Has anyone tried this?

I was giving this some thought but unfortunately the idea is highly situational and I have yet to experiment but here goes.

I play mostly on epic pace and just started deity games.

First off, what is the production>gold exchange if an AI beats you to a wonder? 1 for 1?

My idea would work best when you have quite a few city states around your starting location (which you discover first) and finding a gold ruin (preferably 2). I usually start out Scout-Mon-Shrine. Depending on production in your cap, shrine should finish around 28ish.

With 360+ gold in the bank, instead of building a worker, would it make sense to start a wonder that tends to go very early? Like the Temple of Artemis. (I could be wrong but I recall seeing this go as early as turn 35) Not that you stand a chance getting it, but if the gold conversion gives you enough to purchase a worker in 10 turns instead of the 15 or more turns to build one ... would it be worth it to get your first settler out a few more turns earlier?

Dunno, just thought I'd throw this out there.

Hi - yes. I posted about this a while back but can't find the thread. Upshot of the responses is that the fail gold is about 25% of the hammers and most people indicated they've got stuff to be building unless they're teching too slowly.

Personally, I use this very occasionally in the early game if I don't want to tank my economy (and BPT) with an extra unit's maintenance but not so much lately. I usually want the wonder though so it's usually also a disappointment!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I use this strategy frequently with Venice, since there are times before Guilds where there is nothing available that I want to build, so I pursue wonders knowing that I probably won't get them, and if I do, it helps with the culture bottleneck one has as that civ.

I would only do it for settlers, and even then it's not as good as hard building it in 9 turns or so. I believe it's 1:1 hammers to gold for lost wonders on standard.

Wouldn't bother getting workers this way though, just build a scout and take someone else's workers.

It certainly sounds interesting but I never did it, it's easier to steal an isolated worker from another Civ and then another worker from a CS and then perch in front of their borders and steal another one for giggles. Soon enough, you'll be able to produce your own worker in 5-6 turns if you really need it.

If you have nothing else you want to build, and you haven't tech-ed Guilds yet, then there is nothing better you CAN do with your hammers. It's certainly a situation in which you should minimise hammers so as to maximise food, but some money is still better than building military units you don't need. I suppose you could give them, but hammers for 5 influence sucks.

Not sure exactly what the ratio for wonder-fail hammers is, but I'm pretty sure it's less than 2:1. I've reserved intentionally failing a wonder for cases where there's nothing left to build. Rarely happens, but as Attila/Catherine with a production-heavy start, it can occur. Even then, it's often better to have an extra ranged unit or meatshield, but they do cost maintenance so its not a case of more=merrier.

Also, the scenario described in the OP indicates two better options for obtaining the initial worker, which is what the end-goal is defined as. First, you've met several cities states (the primary source for the bankroll)... ... there you go. Pick whichever one doesn't have a quest you'll win and take a worker. Second, you've established a bankroll which must be pretty close to just buying one outright (they are 310 on standard; you indicated epic so I assume they are 460ish?) Having the capital work the luxury tiles for a dozen turns or so while targeting some encampments would probably be a better option. Maybe even sending your starting 3-4 units to pillage tiles of a neighbor. If you do, keep in mind that if they have tiles to pillage, it indicates that they have a worker, you may end up able to have your cake and eat it.

It seems that you have interpreted the OP as being all about the worker. In that case, of course the best way to get them is to steal them <T20 from the nearest AI and make peace when you have 1 or 2. There is absolutely no argument about this. It's game-changing.

But he mentions other things he could do with the gold, like settlers, etc. Certainly there is a debate as to whether buying settlers is the best use of 500 gold (I'd say it's good only for Skilldorado games, which are kinda cheese anyway), but if the argument is what to do with hammers when you've nothing better, than wonders aren't a bad idea. You might even get them. About 1 game in 20 I see GL/HG/etc still available really late, for some bizarre reason.

The purchase doesn't need to be a worker. I did try this out with Russia and ended buying a quick granary (2 bananas 1 wheat tile) and saved myself 8 turns. Unfortunately, I spawned next to the Mongols and he wouldn't accept bribes to attack someone else. Doesn't take long for aggro AI's to reach 15 unit armies. ESH.

At least on deity the AI's have an economy so gold will never be a problem provided your cap has some good tiles. That's what I hated when I first started playing on king. No one ever has any money.

Wonder fail is 1:1 ratio with gold. Got over 1000 gold when I lost Hubble one game by two turns.

consentient said:

Skilldorado

Click to expand...

That's awesome! I will never be able to call it anything else, ever again.

I suppose one advantage to this is say I build Great Library to get some free gold to get to 500 for a free settler, that then allows you to keep growing your capital rather than stagnating growth.

Redaxe said:

I suppose one advantage to this is say I build Great Library to get some free gold to get to 500 for a free settler, that then allows you to keep growing your capital rather than stagnating growth.

Click to expand...

Buying a settler is nice, but free is not an accurate characterization of this technique. Browd has convinced me that the gold conversion rate is not terrible, and that early in the game, one does not have the option to put hammer production towards gold.

beetle said:

Buying a settler is nice, but free is not an accurate characterization of this technique. Browd has convinced me that the gold conversion rate is not terrible, and that early in the game, one does not have the option to put hammer production towards gold.

Click to expand...

I think you're right.

6 or 7 production per turn in the early game isn't really enough gold to make it a compelling choice.
Maybe if you had stagnant gold income and 480 in reserve and you wanted a few turns of gold to get to 500 (providing you know that a Wonder is about 4 turns from being completed by another civ) you could buy that settler earlier than possible and perhaps avoiding having stagnant growth through building a settler - either way I don't think its a strategy that is really reliable enough to exploit.