23-07-2005 04:34									#61
	Support Apolyton

Everybody being able to build every wonder strikes me as a very unfun concept.

	23-07-2005 06:08									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Risa A simple solution: just let all negative effects (maintenance, unhappy face, negative health, etc.) take place from the beginning of training/building, not at the completion of it. Then all the above trick achieves is surprise. You won't save a single penny.

Very interesting solution... I think it should apply to buildings as well.

	23-07-2005 06:09									#63
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Mahdimael That works too. The point is that you're not penalizing the person who doesn't build the wonder- they're just not getting the extra bonus the wonder provides.

That is a significant penalty given the shield investment. However, I think you should just lose it all. Makes wonders far more risky.

	23-07-2005 06:09									#64
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker Very interesting solution... I think it should apply to buildings as well.

I too like this

	23-07-2005 06:10									#65
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I agree, asleepatthewheel. I say just leave it as is-its just that now you really need to think about your odds of success before you begin (and this is where missionaries and spies are gonna come in so handy !)
Also, slightly OT, but given the change to how population growth works, what effects do you think the Pyramids will have?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

	23-07-2005 06:11									#66
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by patcon How about this? If you build a wonder, you get the primary benefits - Ancient Cavalry every 5th turn, free granaries, etc.

I strongly disagree. Wonders are currently incredibly good investments, but very high-risk. This change means everyone will build all of the wonders (or at least all of the good ones), getting rid of their entire original purpose.

	23-07-2005 12:37									#67
	Inflate your Upload Space

Yep, that´s the problem.

Normally I would agree with patcon as keeping the primary benefits without getting the secondary benefits (cultural bonus) if you are second in the race for a great wonder would be realistic.

But it would imbalance the game too much.

	23-07-2005 13:48									#68
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by asleepathewheel Everybody being able to build every wonder strikes me as a very unfun concept.

exactly. I would like civ specific or region specific wonders. and or require some resources to build them (such as stone for pyramids, bronze for the collosus etc)

	23-07-2005 14:42									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Actually, we already know from other previews that at least some-if not all-Great Wonders will need such Resources as Stone, Marble and Copper. This I think will sufficiently blunt the 'everyone goes for the same Wonder' effect from previous Civ games. I think regional or civ-specific wonders, though, is an unfun hack-as then players will feel no need to pick up wonders with any great hurry.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

	23-07-2005 20:30									#70
	Support Apolyton

Why do so many people not accept that some decisions can cost you a lot? This happens in real live too and contrary to real live you can still go back to the past and reload an old savegame.

I say if you lost out on a wonder, let it hurt. The concept of wonders is investing a lot energy in something big that is unique and gives you an uniques advantage towards others. So it is only normal that when you fail it hurts. In my humble opinion it should also have a negative effect on the morale and productivity if you got beaten by another empire. This way you will not try to make every wonder but make it a very strategic decision...

	23-07-2005 23:03									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I believe the lost "hammers" are negative enough

But personally I don't mind this change. Often when playing I started building a wonder even though I had no chance to finish the wonder before the other civs, just because I knew I could switch to another wonder in a "few" turns... This rule gives me a disadvantage, but I don't mind it since this goes for all civs

	23-07-2005 23:12									#72
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Lambiorix_be Why do so many people not accept that some decisions can cost you a lot? This happens in real live too and contrary to real live you can still go back to the past and reload an old savegame. I say if you lost out on a wonder, let it hurt. The concept of wonders is investing a lot energy in something big that is unique and gives you an uniques advantage towards others. So it is only normal that when you fail it hurts. In my humble opinion it should also have a negative effect on the morale and productivity if you got beaten by another empire. This way you will not try to make every wonder but make it a very strategic decision...

awesome thought

it would be also kewl say have a movie showing the wonder almost built and then collapsing into a pile of ruins

	23-07-2005 23:28									#73
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Adagio Often when playing I started building a wonder even though I had no chance to finish the wonder before the other civs, just because I knew I could switch to another wonder in a "few" turns... This rule gives me a disadvantage, but I don't mind it since this goes for all civs

I do exactly the same. I kinda use it as a 'shield storage' until I have the tech for the wonder I really want and switch so that that wonder gets build very quick

	24-07-2005 00:40									#74
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It's not so much failing that hurts- it's getting beaten to it by a turn or two against a computer opponent who you can't be sure played fairly.

quote: Originally posted by Lambiorix_be Why do so many people not accept that some decisions can cost you a lot? This happens in real live too and contrary to real live you can still go back to the past and reload an old savegame. I say if you lost out on a wonder, let it hurt. The concept of wonders is investing a lot energy in something big that is unique and gives you an uniques advantage towards others. So it is only normal that when you fail it hurts. In my humble opinion it should also have a negative effect on the morale and productivity if you got beaten by another empire. This way you will not try to make every wonder but make it a very strategic decision...

	24-07-2005 00:43									#75
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Mahdimael It's not so much failing that hurts- it's getting beaten to it by a turn or two against a computer opponent who you can't be sure played fairly.

I dont understand

Computers dont play unfair?

I guess I missed what cha' meant??

	24-07-2005 01:18									#76
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

The most obvious difference from Civ3 is that there won't be any 'Wonder cascades'.

If a civ fails to complete the Pyramids, it won't be able to complete the Colossus the nex turn.

In other words, the 'Wonder race' is till on...

	24-07-2005 02:21									#77
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

yep, I hate wonder cascades. Though usually they are for the ancient wonders which suck anyways. I never build ancient wonders (except pyramids- but then only if I manage to get a scientific leader)

	24-07-2005 02:22									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker Actually, we already know from other previews that at least some-if not all-Great Wonders will need such Resources as Stone, Marble and Copper. This I think will sufficiently blunt the 'everyone goes for the same Wonder' effect from previous Civ games. I think regional or civ-specific wonders, though, is an unfun hack-as then players will feel no need to pick up wonders with any great hurry. Yours, Aussie_Lurker.

ahh good news. it will allow more strategy in the building of wonders.

	24-07-2005 08:44									#79
	Increase the size of your Attachments

REALISM even if it becomes impossible to defeat the computer AI-like playing chess

	24-07-2005 14:54									#80
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll it would be also kewl say have a movie showing the wonder almost built and then collapsing into a pile of ruins

gotta love the video thing, that can work on soo many levels

	26-07-2005 23:51									#81
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by LDiCesare Keeping fro more than one turn would make for a great way to prepare and launch hidden alpha strikes: Build a cavalry in every city. Stop when there's one turn left. Build an infantry in every city but stop when there's one turn left. Build and artillery everywhere and stop again. Build something else. When you need your units, you may have them in 3 turns, without having paid maintenance cost for them in the meanwhile. Look, my neighbour is weak. Let's attack him. Next turn: How's that, one infantry in every city? Next turn: Where do these artilleries come from? Next turn: He's actually striking back with cavalry? We'll see if that can be pulled off. Maybe you can use conscription at the same time to augment the size of the army even more.

I think one very easy way to avoid this exploit would be not to let people save the hammers of military units.

If I'm building for example a temple and see barbarians uprising it's very nice if I can switch temporarily to defensive unit and after it's complete then continue building my temple without any unfun extra penalties.

However when I'm building a military unit. I can't think of any situation where it's urgent to switch to somenthing else. (Besides the exploit above )

Ps. My first post to this great forum. Have been reading this for years though

	27-07-2005 00:03									#82
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: My first post to this great forum. Have been reading this for years though

Welcome, then!
We'll see how they handle that. It remains to be seen if such an abuse actually works anyway. Preparing the construction of the unit may be less efficient than building a temple 3 turns earlier.

	31-07-2005 03:46									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I doubt AI can be so clever

	31-07-2005 16:31									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Lambiorix_be Why do so many people not accept that some decisions can cost you a lot? [...] I say if you lost out on a wonder, let it hurt. [...]

The point is that some of us do love to learn every bloody detail in the game and play it on deity.

Suggested change is good logically, but may be completely unfun on deity, because there will be no realistic way to beat the computer using builder strategy (my favourite).

To make the game more realistic, and fully retain the great idea of completely losing the wonder we should address three very different issues, and those are the issues that

1) Deity level AI is better at building (by cheating), and is as pathetic at waging war. Therefore, the greater the difficulty level, the more of a warmonger you should be.
2) All nations always tend to build one and the same wonder at the same time.
3) The intelligence on wonders is unrealistic.

So, how we can deal with those issues?

1) I would be willing to have better AI intelligence on deity compared to chieftain. Which means that deity AI should make decisions on whether to start war or not, whether to continue war or not, whether to spy or not better then at Chieftain. Currently existing "shield cheat" only helps to compensate for AI stupid decision of attacking the enemy on the other half of the globe with all their forces. And while those forces are absent, a neighbour attacks AI for extremely legitimate reason of territory growth and eliminates it before the forces return to their home country.

I think that Civ of the next generation MUST improve AI. And there are cheap ways of doing it, like 1) attacking neighbours more often then distant states 2) using espionage to learn and compare the strength of the enemy 3) not surrendering to a weaker enemy 4) attacking weaker enemies. Reasonably simple ideas.

If we disagree completely to improve AI, and think that Civ 1 AI is still good for Civ 5, then ...
I would move for smaller cheats on wonders at deity level. Let them build soldiers like nightmare, but no 50% discount on the cost of wonder building. 25% discount will be quite OK.

2) If we had more wonders, there would be more temptation to start a wonder, which nobody started yet. As simple as that. And then the competition of 16 nations to build Pyramids will never take place. Currently we can have up to 16 civs at the beginning, and only 3 wonders, out of which inland civs can only build 2 (Colossus requires sea).

In the same area is the question of early game cap on research. At deity level I will always discover any science later then somebody, because I have 40 turn cap, and AI does not (I really wonder why). Therefore, I will never build any wonder without wonder chains, because I will be second in discoveries until some real military gains in mediaeval ages (see issue 1 again).

To solve this issue we must have more complicated tech trees, so that each of the 16 nations had some technology path of their own; more wonders in different paths; more strict obsolescence rules (How SunTsu War academy can help you to win Napoleonic wars anyway? Do Pyramids have any effect after Pharaohs are gone?); and smaller cost (so that you would receive cumulative gain from wonder, not loss). This will allow some strategic choice different from conquering a wonder, such as heading for tech not yet discovered by anybody, holding it while building a wonder, and building a wonder only if you have limited competition. And it will make sense to build Oracle (reason 1 – nobody is building it; reason 2 – payback is larger then cost; reason 3 – Pyramids will soon be obsolete).

One more good idea would be to disallow creating all 16 civs at 4000 BC (especially Americans), but to generate them through wars of cesession and through later-game "civilisation" from barbarians. Then Americans will never build Pyramids :-( , but why should they?

3) Intelligence is good idea, but it should also be balanced. I would recommend the following:

3a) If a nation that you have contact with starts building a wonder, this becomes public knowledge. If you do not have contact yet - well, sorry. You should learn navigation and discover New World first. If you get new contact with Civ, you should get the info about ongoing wonder construction.

This need not happen immediately, when construction starts, or when you contact a new civ, but there should be reasonable chance (say 10% probability) of getting the word immediately. And the probability should also increase from turn to turn by say 10%. Then 10 turns after the construction had started you will get the info anyway, will spy on the enemy, see that you cannot compete, and abandon your project before the wonder is finally constructed by competitor.

3b) There should be reasonable cost of learning how far the construction has progressed. This should be possible via espionage screen for a given sum of money. If you do spy at your competitor, you would have some realistic choices to make, such as a) cease construction of a wonder b) attack wonder-building city c) move workers from other towns to your wonder-building city, increase population, and thus city production.

3c) Espionage should not be possible "immediately" (then player will tend to spy, reload, and play at zero spying cost). Spy must travel hell of a lot to a different country, get info, then return back. One-turn delay is surely necessary. At least, before the discovery of espionage. The lag can be even 3 or 4 turns!

3d) Espionage should be used by AI, and AI should have budget for that.

3e) Espionage should not cost you 100 years of savings in taxes.

All of the requirements above being met, I should get a deity game in which I

1) Will be able to start some wonders first due to specific research path or resource requirements.

2) Will never start doomed projects (excluding projects lost to undiscovered civs)

3) Will try to get in touch with other civs

4) Will spy every day, if the project is a close tie with another civ. Will micro-manage my wonder-building city to build wonder ASAP.

5) Will not need to spy all 16 civs, as only 2 or 3 will build Pyramids. Others will build Colossus, Statue of Zeus, Mausoleum, Hanging Gardens, Temple of the Sun, Oracle, basically something different).

6) Will have some wonders, which are currently missing (Grand Canal of China, Borobodur, Angkor Wat, Nazca Lines, Inca Road system, Nalanda University, RapaNui statues, Chinampas of Tenochtitlan, etc.)

5) Will play against AI, which will also tend to avoid doomed projects for the same reasons (many wonders to build, info on construction available, espionage available).

This will remove the need for "second-class" wonders. This will make more “first-class” wonders. And they still will be a great risk. But the risk will not turn to a 100% guaranteed loss. And it will make a game more fun.

	31-07-2005 16:41									#85
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Yarco_TW To make the game more realistic, and fully retain the great idea of completely losing the wonder [...]

This also means that
1) I am against "major" and "minor" Pyramids. One set of Pyramids is enough. We should not build too much Pyramids, or they will become uncountable noun.

I am for building wonders, which you can complete first. I am for being able to complete at least some at diety.

2) I am for penalising unfinished projects, especially soldiers. Imagine zero-cost unorgainised (90% complete?) army. I cannot imagine that. As with any project I first pay, then construct. Any uncomplete project should have reasonable maintenance cost.

	01-08-2005 14:55									#86
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Yarco_TW Suggested change is good logically, but may be completely unfun on deity, because there will be no realistic way to beat the computer using builder strategy (my favourite). 1) Deity level AI is better at building (by cheating), and is as pathetic at waging war. Therefore, the greater the difficulty level, the more of a warmonger you should be. So, how we can deal with those issues? 1) I would be willing to have better AI intelligence on deity compared to chieftain. Which means that deity AI should make decisions on whether to start war or not, whether to continue war or not, whether to spy or not better then at Chieftain. Currently existing "shield cheat" only helps to compensate for AI stupid decision of attacking the enemy on the other half of the globe with all their forces. And while those forces are absent, a neighbour attacks AI for extremely legitimate reason of territory growth and eliminates it before the forces return to their home country. I think that Civ of the next generation MUST improve AI. And there are cheap ways of doing it, like 1) attacking neighbours more often then distant states 2) using espionage to learn and compare the strength of the enemy 3) not surrendering to a weaker enemy 4) attacking weaker enemies. Reasonably simple ideas. If we disagree completely to improve AI, and think that Civ 1 AI is still good for Civ 5, then ... I would move for smaller cheats on wonders at deity level. Let them build soldiers like nightmare, but no 50% discount on the cost of wonder building. 25% discount will be quite OK.

Accordings to some things I read, the AI for Civ IV has been improved (at least I read that the developerrs say so ).

As for "the AI should make more intelligent decisions on higher difficulty levels and not get its advantages just by cheating on production"
I completely agree with this. Lets hope the developers found a way to implement this already in Civ IV

	07-08-2005 04:10									#87
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Civ 3 has taught me that earlier wonders are better off not built... but they make fine conquests.

	07-08-2005 13:40									#88
	Got spare money?

I don't see what the big problem with prebuilding wanders is. I don't like the idea of losing huge amount of shields (production). I even think that it would be a lot better if no production was ever lost as in moo2 for example.

There would either always be exploits (prebuilding) or the system will be too complex and unusable, so I'd rather have it simple.

	07-08-2005 18:26									#89
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Losing shields is not complex, and it's actually more challenging. It's a good thing imo.

	07-08-2005 20:55									#90
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by realpolitic Civ 3 has taught me that earlier wonders are better off not built... but they make fine conquests.

I enjoy building more than warfare. So, in Civ3 I warred for Great Leader and built some nice Pyramids.

In Conquests this is not possible, and to be the first in discovery is also extremely difficult. So, I build less.

Still, earlier wonders make good conquests only if they are on the same continent. Otherwise missing Pyramids and Hanging Gardens is not that great.

Overall I tend to go for Pyramids, Sistine chapel and Bachs cathedral in the early game. If I have extra leaders, they will go for Heroic Epic and Hanging Gardeens.