Eiffel Tower should give a trade benefit

Alexander's Horse · July 16, 2001, 19:26

Increased tourism was its major longterm benefit.

Provost Harrison · July 16, 2001, 20:08

Yeah, better than the next to useless reputation bonus it had in civ2. Another thing it may be good for is giving a significant boost to culture...

Alexander's Horse · July 16, 2001, 21:06

Maybe it could have a civ wide trade/culture benefit. None of the civ 2 wonders do that.

JellyDonut · July 16, 2001, 21:57

In real life, Paris is the most visited city in the world. A tourism/culture/trade benefit would be quite fitting.

DrFell · July 17, 2001, 00:09

Yeah make it the modern equivalent of the Colossus and add a culture benefit too and it might actually be worth building.

Alexander's Horse · July 17, 2001, 00:21

That temple one expires really early too - making it practically useless.

Eternal · July 17, 2001, 00:21

ALL Wonders should have tourism benefits, although they should not kick in until near the modern era.

The Eiffel tower was no more than a useless show of France's industrialization. It shouldn't have any other benefits than tourism, that's for sure.

SnowFire · July 17, 2001, 00:24

Eternal: Most Wonders are useless displays of a country's wealth. Did you really think that the Pyramids were some giant granary? Frankly the Civ I explanation was better. You tortured your people so much by making them build the P's that they got apathetic and didn't care what government you had, and wouldn't notice any flagrantly anachronistic ones.

tniem · July 17, 2001, 00:40

It would seem that all wonders are going to add to the city's culture. At least that is what I gather from what has been said and shown in screen shots.

The question becomes, is whether increasing culture not only increases borders but also trade. This would make sense as a city with more culture would be on the cutting edge of technology, fashion, etc. and sell newer goods. As well cities with high cultures would have an increase in tourism for all over the country and world. Mid-level culture cities (I am thinking Chicago) could also produce this increased trade for tourists from nearby areas (such as my entire state - Michigan vistiting that city about once a year at the very least).

So, Firaxis have you included some type of formula to increase trade based on culture? If so I am all for it.

War4ever · July 17, 2001, 00:42

Quote:

Originally posted by SnowFire
Eternal: Most Wonders are useless displays of a country's wealth. Did you really think that the Pyramids were some giant granary? Frankly the Civ I explanation was better. You tortured your people so much by making them build the P's that they got apathetic and didn't care what government you had, and wouldn't notice any flagrantly anachronistic ones.

here here.... i brought up the eiffel tower wonder possibility for a dip game but unfortunately there was no way to change the coding or some such to change its benefits...... although i could be wrong in this aspect.

as for the oracle..... my belief is that a happy wonder of this nature shouldn't expire.... after all there are plenty of oracles around today and religion is huge.... something like 95% of the world believes in deities of some sort..... so what were they thinking with this one

TechWins · July 17, 2001, 02:39

The United Nations is way too powerful. You can screw other nations over all the time with this wonder. I think it is the most powerful wonder.

Urban Ranger · July 17, 2001, 03:09

SnowFire,

Not necessarily. What about Magallan's Expedition, the Manhattan Project, or the Great Wall? Some wonders did have pratical purposes, though of course it's not the case with all of them.

Alex 14 · July 17, 2001, 03:12

Many of the wonders in Civ 2 were damn powerful.

Great Wall, Leoardo Da Vinci's Workshop, Great Library, Adam Smith's Trading Corparation (

), just to name a few.

Inverse Icarus · July 17, 2001, 13:15

every wonder has a culture benefit, even after they are obsolete.

firaxis has said that.

July 17, 2001, 14:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Increased tourism was its major longterm benefit.

Since tourism means more money for the City, mabe the Eiffel Tower should increase a small amont of gold to the host country.

TechWins · July 17, 2001, 18:16

Quote:

ALL Wonders should have tourism benefits, although they should not kick in until near the modern era.

I diffently disagree with this. UN, Magellan, etc... shouldn't increase tourism. The only one that should increase tourism is the Eifel Tower because you can't have all wonders increasing tourism. It should give you maybe a 25% increase on trade in the city that you built it in. As well, as giving you the meaning less effect it gave you in Civ2.

Eternal · July 17, 2001, 19:04

IMO all Wonders are pretty stupid anyway. That doesn't mean they all have to be totally ridiculous.

November Adam · July 17, 2001, 20:07

Hey Tech Wins, how about permanent structures (except engineering, production structures), would add to tourism. Example of permanent structures being tourist trap: pyramids, stonehedge, cistine chapel, eiffel tower, etc. Can't really see the Hoover dam being such a draw (unless you are in the area).

But then again maybe the culture sticking to wonders even after they expire is adequate.

JellyDonut · July 17, 2001, 21:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Eternal
The Eiffel tower was no more than a useless show of France's industrialization.

Incorrect. The only reason France kept it after the World Fair for which it was built was its potential as a radio relay station. It still serves that purpose today.