(28a) Counterproposal: Policy Wonders unlocked by number of policies instead of through completion of a tree

[SpecifiedUsername]

Counterproposal to https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-not-finishers-provide-wonder-unlocks.679396/

Proposal: make policy wonders no longer require a specific finisher but a number of policies corresponding with the other wonders on their tech tier e.g. sankore & Alhambra 7 the forbidden palace 8 and so on. [Recursive clarification: The opener for that policy tree would also be required. For example, Sankore would require 7 policies and for the player to have opened Tradition.]

This is a counter to policy wonders being available with just an opener. I see it as a a wrong move in a good direction. We want for these wonders to not be guaranteed to players and we want flexibity of building a sankore as warmonger if decide to make it your priority or a progress player Alhambra and so on. It keeps it open if you go 2 tradition 4 authority, and one statecraft, or 6 progres 6 statecraft. Choice and wonder race are one of the most enjoyful parts if VP let us enhance it.

 

[Stalker0]

My issue with this version is now whenever I finish a tree, I effectively gain access to 3 new wonders instead 1. Aka theirs no wonder differentiation between going all tradition or all authority, I can still pick up both sankore and alhambra. Aka this is a power boost to the core style of playing the game that removes the differentiation of choosing different policy trees.

It also opens these wonders up to "Wonder Policy reduction" abilities such as the Prophecy belief....which may be a good or bad thing depending on your thoughts.

 

[SpecifiedUsername]

It's not a boost, it's a nerf, to the player. You would need to really beeline, invest and not choose other wonders, not to mention disruption normal tech tree disruption for example a warmonger entering mediebak through education. So it adds a lot of new possibilities at a very high cost. Cause now all AI can grab those wonders and they are no longer guaranteed to a player. Now you can't just take as granted you get sankore as tradition, production high progress or authority AI may snatch it.

 

[KlHannibal2]

I would keep this as it is now.

 

[Recursive]

I sponsor this proposal. Technically, the original wording of the OP was ambiguous about whether an opener was required or not, but they clearly intended for the opener to be required in their rationale, so I have edited it as they no longer can do so.

Proposal Sponsors: Recursive.

(Sponsors have indicated that they are able and willing to perform the code changes required for this proposal if the community votes Aye on it. Other coders are free to sponsor this as well. A proposal without a sponsor will not advance to the Voting Phase.)