I didnt want to get dragged into this but I feel compelled to
1.) Hypothetical situations where one builds Stonehenge with stone online are VERY hypothetical. It demands 4 techs and workers doing tasks other than feeding the capital.
2.) % multipliers, whether they are
,
,
or whatever else excite some (ahem, new, cough cough) players, but often, this is not where its at. They used to excite me. % amplifiers are often insignificant, especially early game.
Take the Pavilion lets say you even built it in a city with a library and a uni. 2
+2
+3
= 7
+25% of 7 = 8.75 or 9
. If this happened next to a CRE civ who had the same buildings which add up to 2+2+2+3= 9
. Congrats, you almost matched them with your amazing
% multiplier building. Except they have the momentum because of the initial 2
and the half priced libraries and theaters so not really.
And the Steele tends to multiply less base
than this for most of its life.
The Pavilion gets huge and quite significant if you add it to wonder cities, hermitage, cathedral or
corp cities.
The Steele will never make it to
corp cities.
Nor will it make it to era where building
or turning up
on the slider is advisable.
Think the Stock Exchange will make a big difference unless you have a religion, a corp, settled priests or merchants, or Spiral Miranet? Think it will make a big difference if you never mess with the slider to bring
up to 100%? Think again.
In my noble/prince days I loved factories and coal plants so much all my cities would get mad
and shrink in population. This is a prime example of thinkng
% multiplier exceeding base
production fallacy.
Still a fan of factories and coal plants, but bio and sushi will increase population, giving more squares to work, which can improve total
as well or almost as well. Or better yet, it can provide an opportunity to build base
first, which will make the factories/coal plants get up sooner AND have your cities be able to deal with the
better.
3.) CRE + Stonehenge is most often redundant. In some strategies, the great prophet points might be worth it. Combined wth a cultural victory mindset, caste system and possibly Sistene Chapel it MAY be worth it.
4.) Otherwise, Stonehenge is sometimes worth it. Obsolete just did it on a deity game on a challenging map with Gandhi. Im playing a team co-op game where were 2 (Lincoln & Sitting Bull) vs. 3 coalitions of 3. Seemed to make sense for Lincoln to chop it, as we share wonders, and there were lots of trees to chop.
5.) Centering the globe is not usually a big deal and it can most likely wait until calander. Rough position on globe can be safely assumed through terrain types. Thorough exploration of unclaimed and rival territory is key, however. In terms of just base exploration, chariots or even warriors, scouts, galleys, workboats will give the player more important reconnaissance knowledge than Stonehenge.
6.) Conclusion SH is very niche and most likely more so with Zara.
7.) Oh god
what did I do
now Im in this argument
kochman its not personal, just my 2 cents. This is the forum, yo. If people don't speak their minds here, it won't add +25%
to anybody's game.