The Wonders and population

[Adagio]

I haven't seen if there has been some talk about this yet, but here it goes:

Does the population never go on hollydays (Which gives certain cities extra income). It could be nice if certain wonders gives extra hollyday income, this way for example:

One city has some wonders (of the hollyday extra income type type), as long as the civilization who owns that city hasn't come to modern times yet nothing happens, but as soon that city (country) get's to the modern times, the city gets 4 gold, every turn, per other city in the country and 1-2 gold, every turn, for each foreign city who is in the modern times!

or

It could also be like the older the wonder is the more hollyday money it gets each turn for each city

This way a fight for wonders will be more tense!?!

[Provost Harrison]

Tourism could be an interesting concept, but I doubt it is included in this game. It would detract a bit, but could be used as a source of income and happiness for the two involved civs.

It could also become an aspect of trade in the latter days...

I wouldn't put a great priority on it though. At first inspection, it seems a little 'tacky' a concept...

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
It could also become an aspect of trade in the latter days...

Yeah, it could be like this, you don't get any turism money from the cities of the enemies, therefor peace is important if money is short!

I doubt it will be in game, but hey, I could always give it a try Who knows, maybe they will but it in some addon as an option (Default it's off, since people at that time are used to not having it)

You can always hope

[BigRich]

Re: The Wonders and population

Originally posted by ADG
I haven't seen if there has been some talk about this yet, but here it goes:

Does the population never go on hollydays (Which gives certain cities extra income). It could be nice if certain wonders gives extra hollyday income, this way for example:

One city has some wonders (of the hollyday extra income type type), as long as the civilization who owns that city hasn't come to modern times yet nothing happens, but as soon that city (country) get's to the modern times, the city gets 4 gold, every turn, per other city in the country and 1-2 gold, every turn, for each foreign city who is in the modern times!

or

It could also be like the older the wonder is the more hollyday money it gets each turn for each city

This way a fight for wonders will be more tense!?!

Nice idea. Me I always pictured this as being part and parcel of the culture concept. Maybe the gold income per city could be related to friendly civs and culture points for that city.

[Mahdimael]

I think an option to have the city be set to "tourism/capitalization" would be a good idea. Capitalization would be what we know and love, whereas tourism would give you money based on your culture. So if I have a city with 10 production shields and 2000 culture, I choose to "produce" tourism/capitalization, and it selects whichever one will reap the most money. If we say that culture/100 = money, then in this case it would work towards tourism, giving us an extra 20 gold a turn.

If we think of a city like Las Vegas, this would be accurate- the "culture" (if you want to call it that) is the casinos and gambling. For Los Angeles, this would be Hollywood and the amusement parks.

Perhaps once a city reaches a certain high population, it can select this option and gain both capitalization and tourism benefits?

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Mahdimael
I think an option to have the city be set to "tourism/capitalization" would be a good idea. Capitalization would be what we know and love, whereas tourism would give you money based on your culture. So if I have a city with 10 production shields and 2000 culture, I choose to "produce" tourism/capitalization, and it selects whichever one will reap the most money. If we say that culture/100 = money, then in this case it would work towards tourism, giving us an extra 20 gold a turn.

If we think of a city like Las Vegas, this would be accurate- the "culture" (if you want to call it that) is the casinos and gambling. For Los Angeles, this would be Hollywood and the amusement parks.

Perhaps once a city reaches a certain high population, it can select this option and gain both capitalization and tourism benefits?

Actually what I ment with the option was if the turism should be in the game or not (as it is now), but your idea is also good

The more reason why I wanted to be tourism after the wonders is because most wonders "dies" when a certain advance has been invented, this makes many wonders to be unuseable when built late. And ofcouse some other city improvements could also make turism better

You mentioned Las Vegas Why can't we build casinos in Civ games, a casino makes crimerate go up, while it gives more money and more happyness

[Dauphin]

On a related note, is the concept of emigration, or immigration depending on the direction, in the game.

You could consider them tourists who didn't go home.

That idea probably deserves its own thread though, or a link to an old one.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Tourism is definitly an interesting subject that could put an emphasis on development of land. Tourism could be less poluting version of capitalism, plus it could generate good regard in sorrunding civilizations, but would be really bad for unit support and financing of war.

It could actually bring more money than capitalization plus good regard from neighbours, but you could have it in peaceful times only. Once you have a war, you loose all tourist income. (or maybe make it distance based, closer some kind of combat is to the town, tourism suffers more.) eg if you have a barrbarrian attact on the town there is no tourism next turn (tourists are afraid of the barbarrians ), and than it increases slowly until full potential over the next ten turns.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
It could actually bring more money than capitalization plus good regard from neighbours, but you could have it in peaceful times only. Once you have a war, you loose all tourist income. (or maybe make it distance based, closer some kind of combat is to the town, tourism suffers more.) eg if you have a barrbarrian attact on the town there is no tourism next turn (tourists are afraid of the barbarrians ), and than it increases slowly until full potential over the next ten turns.

I like the part about loosing all tourists when getting attacked, but I don't think the tourists should stop comming when you're at war (This means you're attacking your enemy ), this only stop the tourist of your enemy to visit your country

How about also making another tourist income: Beaches, normal beaches doesn't give anything special, but a few places on the map there's a extraordinary beach, which gives extra income from tourists...maybe this one is to far out from the original Civ idea, but why not give it a shot

Personly I think tourism is an important subject for modern civilizations, think about, what would Las Vegas be without tourists

Oh, and I almost forgot, Civilizations with a good tourist rating gives a good regard points by the civilizations you have peace (or higher) with.

[Your.Master]

Originally posted by ADG


I don't think the tourists should stop comming when you're at war (This means you're attacking your enemy ), this only stop the tourist of your enemy to visit your country

Would you like plane tickets to War-Torn Yugoslavia during the Serbians genocidal missions? How many neutral countries were visiting Nazi Germany or France shortly after liberation?

[Mahdimael]

That's a good idea, certainly. Long periods of peace could increase the bonus, while war removes or penalizes it. I don't know if you're talking about tourists as actual units, but I think it might be better if they're handled in a more abstract way. Pretty much just as a function of culture to determine revenue.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Mahdimael
That's a good idea, certainly. Long periods of peace could increase the bonus, while war removes or penalizes it. I don't know if you're talking about tourists as actual units, but I think it might be better if they're handled in a more abstract way. Pretty much just as a function of culture to determine revenue.

Well, I don't think Tourists can be handled as units, more like some extra income. This means in the civ income screen you also have an income from tourists. Maybe it could be something in the city screen saying from where the different gold comes from.
There could be a thing which say like: 40% of the tourists in this city comes from Canada and 60% comes from Germany (for example).

Another idea about how tourism could be handled:

The more money you get from tourism depends of how many tourist visits the city To get more tourists to visit a city there's several things to be made: Wonders, roads (and railroads) connected from your city to other countries cities and city improvements (especially airport).

I really think roads is nessesary because in our modern times the whole worlds civilizations (almost all of them) are connected with roads, but in civilization (as far as I remember) and CTP (both games) the enemies are not happy about connecting roads to other civilizations. If my way idea is used there's more of a reason to connect roads to all civilizations!!!

[JellyDonut]

Re: The Wonders and population

Originally posted by ADG
the city gets 4 gold, every turn, per other city

Any three letters come to mind? ICS should. It should be "the city gets x amount of gold, every turn, per other POPULATION POINT in the empire". Otherwise the idea looks good.

[Sabre2th]

Tourism has no place in civ IMHO. While tourism and holidays play a large part in peoples' (and civs) lives, I don't believe the concept could be represented cleanly in civ3.

[Grumbold]

The suggestion that old Wonders should boost trade after their primary effect is complete has been knocking around on Apolyton (and doubtless elsewhere) for a long time. I like the idea but it depends whether increasing your culture increases your wealth. If it does, then Firaxis have it in hand. Similarly declaring war should lose you access to some resources outside your country which would then affect your income if it is tied in to culture. If culture and income are not linked then some alternative representation of tourism might be welcome.