 |
|
Turrosh Mak
|
|
You have a choice of either or of the following wonders, how would you rank their usefulness over a long game, huge map, 60% continents?
Leo's Workshop
Smiths Trading Post
Magellans Voyage
Bachs Cathedral
|
|
| |
|
|
|
PeaSoup
|
|
Vancouver, BC
Nov 2001
time: 21:31
|
|
here's how I'd rate them from most important to least (to me at least)
Smiths Trading Post
Bachs Cathedral
Leo's Workshop
Magellans Voyage
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:31
|
|
I have to add one more "depends"
If you plan to wage wars (like aiming for domination or conquest) and do massive upgrades of expensive units (I talk about upgrading Chariots to Sipahi and alike), it's Leo's hands down.
If you suffer happiness problems, because you are short of luxuries, it's Bach's.
If it's an archipelago map and you plan a naval powerplay, it's Magellan's. Admittedly, this one is the weakest of all wonders you mentioned, even if you're such an island hopper as I am.
If you're a builder nature at heart (again, like I am), Smith's is the way to go. The amount of money it saves is insane, especially on larger maps / with bigger empires.
EDIT: Considering the map conditions you mentioned, it's either Leo's (planning warmongering) or Smith's (planning to build). On huge continents are usually plenty luxuries, so happiness shouldn't be a problem, and Magellan's is next to worthless at this map.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CerberusIV
|
|
The first issue is it depends on which civ you are playing as you could be looking for one of these wonders to trigger a GA - which makes that particular wonder more valuable.
Apart from that it has to be Leo's if you are going a-conquering and Smiths if you are playing a balanced mixture of war and peace or a completely peaceful game.
Magellan is nice but nothing special and Bach depends on how many cities might benefit on a continents map.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002
time: 21:31
|
|
Definitely an "it depends" answer, but I'd say Smith's is the better choice in most cases. 
If you've prepared for a massive horse-to-cav upgrade, Leo's might be the right answer. But absent that, I'd be inclined to go with Smith's, even if you plan to go a-conquering. On a huge map, max land, continents, and a "long game," you're going to save a massive amount of cash over the long run with Smith's due to the number of cities you will control. And, I'd wager that you'll also save more in the short term unless you're preparing the horse-to-cav rush. If you already have knights, the upgrade cost to cavs is small. I am one of those players who only selectively upgrades pikes to muskets (where needed), and rarely researches Nationalism -- more often than not, I'll build an infantry force from scratch so there are only limited upgrade costs on the defensive side. In short, if you actually have a chance to build any of the four wonders (but only one), I'd wager Smith's is the better choice.
A couple of caveats -- both Smith's and Leo's can be captured later -- Bach's can be captured but you need it on your landmass. If a neighbor (preferably a weaker neighbor ) was closest in the wonder race, I'd probably build Leo's and expect to take Smith's as soon as it was built.
Bach's is great, and one I covet, but only rarely is it a "must have" in my games. On a huge map, with luxuries more widely dispersed, Bach's stock goes up, but not, IMHO, enough to cast aside Smith's. Magellan's is a "nice to have" wonder, rarely (if ever) a must have. BTW, having Leo's, Smith's, and Magellan's available seeems a bit rare to me -- I would have thought Leo's would be gone by now.
So, absent a planned and pending horse-to-cav upgrade and rush (and even then I'm not sure I'd change the order), I'd rank them as:
Smith's
Leo's
Bach's
Magellan's
Catt
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
I think if you're going for a "Horseman to Cavalry" strategy, Leo's is definitely the top choice; Smith's will pay off in the long run, but you need all that Gold (so to speak) now when you're rushing the opposition. 1000 Gold right now in Cavalry upgrades is well worth 2-3k many more turns down the road.
Trying to avoid a "it depends" answer, here would be my ranking:
Leo's
Smith's
Bach's
Magellan's
(Side rant: why did Michelango get shafted out of having his Wonder named after him? Every other Medieval era Wonder is named after some famous dude, why not Michelangelo. Definitely something I hope to see fixed in Conquests!).
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Solomwi
|
 |
Don King of the Apolyton HLA Movement
Dec 2002
time: 23:31
|
|
I've got to go with the majority here and say the order of the first two may depend, but in large part...
Smith's
Leo's
Bach's
Magellan's
Your map conditions describe just about every game I play, and Smith's is immensely powerful there (markets, airports and harbors in single shield cities with no upkeeep even appeals to warmongers). Likewise, Leo's is extremely powerful with the 300-unit armies that aren't uncommon on such a map, at least for me. I would bump it up to #1 if planning a mass Cav conquest, but right now I'm in the Modern Age mindset, where because of Smith's in large part, I've got enough of a treasury stockpiled to pay for the full upgrade price without batting an eye. Had you asked when my current game was late Middle Ages, I'd have probably reversed the top two.
Rest assured, though, once I build my one, I'm planning to take the others very quickly. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
"Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel" would be more fair, then. Take out his work and you've got pretty boring dome there (just like if you take out Bach's music, the cathedral would be awfully silent and boring too).
I hate inconsistencies, and so naming all Medieval era Wonders after famous people save one is just annoying for me. Something I'll just have to live with, I guess (hm, maybe not...editor?).
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Thanks for the help, but I (and many others, I'm sure) associate the Sistine Chapel and Michelangelo far more readily than Bach and any old cathedral (I associate Bach with music and religion, not a building).
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WackenOpenAir
|
|
Bach's
leonardo's
smiths
magelans.
magelans gets low because i prefer pangea maps anyway.
leonardos gets high because im a warmangerer
bachs gets highest because i play deity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
nbarclay
|
 |
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
I agree with Catt and Dominae regarding Leo's and Smith's. If I'm planning a massive horseman-to-cavalry upgrade (which is one of my favorite tactics), getting Leo's is a high priority for me. Otherwise, it's no big deal.
On those map settings, Magellan's would be at its most useful if you expect to invade the other continent(s) before airports become available. If you do, it might be more useful than Bach's. Otherwise, its value is minimal.
The value of Bach's depends a lot on city spacing and on how hard it's going to be to acquire luxuries. In most of my games, I use a tight city spacing and can build a tech lead to trade techs for luxuries (plus cash and other goodies), so I don't mind missing Bach's. But with bigger cities and having to pay gold for luxuries, Bach's can make a much bigger difference.
In a way, I'm sorry I can't give a more definitive answer, but in another way, I'm glad. The fact that different wonders have different values in different situations is a significant part of what keeps Civ fun even after playing it for a long time.
Nathan
|
|
| |
|
|
|
nbarclay
|
|
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999
time: 23:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Solomwi
Sun Tzu's and the Globe Theater, though, break the mold then. |
There are three basic categories that wonders can fall in with regard to naming. Some, like "Magellan's Voyage" and "Smith's Trading Company" would be completely meaningless without a person's name attached. There have been countless voyages and more than a few trading companies over the centuries.
The second category is one in which the wonder could, at least in theory, be adequately identified without using a person's name but its identity is signifcantly clearer with a name attached. "Art of War" and "Globe Theater" could potentially be identified without attaching a person's name, but many people would miss the significance without the person's name attached. Anyone who has heard of Shakespeare would understand that "Shakespeare's Theater" is important, but fewer people would make the connection with the name Globe Theater. (Actually, "Bach's Cathedral" almost certainly has another name in real-world history, but how many people would know it to make the connection?) Similarly, attaching Sun Tsu's name to his Art of War provides a useful clarification for the unfamiliar.
The third category is wonders like the Pyramids, Colossus, and Sistine Chapel that are well-known in their own right. Where the Globe Theater and Bach's Cathedral (whatever its actual name was) had merely transitory significance as the place famous works were originally performed, Michelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel is an integral and lasting part of it. That gives the Sistine Chapel a kind of lasting significance that the other places do not have.
Nathan
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Solomwi
|
|
Don King of the Apolyton HLA Movement
Dec 2002
time: 23:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Datajack Franit
For EVERY civ game including large masses of land:
JS Bach's
Sistine
Pyramids
Sun Tzu's |
Ummm, okay but not quite...
For one thing, you replaced three of the stipulated wonders. For another, you completely miss the aspect of different playstyles. For someone who builds cathedrals in every city, Sistine's is going to be more valuable than Bach's. For a warmonger without a militaristic civ, Sun Tzu's is likely to be a higher priority than any of the other three you list. Personally, ever since I moved to Monarch, I don't even try for the Pyramids, but rather hope somebody on my continent builds it. Of the four you listed, with my playstyle, I'd rank them Sun Tzu's, Sistine, Pyramids, Bach's, with Pyramids and Sistine potentially swapped depending on circumstances.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WackenOpenAir
|
|
i do build cathedrals in every city, but i do not value sistine higher than bachs. maybe equal i think.
bachs is more versatile in that when you build or conquer a new city you have the benefit before you buid a catherdral.
furthermore, building pyramids is simply impossible (on deity) so i give it 0 priority.
leo's and sun tsu i very like because i am a warmongerer, but i see them as bonus wonders. they are not necesarry for my succes, they just make it easier. while at least one of the happyness wonders is pretty much nescesary.
Smith's is not so important for me, i usually am to busy building units and stuff to bother building any more economy than marketplaces.
magelans doesn't mean much for me, on island maps it would have average priority probably, but not high
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MysteryMan
|
|
First of all, if I had to be stranded in a random Civ III game with only one wonder, it would be the Sistine Chapel, no hesitation, no questions asked.
However, which of the four (Leo, Bach, Maggie, Smith) is best depends on your game and your settings and your style.
Leonardo's Workshop is actually MORE important for me if I'm a builder as I don't want to actually have to BUILD new defensive units, nor do I want to pay a whole lot
Magelan's Expedition is a very hit or miss wonder. It can be a large advantage, but only under limited circumstances (archapalaego map, your involved in a high tech naval war, or one of your enemies is a big naval power - you wouldn't want THEM to build it, would you? This is the Hasek Theory at work again).
I'm very sorry but Bach's I use only for the culture. Since I have EVERYTHING concentrated on getting the Sistine, thus doubling my cathedrals, Bach's is just the icing on the cake (unless you are trying for a cultural win). Don't get me wrong, Bachs is very good, but the Sistine is just so much better that it is put to shame.
And that brings me to Smith. Well, it sure is nice getting them free marketplaces and banks. Sometimes that alone is the difference between a rich civ and a poor civ. This wonder is worth much more on larger maps.
However, all factors being equal, this is my order of importance:
Leo (both an economic and a military advantage)
Smith (economic edge)
Maggie (naval power/shorten supply lines)
...what was that other one again? (build the Sistine and forget about Bach)
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-10-2003 15:49
) all eight luxuries, so once hooked up, Bach doesn't do much for me. Leo and Smith both let me save money, probably more so Leo's if I'm playing a large map with a huge military. Magellan? I can take it or leave it.
|