other goals too. Rather than the gradual era by era penalties for warmongering, you get more of a fightin' window until well into the mid game, at which point the penalties seriously rack up (exponentially so in information era). Also, investing heavily in GPP's and wonders won't be such a hazard as the AI will find it harder to attack you.

just a thought, probably too hard to patch in at this point. But what an idea, hey?