I'm sorry if this have been asked before but I could not find anything when I searched. I have seen two different system of adjacency being used, the one in Lucy in which some quarters like maker's and farmer's had adjacency with themself but others such as research and market got an adjacency bonus from maker's, respektive farmer's, thus discourage research and market carpets. This is poll choice 1.

The current system, used in Poe however have all basic quarters have self adjacency, so research, market, farmers and makers all produce more if they are next to each others this is poll choice 2.

I also added in a third poll choice which is what was done in Lucy but to the extreme in which not even farmers and makers quarters would have self adjacency.

Poll choice 4 mean you don't want any sort of adjency bonus between the basic quarters.

So which adjacency system do you prefer? I like the Poe one the best, it is simple, the Lucy system which many people seems to like I found hard to build up research and market quarters, thus it was easy to produce industry and food but hard to produce research and money, making the latter two resources harder to focus on compared to the earlier two. Like to make alot of money you probably needed to build alot of agarian quarters and to have decent research you also needed to build makers quarters in a large scale.

Honestly the Poe version is more simple, but it breaks immersion for me, especially when you see ten research quarters next to each other with really similar aesthetics...

It is not realistic either, like I understand the fact that farmer's quarter benefit from each other, but I don't get how research quarters would benefit from exclusively other research quarters, maybe harbours could give a boost in science, exploring the sea bed does give knowledge about the environment and much more.

The market quarter adjency with the farmer's one was well thought and realistic, since a farmer might take his products to the market and sell them there.

Another adjacency could be the commons quarter placed next to a maker's quarter, it might increase stability additionally, with the logic of providing a place for the exhausted workers to relax and pass their time with entertainment.

I think different and well thought adjacency could improve city building and give the cities a more realistic look towards the end of the game.

I honestly don't know why they decided to go the Poe's way.

I think a lot of the lucy adjacency bonuses were eliminated because district yelds spiralled out of control. This and the low stability cost districts had at the time rendered infrastructure worthless.

I'm all for bringing back the research quarter + makers quarter adjacency in particular; since Victor, cities have looked absolutely ridiculous with all the research quarters clustered toether. Plus it necessitates the designation of one or more cities as pure research centers, which can throw the balance of the game for some people and some cultures. Much better to let every city with some makers quarters contribute modestly to scientific progress rather than one or two science cities which do 90% of the work.

I liked the old system where market quarters synergised with farmers quarters too, because it makes thematic sense as Sewata said, and it looks good aesthetically too. I'm less worried about this one though, since at least clustered market quarters don't look too ridiculous.

Goodluck wrote:

roger212 wrote:

I think a lot of the lucy adjacency bonuses were eliminated because district yelds spiralled out of control. This and the low stability cost districts had at the time rendered infrastructure worthless.

What adjacency bonuses was eliminated, research and market quarters was change to become more generous, now it is much easier to spam them and make large amount of money and science. A big change was that emblematic quarters was limited to one per territory, in Lucy you had no such limit.

You are right, I don't remember exactly but I believe they eliminated the farmers / market adjacency as part of the tweaks to make farmers and makers less attractive so that research and markets would be competitive with them.

roger212 wrote:

I think a lot of the lucy adjacency bonuses were eliminated because district yelds spiralled out of control. This and the low stability cost districts had at the time rendered infrastructure worthless.

The change that reduced yield spiraling was the changes to stability, not the adjacency. If you changed Lucy to use the closed beta adjacency, it would spiral even more.

roger212 wrote:

Goodluck wrote:

roger212 wrote:

I think a lot of the lucy adjacency bonuses were eliminated because district yelds spiralled out of control. This and the low stability cost districts had at the time rendered infrastructure worthless.

What adjacency bonuses was eliminated, research and market quarters was change to become more generous, now it is much easier to spam them and make large amount of money and science. A big change was that emblematic quarters was limited to one per territory, in Lucy you had no such limit.

You are right, I don't remember exactly but I believe they eliminated the farmers / market adjacency as part of the tweaks to make farmers and makers less attractive so that research and markets would be competitive with them.

Perhaps, but a more sensible change would've been to remove self-adjacency from Maker's and Farmer's Quarters.

Looking back at this, it seems a shame they decided not to change things back for the release. I really hope they improve this in an update; I can't stand the thought of needing to look at spammed research quarters. It's ugly, it's boring, and it breaks immersion!

This is very weird they opted for monoadjacency in the first place!

Absolutely true. I'm hoarding screenshots of both myself and AI spamming 15+ (for AI) and 30+ (for myself) research quarters on most of our cities. I'll post them here some time and hopefully someone at Amplitude notices how terrible it looks and how boring the city-building can get because of this!

I absolutely agree, beside not looking visually appealing... It really brings down the fun and the thinking that comes with city building.

I really enjoyed back in Lucy where I had to plan a space for some market quarter around my farmer's one, or other thoughtful combination, while now it's really that easy and not fun at all.

I would also make sense to have combined districts in a way that all can benefit from each other. Maybe if I place a market quarter beside a maker's quarter, I could get some science while if I place next to a farm I could get money influence, I know it doesn't have to be this way but something similar would definitely improve the feeling of the cities.

I'd like them to steal from the board game "Suburbia" and have a bunch of different types of districts with various adjacency bonuses and penalties. Would make the city building aspect a lot more fun and engaging rather than generic food and industry tiles.