Why ever pick Ancestral Hall over Warlord's Throne

[Victoria]

because you have to consider where to put it very carefully to maximise its utility.

Normally the capital as you often get an envoy in at least one military state, if not you should be actively pursuing that first quest if possible.
The irony is that if you have 3 military states you can get a lot of settlers before AH.

 

[acluewithout]

Normally the capital as you often get an envoy in at least one military state, if not you should be actively pursuing that first quest if possible.
The irony is that if you have 3 military states you can get a lot of settlers before AH.

Huh. I have literally never thought of that. Good point. I think I may suddenly like AH and Red City States just that little bit more now.

 

[iammaxhailme]

I’m not a huge fan of the T1 Plaza Buildings anyway.

I really disliked the whole Gov Plaza and T1 Buildings things because they all seemed so bland.

It’s taken ages, but I’ve grown the like the Gov Plaza much more once I realised I didn’t actually have to build it without fail in the middle of my empire and spam districts around it. These days I just put it down adjacent to my City Centre and use it to get a Campus or Theatre Square up to +3 or buff a later IZ. You know, the Plaza is actually kinda cool. It even has a Wonder!

I liked the Ancestral Hall much more once I realised the +50% Settler bonus is only in one City. That’s makes it much more interesting, because you have to consider where to put it very carefully to maximise its utility. The timing is also awkward, but I kinda like that - you have to really balance when you’re building it and how much you get out of it.

You also get more value out of AH if you’re still settling Cities later in the game, maybe with Monumentality or Hic Sunc Draconis. That can be pretty fun, with the builder letting you chop in districts etc. Not optimal, but fun.

I like that the Audience Chamber provides a “Tall” mechanic, but I find the way it does it is quite boring. Wasn’t it even nerfed a little in one patch? I’m not really sure what would make the AC more interesting. I guess it’s fine as is, but I feel like it’s missing something.

I don’t know if I like the Warlord’s throne at all. I don’t like the bonus applies to all Cities, I guess. It’s obviously a powerful bonus, but it just doesn’t ... eh, interest me. It feels like the wrong bonus for a building to have - it’s more something that would make more sense as a pantheon (which would be op), government or cultural ability. I think it maybe WT needs a rethink, but perhaps the issue is that I just haven’t played with it enough.

I am not a big fan of the T1 or T2 buildings either, because I find that Ancestral Hall and Intelligence Agency are the best choice for me the vast majority of the time. It's not a matter of wanting different buildings/effects, it's mostly that I wish the buildings were balanced better.

Normally the capital as you often get an envoy in at least one military state, if not you should be actively pursuing that first quest if possible.
The irony is that if you have 3 military states you can get a lot of settlers before AH.

Wait... does the military city state bonus apply to non-combat units??? I never thought of that. Maybe I should stop treating those CS's as so useless for my non-war games.

 

[Victoria]

Wait... does the military city state bonus apply to non-combat units???

yesssss
it says units

 

[Casualty of war]

If you haven't had the early Suzerain of Valletta game, you have been missing out. Settlers popping out of your capital, like dandelions on your lawn after a rain, then plopping them down, Faith-buying whatever they need to be almost immediately contributing to your empire, over and over again. It's almost unfair. Akkad and Kabul are great for warring but Valletta is just great.

I like forward settling with this arrangement to antagonize my neighbors into attacking then Faith-Walling after they've committed to the attack; the AI will just grind their troops to paste then you can go clean up the rest of their nation.

 

[darkace77450]

I don't recall any nerfs to early game Culture but I could be wrong.

They nerfed Culture from Great Works of Writing.

I am not a big fan of the T1 or T2 buildings either, because I find that Ancestral Hall and Intelligence Agency are the best choice for me the vast majority of the time.

T1 is a matter of playstyle (tall vs wide vs aggressive). T2, though, is pretty bad. Aside from Hungary, I can't fathom why anyone would bother with the Foreign Ministry when the Intelligence Agency and Grand Master's Temple are available.

 

[knighterrant81]

They nerfed Culture from Great Works of Writing.

I'd say that's not really applicable to the first 50 turns of the game.

 

[Galvatron]

I don't choose any one option every time. WT is too strong, and AC is too weak, but it's not a done deal. If you're not going to conquer anyone WT is useless, and if you've done settling already AH is useless.

As it happens I just used AC for the first time in a while, but it's not the only time I've used it.

 

[Fluphen Azine]

I play Pangaea and I dunno if the fall patch changed things but I seem to have more room in many of my games now.
I have been building this Hall more on many of my games when I have enough space to settle 10 to 15+ cities.
However I seem to fall into this trap of building it in my Capital and use the policy card with a 2 or 3 charged Magnus.
What happens is, I seem to be building settlers for 70 turns or more from only my Capital.
This seems to hinder my Finish time and push me into later turns.
Should I be more focused on building settlers from my Expos as well or only from the Hall which seems to build them every 6 to 8 turns or so??

I feel like I am doing something wrong where I am playing friendly with all Civs and just expanding while trade is through the roof!?
The feeling of a trap is because I am usually at 2 to 4 cities waiting to get to the Hall delaying settlers and I have to wait for Feudalism to make the "free" builder have more value.
It works out and seems a safer way to play as I build Army and Infrastructure but playing "nice" seems to delay my hostile take over which usually has to wait for Bombers of some sort.

 

[Disgustipated]

I vote 3rd choice. I may be the only one to ever use it. But in my current game I had all my cities already conquered or settled so ancestral hall wasn't really an option. And while I did liberate one city (as seen in the funny screenshots thread) in my current game, I don't often get involved in the liberation game. I have inferior troops and lack oil, so going up against Germany isn't easy to begin with. I was only able to do it with bombers whose engines use aluminum, not oil. So Warlords Throne wasn't really a good option for me this game. I did conquer Egypt (and be extension England since Egypt conquered all of Victoria's cities), but I had to go full bore on army to do it (because of Egypt's UU), I couldn't spare the time to build the government district.

 

[Sostratus]

Should I be more focused on building settlers from my Expos as well or only from the Hall which seems to build them every 6 to 8 turns or so??

The penalty of 1 pop is almost negligible if the city building it is small, since you can grow from size 3->4 in a couple turns. But settlers are expensive too, so usually i end up with some combo of magnus city not using pop to build them and then if I'm gonna settle 10-20 cities, I might produce half those settlers in other places. It's more worth to have the city down 10 turns early and pay 1 pop (again, which is nothing in a small city) than wait to get it from the capital if you're trying to get a lot of settlers out at once. In my opinion and experience, of course.

 

[sdtum21]

And then there's me who almost always picks the Audience Chamber. I've always been a tall player, even in Civ VI,