Why can't we build districts on flood plains?

[darkace77450]

From a fluff standpoint, I don't see why we'd be able to construct districts on marshes but not flood plains. That leaves game balance as the likely reason we can't do so. But I fail to see how building a Commercial Hub or an Industrial Zone on a flood plain breaks the game in any way. So I'm at a loss here. Did they ever mention why this particular restriction was implemented during any of the pre-release interviews, videos, or articles?

 

[Halcyan2]

From a fluff standpoint, I don't see why we'd be able to construct districts on marshes but not flood plains. That leaves game balance as the likely reason we can't do so. But I fail to see how building a Commercial Hub or an Industrial Zone on a flood plain breaks the game in any way. So I'm at a loss here. Did they ever mention why this particular restriction was implemented during any of the pre-release interviews, videos, or articles?

Probably balance since flood plains are often grouped together, they can be farmed, and often have wheat on them. Farmed flood plains are already providing at least 4 food, plus potential adjacency bonuses.

 

[need my speed]

Probably balance since flood plains are often grouped together, they can be farmed, and often have wheat on them. Farmed flood plains are already providing at least 4 food, plus potential adjacency bonuses.

So it would be terrible to place districts on them - so how is this possibly a balance issue?

 

[Halcyan2]

So that there is a downside to settling near a whole bunch of them.

 

[AmtrakQuebec]

Because they would get flooded.

 

[Amrunril]

I think the reason districts can be constructed on marshes is that marshes can be cleared by builders, so putting a district on one (thereby removing it) is simply doing something you could have done anyway with a bit less busywork (also saving a builder charge at the cost of a food boost). As to why flood plains can't be cleared in the same way or why districts can't be placed on intact flood plains, I have no idea. It does seem very odd for flood plains to be the only terrain type singled out in this way.

 

[callan]

I think the reason districts can be constructed on marshes is that marshes can be cleared by builders, so putting a district on one (thereby removing it) is simply doing something you could have done anyway with a bit less busywork (also saving a builder charge at the cost of a food boost). As to why flood plains can't be cleared in the same way or why districts can't be placed on intact flood plains, I have no idea. It does seem very odd for flood plains to be the only terrain type singled out in this way.

Well, no. Assuming you like your buildings to above water year round then it's usually advised to build above the high water mark. A flood plain is an area of land below this level which is why they aren't extensively constructed upon.

 

[joncnunn]

From a fluff standpoint, I don't see why we'd be able to construct districts on marshes but not flood plains. That leaves game balance as the likely reason we can't do so. But I fail to see how building a Commercial Hub or an Industrial Zone on a flood plain breaks the game in any way. So I'm at a loss here. Did they ever mention why this particular restriction was implemented during any of the pre-release interviews, videos, or articles?

The floodplains in the game represent areas with little rainfall near a river that naturally flood every single year (from snow melt upstream in the Spring); consider how many years are in a given turn for the first 250ish turns.

 

[kaspergm]

So that there is a downside to settling near a whole bunch of them.

I always assumed this was the reasoning behind it. In Civ5, deserts were great places to settle to an extend that seemed to kill immersion a bit. But then again, if one wanted to nerf desert spots, it would be more logical to prohibit districts on the desert tiles (which are useless for normal working) so that you had to put the districts on the good flood plain tiles. So maybe there's another logic behind it.

 

[need my speed]

The floodplains in the game represent areas with little rainfall near a river that naturally flood every single year (from snow melt upstream in the Spring); consider how many years are in a given turn for the first 250ish turns.

So? Civilisations arose primarily near rivers, including floodplains (hello Egypt). If this is an actual reason for not allowing it, then what about tundra? What about the borders of continents - earthquakes - or tiles bordering water - flooding? The game doesn't operate on such a scale.

 

[Truronian]

So? Civilisations arose primarily near rivers, including floodplains (hello Egypt). If this is an actual reason for not allowing it, then what about tundra? What about the borders of continents - earthquakes - or tiles bordering water - flooding? The game doesn't operate on such a scale.

Civ is very inconsistent in it's implementation of scale. The city, district and combat systems all imply that tiles are quite small; the floodplain rule makes sense from this perspective.

The scale issue is one of my main gripes with the recent instalments of Civ. I hope of the future versions has a go at making everything large scale.

 

[need my speed]

Aye, exactly. It is, to me, one of the core flaws of Civilization V and VI.

The city only implies this now, because of the existence of districts, mind.

 

[HeliosDisciple]

So? Civilisations arose primarily near rivers, including floodplains (hello Egypt).

Egypt doesn't have the floodplain building restriction.

 

[Victoria]

It has a logic one is happy with and it would be rare indeed to find a 7 tile circle entirely of floodplane so there is always somewhere to build a district. Floodplains are primarily food producing beaties

 

[Jarms48]

I wouldn't mind seeing a mid-game technology/civic that allowed all Civilizations the ability to build over floodplains, really, it's an arbitrary restriction currently. We can build in Desert, Tundra, and Arctic/Snow biome's without restriction, but not Floodplains? The former terrains have all been considered desolate or semi-desolate throughout human history, until we developed better technologies to make it more comfortable/possible to live there, whilst Floodplains have been the lifeblood of many ancient Civilizations.

It's already a harsh trade-off to build over floodplains, they're amazing food tiles, and in a Desert city workable tiles are limited.