Great Wall Wonder

Noticed something in my game last night. I was attacking the Inca's, and they had the Great Wall. I specifically waited until I had Dynamite before attacking.

However, the Great Wall still limited my movement while in their territory...

The Inca's did NOT have dynamite at the time. Does the wonder only expire once the civilization that BUILT the wall researches Dynamite?

Landtuber said:

Noticed something in my game last night. I was attacking the Inca's, and they had the Great Wall. I specifically waited until I had Dynamite before attacking.

However, the Great Wall still limited my movement while in their territory...

The Inca's did NOT have dynamite at the time. Does the wonder only expire once the civilization that BUILT the wall researches Dynamite?

Click to expand...

Yes..

Yes this I think is really stupid and does not make sense. Then again, we're talking about a video game where leaders hold grudges for centuries, yet still the Great Wall should be obsolete when the attacker discovers dynamite.

Probably more for balance reasons..... but it really should be based upon the attacker's technology, not the defender's.

On another note, Great Wall being unlocked in the Medieval = LOGIC.

It's from when wonders and buildings becoming obsolete with technology was much more prominent. In past Civ games, these served to shape tech paths and balance wonders: a really good wonder might be balanced not just by its hammer cost and location exclusivity (eg. requires mountain), but also by the fact that one of the most vital techs in the game made the wonder obsolete. As a result, if you ended up getting that wonder, you may have wished to delay picking up the tech that obsolete'd that wonder, and sometimes building a seemingly overpowered wonder was not worth it simply because of how quickly it became obsolete. Since the tech tree was a lot better designed as well, delaying a vital tech would not necessarily put you strictly behind or strictly ahead the way delaying Plastics might in Civ5, so you could actually afford delaying that vital tech.

The Great Wall is the only wonder that still has this "feature" in Civ5, the tech that obsoletes it is only vital for a playstyle that will want to avoid building it Great Wall anyway. If Great Wall unlocked at Masonry and become obsolete at Gunpowder though, things would have been a lot different. Other examples of possible obsoletes that would have made the game quite interesting: Stonehenge obsoletes at Astronomy, Temple of Artemis obsoletes at Industrialization, National College obsoletes at Scientific Theory.

Colossus (back when it gave +1 commerce to water tiles) was sadly obsoleted by Corporations.... researching it was.... sad

Delnar_Ersike said:

It's from when wonders and buildings becoming obsolete with technology was much more prominent. In past Civ games, these served to shape tech paths and balance wonders: a really good wonder might be balanced not just by its hammer cost and location exclusivity (eg. requires mountain), but also by the fact that one of the most vital techs in the game made the wonder obsolete. As a result, if you ended up getting that wonder, you may have wished to delay picking up the tech that obsolete'd that wonder, and sometimes building a seemingly overpowered wonder was not worth it simply because of how quickly it became obsolete. Since the tech tree was a lot better designed as well, delaying a vital tech would not necessarily put you strictly behind or strictly ahead the way delaying Plastics might in Civ5, so you could actually afford delaying that vital tech.

The Great Wall is the only wonder that still has this "feature" in Civ5, the tech that obsoletes it is only vital for a playstyle that will want to avoid building it Great Wall anyway. If Great Wall unlocked at Masonry and become obsolete at Gunpowder though, things would have been a lot different. Other examples of possible obsoletes that would have made the game quite interesting: Stonehenge obsoletes at Astronomy, Temple of Artemis obsoletes at Industrialization, National College obsoletes at Scientific Theory.

Click to expand...

Yeah I remember those times

It lead to some strange behaviours like avoiding Scientific Method like plague in Civ 4 though...

Delnar_Ersike said:

The Great Wall is the only wonder that still has this "feature" in Civ5, the tech that obsoletes it is only vital for a playstyle that will want to avoid building it Great Wall anyway.

Click to expand...

You're missing the point -- the problem is that the DEFENDER'S technology is what happens, rather than the ATTACKER'S.

If I have XCOMs, Stealth Bombers, and Nuclear Missiles then the fact you don't know what Dynamite is shouldn't impede my units in your territory.

DocRock said:

It lead to some strange behaviours like avoiding Scientific Method like plague in Civ 4 though...

Click to expand...

It might be strange, but it also might be intended. It was a tool for designers to play around with to balance buildings and wonders. It's a shame that is was wasted for Civ5.

LordBalkoth said:

You're missing the point -- the problem is that the DEFENDER'S technology is what happens, rather than the ATTACKER'S.

If I have XCOMs, Stealth Bombers, and Nuclear Missiles then the fact you don't know what Dynamite is shouldn't impede my units in your territory.

Click to expand...

I stated what the thing was, I did not argue that it was good or bad. Remember, this obsoleting mechanic originated from the pre-Civ5 eras, where the tech tree was huge, tech trading was allowed, techs sometimes only required one of many optional prerequisite techs (eg. I remember being able to skip Alphabet for an incredibly long time), and science was generated from commerce, so high population empires weren't necessarily science leaders. It was a way to have players avoid certain techs that they would otherwise want. Plus, Great Wall's -1 movement was not that incredibly powerful in the pre-Civ5 combat system that both allowed unit stacking and did not have any ranged attackers.
Civ5 changed so much that I do not know how well obsoleting mechanics would work if they were implemented in a much larger scope.

Actually wonder obsolescence goes all the way back to CIV1. Even at the simplest difficulty levels I learned not to build the Ancient Wonders because Obsolescence + AI-Grabbing ='d All Pretty Much Useless.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To the OP's point, I understand what you are saying re Death Robots, etc., but to impliment obsolescence based on the attacker's technology means that the builder gets no real benefit from it, ever, really.

• If the Builder of the Great Wall is ahead in technology:
  1. they want generally to maintain that lead, and they want those Artillery ASAP to help take out an adversary or two before everyone else catches up
  2. Their defensive units are probably good enough if they are leading the tech-race that they don't actually need the slow-down effect on invading units.

• If the Builder of the Great wall is behind in technology:
  1. If the effect evaporates when the tech leader researches Dynamite, this will generally mean the player builds the Great Wall, and then in a blink of a game-player's eye, some other player obsoletes it, and all the builder gets out of it is a free walls in one city.

Remember the Great Wall effect* doesn't do anything if no one ever invades the Builder's territory.

LeeS said:

- If the effect evaporates when the tech leader researches Dynamite, this will generally mean the player builds the Great Wall, and then in a blink of a game-player's eye, some other player obsoletes it, and all the builder gets out of it is a free walls in one city.

- Remember the Great wall doesn't do anything if no one ever invades the Builder's territory.

Click to expand...

I think it'd be better if it worked on player-to-player basis, in the sense that only attackers who have researched dynamite would be able to bypass the movement penalty, while at the same time attackers who have not researched dynamite would still suffer from the movement penalty.

It would work out as a "if you let someone build X wonder, then you must complete Y technology to nullify that advantage" - i.e. an advantage defined by temporal limits.

LeeS said:

Remember the Great wall doesn't do anything if no one ever invades the Builder's territory.

Click to expand...

Well, not to be pedantic, but there is +1 and +1GE point, plus the possibility of other boni due to religion or policies...and the fact that you KNOW you won't have to worry about your enemy grabbing it

Oh, and it will add to score, if that matters to anyone...

Crus8r

Delnar_Ersike said:

I stated what the thing was, I did not argue that it was good or bad.

Click to expand...

Except you didn't state why the designers made it based on the Wonder owner's tech vs the affected player's tech (which is still not arguing good or bad). Your statement of "sometimes building a seemingly overpowered wonder was not worth it simply because of how quickly it became obsolete" could easily apply to either scenario (either the Wonder owner needs the tech that obsoletes it or other players can easily grab the tech that obsoletes it).

LeeS said:

[*]If the effect evaporates when the tech leader researches Dynamite, this will generally mean the player builds the Great Wall, and then in a blink of a game-player's eye, some other player obsoletes it, and all the builder gets out of it is a free walls in one city.

Click to expand...

Except no one ever said that -- we said the specific attacker needed the tech. Aka, if you want to invade a nation with the Great Wall, you personally need to know how to use Dynamite...doesn't matter if someone halfway across the globe knows.

LordBalkoth said:

Except no one ever said that -- we said the specific attacker needed the tech. Aka, if you want to invade a nation with the Great Wall, you personally need to know how to use Dynamite...doesn't matter if someone halfway across the globe knows.

Click to expand...

Difference between the specific attacker and the tech leader is meaningless because it is a distinction without a practical difference in terms of the balance issues that are involved. The issue for the builder of the Great Wall remains the same vis-a-vis the pointlessness of building the wonder if it were to obsolete based on some other player's tech level.

And re "Except no one ever said that":
Meaningless in and of itself. The discussion so far has been in two parts (1) What Does the Great Wall do?, and (2), Ought it not to work in some other way (or, rather, why does it work the way it works?)

My entire post (except the bit about Civ1) was directed to #2

Right, thought experiment on how obsolescence works if it is tied to target players rather than the given player:

When a wonder becomes obsolete based on a tech that the current player has, that tech gets a hidden negative effect in that it removes one of the bonuses the player invested production in to achieve. As a result, the player will delay researching that tech until its benefits outweigh the new, negative effects. The player also has full control over when the wonder becomes obsolete.

When a wonder becomes obsolete based on a tech that another player has, that tech gets a hidden positive effect in that it removes one of the bonuses another player invested production in to achieve. As a result, the player is incentivized to research that tech even more. The player who invested production into the wonder does not have control over when the wonder becomes obsolete against any particular player.

As a result, while the current obsolescence mechanic works best when it applies to a tech that the player who built the wonder would want anyways, the proposed obsolescence mechanic that works based on the other players' tech levels works best when it applies to a tech that the players would not necessarily want without the added obsolescence bonus. In both cases, tech trees that contain more techs and do not have clear-cut, mutually exclusive ideal tech paths work best, since players can accommodate their shifted priorities better.

The problem is that the Great Wall in Civ5 follows none of these. Civ5's tech tree has roughly three "best" tech paths (two in multiplayer) that become mutually exclusive around Renaissance: one aims for lategame victory thanks to research labs through Plastics, one aims for a timing push with artillery through Dynamite, and the third one aims to quickly grab Archaeology for the extra tourism before heading into Plastics. Great Wall becomes obsolete through Dynamite, so in the current system, the builder will wish to avoid Dynamite, while the proposed system, the attackers will wish to prioritize Dynamite. This adds nothing to the game: if the builder builds Great Wall for its bonus, they are not looking to win with a timing push, so they would not prioritize Dynamite anyway and lose nothing by delaying it. In the proposed system, the players who suffer most from Great Wall, and therefore the ones looking to obsolete it as soon as possible, are the ones who are looking to end the game before Information Era, ie. they will want to win with a timing push; since Dynamite's artillery are so important to timing pushes, attackers would be prioritizing Dynamite anyway, so the fact that Great Wall's bonus is negated at dynamite does not change tech paths in any way.

In Civ5's current state, obsoleting the Great Wall at Dynamite does not add to the game the same way obsolescence did in previous Civ games, regardless of whether the obsolescence works based on the builder's tech level or the attacker's tech level. Even if Great Wall were to become obsolete at a tech like Industrialization, it would not work as well as obsolescence worked in previous Civ games: the fact that Civ5's tech tree has such clear-cut "best" tech paths mean that even if the Great Wall's builder would wish to avoid Industrialization, there is no real alternative techs that they could go for, they would just be forced to take the hit for those fast Research Labs. Likewise, the fact that artillery are so out of the way of other techs mean that if you wanted to obsolete another player's Great Wall, you would have to sacrifice so much time to do so that it's probably not worth it (remember, you're trying to win via a timing push with artillery).

LeeS said:

The issue for the builder of the Great Wall remains the same vis-a-vis the pointlessness of building the wonder if it were to obsolete based on some other player's tech level.

Click to expand...

How is it pointless to have a wonder that basically says "Once I build this (in the Classical Era) you can't successfully invade me until the last half of the Industrial Era...and that's only if you pursue a specific tech path too?" I mean, you're basically immune to attack for the entire Medieval and Renaissance Eras at an absolute *minimum.*

Delnar_Ersike said:

This adds nothing to the game: if the builder builds Great Wall for its bonus, they are not looking to win with a timing push, so they would not prioritize Dynamite anyway and lose nothing by delaying it.

Click to expand...

See above. The thing the wonder adds to the game is being immune to attack for more than two entire eras. The fact that the owner can artificially extend that even further and the attacker cannot do anything about it is a poor gameplay result. You know how amusement park rides have signs saying "You must be this tall to ride?"

Well, the Great Wall says "You must have this tech to invade."

LordBalkoth said:

How is it pointless to have a wonder that basically says "Once I build this (in the Classical Era) you can't successfully invade me until the last half of the Industrial Era...and that's only if you pursue a specific tech path too?" I mean, you're basically immune to attack for the entire Medieval and Renaissance Eras at an absolute *minimum.*



See above. The thing the wonder adds to the game is being immune to attack for more than two entire eras. The fact that the owner can artificially extend that even further and the attacker cannot do anything about it is a poor gameplay result. You know how amusement park rides have signs saying "You must be this tall to ride?"

Well, the Great Wall says "You must have this tech to invade."

Click to expand...

The "pointlessness" being referred to is the pointlessness from the point of view of the potential builder of the wonder if the wonder becomes obsolete based on the action of some other player. The "action" in this case would be discovering the tech that makes the wonder obsolete. It seems a pretty straightforward analysis to me that there would be nothing more useless (ie, pointless to build) than a wonder that is only effective for as long as some other player chooses to allow it to remain effective.

I'm pretty sure the only reason that it ever becomes obsolete is because the great wall with artillery and other long ranged units would be incredibly over powered. The great wall is already pretty much way OP before artillery but artillery would be absurd with GW.

It's merely for balance with artillery and not for any reason that makes sense in the real world.

LeeS said:

It seems a pretty straightforward analysis to me that there would be nothing more useless (ie, pointless to build) than a wonder that is only effective for as long as some other player chooses to allow it to remain effective.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? Much as I loathe to agree with Craigmak on anything, the Great Wall is insanely overpowered in general, regardless of which way it obsoletes. That other player has to wait *more than two entire eras* to try to remove the effectiveness of your wonder...during which you can be teching or culturing or whatever to your heart's content.

Hell, think of it this way if you want: if the Great Wall gave each of your cities 300 extra combat strength until the attacker researched Nuclear Fusion would you say that's also useless? I mean, it's a wonder "that is only effective for as long as some other player chooses to allow it to remain effective."