damnrunner
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,004
Share any thoughts ideas on what wonders you think should be in or out. Or changed for that matter.
World Wonders Suggestions / Requests
- Thread starter damnrunner
- Start date
damnrunner
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,004
My pet peeve has always been the Manhattan Project
In my view it is a huge waste of resources. It is always more efficient to wait for someone else to build it as once it is built everyone gets the same benefit. This incentivizes no one to build it – and consequently it is rarely built. The in game costs of actually using nukes are already fairly high, but it almost never gets to the point where people actually contemplate their use. Also the game play mechanics of MAD could make for some interesting great power diplo.
I believe the builder of the Manhattan Project should get 1 or two nukes giving them a temporary monopoly on nuclear weapons.
On a related note why do nukes cause global warming? A nuke winter would be far more realistic.
In my view it is a huge waste of resources. It is always more efficient to wait for someone else to build it as once it is built everyone gets the same benefit. This incentivizes no one to build it – and consequently it is rarely built. The in game costs of actually using nukes are already fairly high, but it almost never gets to the point where people actually contemplate their use. Also the game play mechanics of MAD could make for some interesting great power diplo.
I believe the builder of the Manhattan Project should get 1 or two nukes giving them a temporary monopoly on nuclear weapons.
On a related note why do nukes cause global warming? A nuke winter would be far more realistic.
cybrxkhan
Asian Xwedodah
Only two big things I can think of at the moment concerning wonders.
1. No wonders like Leonardo's Workshop or JS Bach's Cathedral. I know they were a big part of the old series, but after the introduction of Great People in Civ4, I think it's proper that they aren't necessary. Some may disagree on this with me, of course...
2. A wider variety of wonders in terms of global/cultural representation. I mean it's okay if the majority of wonders are Western or European or Graeco-Roman, but there should be at least a good amount of wonders from other places too, just to make the game more interesting.
1. No wonders like Leonardo's Workshop or JS Bach's Cathedral. I know they were a big part of the old series, but after the introduction of Great People in Civ4, I think it's proper that they aren't necessary. Some may disagree on this with me, of course...
2. A wider variety of wonders in terms of global/cultural representation. I mean it's okay if the majority of wonders are Western or European or Graeco-Roman, but there should be at least a good amount of wonders from other places too, just to make the game more interesting.
Dragonxander PR
Emperor of the Drakons
I want the Large Hadron Collider as a world wonder:
- Requires Fusion, Superconductors, Robotics, composite materials, (or whaterver Civ V equivalents it needs)
- Gives 1 free scientist & 1 free engineer (if they are still present in Civ V); gives 1 slot for each as well
- Gives +3 GPP for scientist (also, if GP are still on Civ V)
- +25% research in all laboratories
- possible bonus for space ship building
Its downside is that the game would need a good amount of future stuff afterwars to justify its use.
The Bellagio Fountains (National Wonder)--images here:
- requires robotics
- requires aqueduct
- requires composite materials
+ 2
in all cities with aqueduct
+ 3
in its builder city
+ 2 GPP for artist on its home city
+ 1 artist slot
- Requires Fusion, Superconductors, Robotics, composite materials, (or whaterver Civ V equivalents it needs)
- Gives 1 free scientist & 1 free engineer (if they are still present in Civ V); gives 1 slot for each as well
- Gives +3 GPP for scientist (also, if GP are still on Civ V)
- +25% research in all laboratories
- possible bonus for space ship building
Its downside is that the game would need a good amount of future stuff afterwars to justify its use.
The Bellagio Fountains (National Wonder)--images here:
- requires robotics
- requires aqueduct
- requires composite materials
+ 2
in all cities with aqueduct+ 3
in its builder city+ 2 GPP for artist on its home city
+ 1 artist slot
Gamemaster77
PC > Mac
Mabye the Manatten project could be a small wonder, or a national wonder as I think they are in civ4 terms. Then just make it cost less and voila. Everyone is rushing to build it first.
.
bonafide11
Worker
Civ specific wonders is a cool idea. Each Civ should, in addition to unique buildings, have a unique national wonder. Might be hard to come up with one for each civ though, and I get the impression that Civ bonuses are not going to be as standard as they have in previous versions. I think some will have UUs and UBs, some will have special bonuses, but not every Civ will have the same amount of bonuses or UUs/UBs.
Dark_Jedi06
"Deus ex Machina."
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,451
Each nation should have to construct its own Manhattan Project in order to build nuclear weapons, that only makes sense.
Other then that I would like to see them make it far more difficult to be a wonder-monger (i.e. getting rid of marble/stone), so that wonders are spread all over the world and you have to be much more selective in terms of which wonders you choose...though this could just be the result of me playing on Prince, I'm sure on insane difficulties this isn't possible.
Other then that I would like to see them make it far more difficult to be a wonder-monger (i.e. getting rid of marble/stone), so that wonders are spread all over the world and you have to be much more selective in terms of which wonders you choose...though this could just be the result of me playing on Prince, I'm sure on insane difficulties this isn't possible.
The logic behind this is that nuclear proliferation is inevitable. Once the technology is discovered, it's tough to keep a lid on it.
Mainly I want the wonders available at each stage of the game to be of similar power level. For example, there's no reason for the Pyramids to cost 500; they would be a lot more interesting if the cost was reasonable. This would add more strategic depth to the choice among development paths.
Dark_Jedi06
"Deus ex Machina."
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,451
Then for every other nation that has constructed the Manhattan Project, you get a bonus in the production of yours.
Simply giving everyone the ability to construct nukes is silly.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say I don't like Civ Specific ANYTHING.
To me the whole idea of Civ was a big 'what if'? What if the Egyptians had found a source of Iron close by? What if the Zulus had been more agricultural and built an empire? What if the Chinese hadn't stopped uniting and just continued on into western/southern Asia, eastern europe and beyond, learning new technologies and absorbing cultures along the way?
In my mind, that excludes the idea of "Civ Specific" units and wonders. Because what instead of excess, the Romans became obsessed with a western form of Bushido and everyone became citizen samurais? What if they built a "great wall" along the eastern frontier of their empire?
Civ specific buildings was an ok idea. Civ specific units I barely tolerated. Civ specific wonders would probably make me gag. I'd prefer if you could pick from a pool of leader traits and unique buildings form the very start. Kind of a way of deciding fixed elements of your culture before you start, while continuing to keep the "what if" mystery alive.
To me the whole idea of Civ was a big 'what if'? What if the Egyptians had found a source of Iron close by? What if the Zulus had been more agricultural and built an empire? What if the Chinese hadn't stopped uniting and just continued on into western/southern Asia, eastern europe and beyond, learning new technologies and absorbing cultures along the way?
In my mind, that excludes the idea of "Civ Specific" units and wonders. Because what instead of excess, the Romans became obsessed with a western form of Bushido and everyone became citizen samurais? What if they built a "great wall" along the eastern frontier of their empire?
Civ specific buildings was an ok idea. Civ specific units I barely tolerated. Civ specific wonders would probably make me gag. I'd prefer if you could pick from a pool of leader traits and unique buildings form the very start. Kind of a way of deciding fixed elements of your culture before you start, while continuing to keep the "what if" mystery alive.
CornPlanter
Emperor
+1
Civ is all about "what if". Civ-specific something is good because it enhances gameplay, I mean, it's boring to play "different" civilizations different only by name. But I too dont wanna go too far with differences.
When it comes to civ-specific wonders I propose:
Keep all the world wonders as they are, but give unique national benefits to the civ that originally built it. For example, any civ may build the pyramids but if the Egyptians do it, the wonder would have some enhanced effects. This way, you can keep the world wonders as free for all but also give the civs that built them historically some added benefits if they also build them in the game.
Keep all the world wonders as they are, but give unique national benefits to the civ that originally built it. For example, any civ may build the pyramids but if the Egyptians do it, the wonder would have some enhanced effects. This way, you can keep the world wonders as free for all but also give the civs that built them historically some added benefits if they also build them in the game.
bonafide11
Worker
You're crazy, I couldn't disagree more. The more things Firaxis does to make Civs unique, the more fun the game is. I would definitely not play the game if each Civ was the same; I like civs having special abilities and bonuses that reflect their historical precedents. The Civs bonuses should reflect the histories of those Civs. It adds to the game's replayability when each Civ has different bonuses, units, buildings, etc.
If you want to customize your Civ more instead of have it be historical, then you can simply mod it how you want. That's not hard to do.
CornPlanter
Emperor
Actually, no, they do not reflect historical precedents. Unless you show me how building Pyramids was hardcoded into Egyptian genome, there's no reason whatsoever to directly associate Pyramids with Egyptians.
In your game, you can play France and build Pyramids and Taj Mahal. Civ is all about what-if and alternatives, its a game not a movie about one particular history version.
And calling people crazy just because they point to this kinda obvious fact is, well, not so polite.
The building of the pyramids reflect the historical society, culture and religion of the ancient Egyptians. Would you expect for example the Vikings or the Chinese to build a similar building?
CornPlanter
Emperor
Yes.
Truly. Either you are saying that Pyramids are hardcoded into Egyptian genome and they absolutely must have built them. Or you are saying that Pyramids are result of many different factors, including but not limited to random events, series of decisions made by Egyptian leaders, geographical place, et cetera. Things that change in Civ from game to game. And most of all, in civ game you are the leader to make decisions.
I dont object some differences, they make gameplay way more interesting. But I do object too many differences. I dont wanna draw a line nor could I, but in my opinion we can have a bit more differences between civilizations than we had in Civ4. But only a bit.
------
And speaking of Chinese pyramids, the Wonder I'd really like to see in Civ is Terracotta Army
Yes.
Truly. Either you are saying that Pyramids are hardcoded into Egyptian genome and they absolutely must have built them. Or you are saying that Pyramids are result of many different factors, including but not limited to random events, series of decisions made by Egyptian leaders, geographical place, et cetera. Things that change in Civ from game to game. And most of all, in civ game you are the leader to make decisions.
I dont object some differences, they make gameplay way more interesting. But I do object too many differences. I dont wanna draw a line nor could I, but in my opinion we can have a bit more differences between civilizations than we had in Civ4. But only a bit.
------
And speaking of Chinese pyramids, the Wonder I'd really like to see in Civ is Terracotta Army
Of course, if the "Egyptians" would instead have lived in Iceland, worshipped Norse gods and praticed fishing and hunting, they would probably not have built the pyramids we know. However, I do not think any random civ living in the Egypt area at that time would have started a similar project. The pyramids of Egypt is closely linked to the Egyptian culture and religion, and as I see it the Egyptians in Civilization is part of that culture. Otherwise, we could just call them "Random Civ nr 7", "The Desert Rats" or something...
I know that both South Americans and Chinese have built pyramides, but they are not that similar to the Egyptian pyramids in form and function and could therefore be regarded as unique wonders for their civilizations.
