Wonders

D

daft

The fargone
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
1,398
Location
New World
to me it's all a fairy tale, with the Americans being able to Y!build the Pyramids, the Mongols building the Great Wall, or the Polynesians the Statue of Zeus.
MAKE WONDERS BEING AVAILABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED ONLY FOR NATIONS THAT BUILD THEM IN REALITY!
add more wonders, there are so many great monuments from so many countries not included in the game. Multiple National wonders should be available to all tribes.
wonders should all have different levels of culture acquired after they are built, the great ones, the most.
This would mean some cultures would be richer culturally, some poorer, but that is reality, the game is based in large part in history but it cheats the nations which contributed the most to world culture by making them struggle to build wonders which they built in reality, making them face enemy units which the enemy in reality would never have been able to use!
This is why you see in this game the Americans getting conquered by the Zulu, or the Chinese by Indonesia, it's pathetic.
 
The point of this game is that the Zulus can invade America, not so they can't. Civilization is a massive what if game, not a what was. What if Indonesia conquers China? What if Denmkar built the Parthenon? What if the Huns became cultured?
 
Hey, why not also make the game so that it plays out exactly the same way each time you play it - wouldn't that be great fun?
 
Isn't this the exact same complaint you've made in at least two other threads? Why are you making a new one?
 
Erm, the unrealistic thing about the wonders isn't who can build them but that they actually are global spells providing magic bonuses that has absolutely nothing to do with what the real buildings are in most cases. Also, the magical blocking of building them to other civilizations is neither realistic nor fun. A "wonder" should be a building providing culture and tourism with the current system and the bonuses given by the current wonders could be replaced by social projects unlocked by social policies. Seriously, the wonder race is one of the worst aspects of the civ games. I would definitely want to see it gone.
 
Maybe they're one of the worst aspects to you. I think they're awesome and I hope they stick around.
 
It's better if no one responds to these kind of spammy threads. They offer no real opportunity for discussion, and are largely a closed statement of the author's opposition to the philosophy of the game. If you want to play a game that is inextricably tied to historical accuracy, which in itself is a bit of a fallacy, then go read a book.
 
Wonders are the most unique parts of the games so no.
However I think they could include unique national wonders as unique features (Louvre as National Museum, Wall Street as Stock Exchange etc.)
 
I like wonders. It's the wonder race that I hate. Few things are so enraging as getting beaten to a wonder by a few turns.
 
Hemul said:
Erm, the unrealistic thing about the wonders isn't who can build them but that they actually are global spells providing magic bonuses that has absolutely nothing to do with what the real buildings are in most cases. Also, the magical blocking of building them to other civilizations is neither realistic nor fun. A "wonder" should be a building providing culture and tourism with the current system and the bonuses given by the current wonders could be replaced by social projects unlocked by social policies. Seriously, the wonder race is one of the worst aspects of the civ games. I would definitely want to see it gone.
Click to expand...

Hemul said:
I like wonders. It's the wonder race that I hate. Few things are so enraging as getting beaten to a wonder by a few turns.
Click to expand...
I get what your are saying here, and from an logical pov. I agree with you about the (lack of) realism of the wonders. However, I also think it's important to realize how big part of the game that wonders is for many players, and for many play styles. If you play a none-agressive game style, the wonder race is a key factor in motivating you to reach certain benchmarks first, as well as giving your the satisfaction of actually "doing well" in the game. I have often thought about alternative ways to implement wonders in the game that will be less "dicey" but I also have reached the conclusion that civ without wonders as they are now would probably be a lot less fun to play.
 
The game setup is not realistic. Huns walking on ruins of Washington, prior to that building the Statue of Liberty.
I'm not saying get rid of Wonders, aggressive barbarian nomads should be able to beat you by the means of war, it should not be made possible for them to beat you at culture as well, they have no business building wonders.
Face it, some civilizations were much better at building great monuments than others, this should be recognized in the game.
 
Egyptian UA and the tradition one? What about the pantheon belief? Warlike civs are more likely to take honor and skip religion.

You do also realise that leader flavours are set up so the more warlike leaders are less likely to build wonders than the peaceful ones anyway?

And if it's possible for Greece to beat the Huns in warfare, why shouldn't the Huns be able to win on culture. It rarely happens anyway but you are the only one who complains on the off chance the Huns spawn by Mt Fuji and take the Liberty opener for all the cities they don't raze.
 
daft said:
The game setup is not realistic.
Click to expand...

So?

daft said:
Huns walking on ruins of Washington, prior to that building the Statue of Liberty.
I'm not saying get rid of Wonders, aggressive barbarian nomads should be able to beat you by the means of war, it should not be made possible for them to beat you at culture as well, they have no business building wonders.
Click to expand...

If the player (AI or human) wants to invest the time and resources in producing a wonder, why not? That's the strategy they're going for.

daft said:
Face it, some civilizations were much better at building great monuments than others, this should be recognized in the game.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
daft said:
This is why you see in this game the Americans getting conquered by the Zulu, or the Chinese by Indonesia, it's pathetic.
Click to expand...

Last I saw the game was called Civilisation V, not World History Simulator 2000. Otherwise I would always play as the British and win
 
would a scenario setup provide what daft wants or maybe a mod plus scenario?
 
daft said:
to me it's all a fairy tale, with the Americans being able to Y!build the Pyramids, the Mongols building the Great Wall, or the Polynesians the Statue of Zeus.
Click to expand...

i read up to here. and no. this isn't the first time someone has had this idea, but it still makes just as little sense. if it's not available to anyone but who built it originally, it's just another ub. they're wonders for a reason.
 
I hate the very idea of this. If you want realistic, then play paradox interactive's games. In doing this you destroy the very idea of civ, where you can see Arabia battling Japan for dominance over Cahokia. Please, leave history to the grand strategy wargames. Also, what would you do for nations that didn't build any wonders, like the Zulus?
 
Three options:
-They're screwed
-South Africa is their spiritual successor, so they get something South African, even if it was built by the English
-You make stuff up

The second option is probably the best, but it also makes me wonder who gets the State of Liberty: France or America?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

King Phaedron
Giants and Aliens
Replies
4
Views
416
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
D
Civ 7 idea - different cultural and border mechanics
Replies
1
Views
681
Naokaukodem
Naokaukodem
King Phaedron
Evolving Civs and Leaders - Aztec to Mexico, Cherokee to America
2 3
Replies
44
Views
2K
Alexander's Hetaroi
Alexander's Hetaroi
Bonyduck Campersang
Mix-'n-Match Feature
Replies
4
Views
341
Zegangani
Zegangani
D
Turn Phases
Replies
1
Views
365
Quintillus
Quintillus
Top Bottom