1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

First impressions: Wonders still suck (big time).

Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by Ryika, Mar 11, 2015.

  1. legalizefreedom

    legalizefreedom Inefficiency Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    633
    Location:
    Texas
    If you're afraid the AI will win before you, just stop them from doing it. If there's one thing I can say for the victory conditions its that all of them (I believe) can be stopped by another civ.
     
  2. whyidie

    whyidie Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,182
    Your point stands. The game experience is not a good one for you and the changes to wonders did nothing to improve it. Based on everything you've written, I'm utterly convinced of this.

    I think the point Bandobras Took is making is that there may be others who actually enjoy the experience and their gameplay actually benefited from the wonder changes....though they have gotten lost in some of the pointless jabber that you have suffered through.

    Based my experiences with the demo, I did not buy the game. Based on your excellent critique I know that I'll stick to Civ5 if I want a challenging experience with the AI.

    While you may not have taken any value out of his post, I certainly did, if only as a reminder that maybe there is hope for those of us who aren't skilled enough to build 90% of the wonders on Civ5 deity.
     
  3. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    But that's the thing. Even if I were playing on Mercury I wouldn't make them because I can see that their bonuses are weak (again, not all). I fail to see how the fact that you can make them on a lower difficulty somehow make them better or worth it.

    Take Angkor Wat in Civ5. It sucks. Nobody will start to argue that the wonder is actually okay because you can have fun making it on Prince.
    A couple months ago there was a "make your best wonders list" by players. And it was pretty clear that the best wonders for Prince players were also often the same for Deity players. The only difference was that Deity players had to cross some of their playbook because of how unlikely they were to get it, like the Great Library. But it was not because the bonus is poor, if it was available you'd see a lot of Deity player making the Great Library.

    I just don't get where this mentality comes from. If you don't care whether or not a wonder is good then how does that affect you that someone would like them to be good ? If you make them regardless of their value why do you even care about a discussion about their value ?

    I play total war games casually for example. If someone was making a thread to say pikes are crap I'd probably just say to myself: "Ha maybe, fix it if it need fixing, I still make them anyway". But if someone with more hindsight were to give me a better understanding of why they are poor I'd probably agree that they need'd a buff rather than making the argument that "I still make them anyway".
     
  4. whyidie

    whyidie Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,182
    Great example. To your point, even when I'm goofing around, I never build Angkor Wat. Its gains are so detached from a useful mechanic I just can't bring myself to do it.

    Are the majority of BE wonders in that category ?
     
  5. Barathor

    Barathor Emperor

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,202
    For the Gene Vault, I made a quick little mod if anyone wants to test drive it.

    I somewhat turned it into the Pyramids of Beyond Earth, having two free workers appear in the city where it's built, alongside the existing ability of providing free workers to new cities.

    This way, at least you get a much quicker return on your investment of production and time (which is quite valuable early in the game).

    I'm also considering reducing the initial free workers to only 1.
     
  6. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    Not all, there are a few good ones. The most problematic are those on a remote tech, costing 1600+ for an average bonus.
     
  7. TLHeart

    TLHeart King

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2005
    Messages:
    615
    and civ stated as a single player game, and that is all I play, and therefor all I care about. This is the first civ game I can complete in one setting.

    And if you don't win by turn 250 to 270 after the patch, on apollo, the AI will.

    And the middle to end game is still just press enter for next turn, so that I can build and use the winning wonder. Bad design.
     
  8. whyidie

    whyidie Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,182
    If handful of good with the rest closer to Angkor levels...I get the point. Doesn't bode well.

    Good thread idea though compare wonders in BE to their counterparts in 5.
     
  9. GAGA Extrem

    GAGA Extrem Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,589
    Gender:
    Male
    I am not a competetive player - I don't play MP games. But on the flip side I don't like to make sub-par decisions in my SP games. So: Efficient play? Yes. Competetive play? No.

    I think that is a pretty big difference...
     
  10. JokerJace

    JokerJace Prince

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    492
    One is an element of the other I would say. So that's a rather arbitrary differentiation.
     
  11. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    They are not directly comparable because of the different tech layouts.

    Civ5 has a rather linear tree. It is easy for the game designer to aproximately know when someone will reach a technology. As a result being able to construct a wonder is directly a consequence of your natural tech advancement. It's easy to know that quite quickly you'll get Archery and therefore a long term bonus like ToA is a good idea at that point. Or if you make the Great Wall in civ4 it comes when Barbarians are relevant.

    CivBE on the other hand uses a tech web so it's a lot harder to know where the player goes (although due to the current metagame there's not that much variation but let's put that aside). As a result the whole long-term, short-term ideas are hard to judge because you have no clue when the player will be able to build the stuff. Also contrary to civ5, many technologies are optional. You don't unlock wonders automatically, you invest into the techs to build the wonders.

    This is why CivBE wonders, especially the outer ones, have to be very good to justify their tech cost on top of their production cost. And then try to go for immediate bonuses rather than long-term ones (unless you're close to the center). Some fit this idea and are those considered good. On the other hand take Mass Driver. It's almost 1000 production, in a tech leaf providing only this wonder and for a defense bonus in the city... urgh.
     
  12. tedeviatings

    tedeviatings Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2015
    Messages:
    126
    There was one game where I was on my way to victory, sending angels through the emancipation gate (~20% done so maybe 8 to 10 turns more to go) when the Huatama AI finished it's mindflower. At this point I wasn't especially worried. But I still lost two turns later due to Huatamas transcendence victory. He wasn't bordering me, not even close.
    I later though about what I could have done differently to win this game still. He was too far away to invade in just 2 turns without prior knowledge. At this point I realized the best way to stop this from happening is winning faster and nothing else.
     
  13. liv

    liv Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,394
    You do have prior knowledge if you want to. You can follow his progress all the time and if you have a spy in his area you can tell if he is building the may flower.

    I always invade the harmony players long before they get to 13 as they can win quickly if they get that thing built
     
  14. Ryika

    Ryika Lazy Wannabe Artista

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,395
    But while you delay your victory by killing that guy on the other end of the world everyone else will make victory progress. Chances are, you're in the exact same position 10 turns later. "Winning faster" is certainly not the only way to win, but I agree with tedeviatings that it's by far the easiest and thus the "best" way to do it if things don't go horribly wrong in the mid-game.
     
  15. liv

    liv Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,394
    I like this actually. It is the only challenge I find in the game. All else is easy
     
  16. GAGA Extrem

    GAGA Extrem Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,589
    Gender:
    Male
    Maybe, but I don't really know how else to describe it.
    Again, I am not playing efficiently because I have to. I do it because it fits my playstile. I am a builder, so optimizing and improving my civ and cities ist the main goal of the game for me...

    As Acken said: That's not really possible.

    I think if you want to imagine how it feels gameplay wise, think of the end game wonders in CIV5. They suffer the same problem:
    -> Hubble is only good for Science games because it has nothing to offer except for that direct boost.
    -> The CN Tower will rarely allow you to recoup its cost because the game will be over soon.
    -> The Great Firewall is cool in theory, but it's placed at a tech that you would never touch if you aim for a culture victory (which is basicially like CIV:BE techs behave if you go for an affinity victory).
    -> And lastetly there are some wonder that are like Angkor Wat placed in a dead-end tech that offers nothing else and leads nowhere (that would be the CIV:BE Mass Driver).
     
  17. Lexicus

    Lexicus Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    25,564
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    This is actually an excellent point, and made me realize that with a tech web it is probably harder to balance everything, not just wonders.
     
  18. Manannan

    Manannan Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2012
    Messages:
    424
    Um, what?

    Hubble is good for every victory condition, as everything in the game is directly tied to your science output. I aim for it during every cultural and diplomatic game I play (yes, on diety) BEFORE sling-shotting my way to the internet/globalization as it's bonus great scientists for the player, and no science/space race bonuses for the AI.

    The CN tower is free population, free happiness, and free broadcast towers in every single city you own; how exactly are you measuring that it won't "recoup it's cost"? Not exactly an easy thing to quantify. If you have 3 small cities that are struggling to get their infrastructure up popping the CN tower in one of your more developed cities immediately pays itself back across your empire, nevermind trying to predict it's other benefits. It isn't always worth it, true, but for a wide empire it can be an excellent wonder.

    The Great Firewall isn't particularly aimed at a player playing culturally, although it's a nice thing to snag to deny it to other players. It's well placed on the tech tree if you want to warmonger while ignoring culture, although in practice I find it's rarely a concern with the AI. A wonder not being useful because of AI behaviour, and a wonder not being useful because of it's design are two different things.

    Angkor Wat is of course useless, as is the Mass Driver, but I'd just like to make mention of New Terran Myth and Deep Memory as also being utterly useless wonders in terrible parts of the tech web.
     
  19. Minor Annoyance

    Minor Annoyance Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,247
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario
    Also, if you can take down someone to stop their victory, then you can probably continue on to a conquest victory. In which case why not do that to start with?
     
  20. Minor Annoyance

    Minor Annoyance Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,247
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario
    Here's a news flash: I find your characterization of me quite insulting.:trouble:

    It seem like you're saying if I'm winning to easily then it is my fault for trying too hard. I'm really not trying that hard. I played on Prince in Civ 4. I had heard you should never found a religion but I always founded one because it's fun. I'm sure someone has done that math and found you could win 20 turns earlier by not founding a religion (and instead capturing a holy city) but I don't feel like skipping that element just so a week later I'll finish the game 20 turns earlier.:religion:

    In civ 5 I played on King and couldn't win on Emperor without choosing or setting up a map to my advantage. I usually picked a victory and ideology ahead of time and stuck to that rather than just doing whatever the easiest victory and "best" ideology is. Although I wished it was harder in the later game than the early game, Civ 5 worked for be in terms of difficulty, and one level I couldn't do without luck or cheating, and two whole difficulty levels that I was just about never going to touch. So there was plenty of challenge to be had. This game I can win on the highest level and I'm not trying especially hard.
    Civ 5 was big enough that the things I did which were probably inefficient at least seemed like a good idea and I'd have to have done some careful analysis to determine otherwise. Civ 5 felt like I was building a civilization to stand the test of time, and part of that was that it took time. A week and 450 turns for a civ 5 game. BE I do 300 turns in an afternoon.

    It seems like you want me to play the game like Sim City :c5citystate: which has no way to win and you just make your own goals. That play style worked in that game because it had complex interacting systems and you couldn't tell how everything would work out until you tried. In BE I know how it will turns out. If I go straight for victory, I'll probably win. If I take a detour in tech I'll lose, and that detour won't open up a lot of new element for me to enjoy playing around with because I was so close to winning anyway I no longer need to build up a colony. I used to get augmentation and build the augmentary as supremacy, but I realized that by the time I got and built it I was so close to the end I'd never get good use out of it anyway. So I stopped.:sad:
    I recently enjoyed playing as seeing how fast I could get every technology, to test how overpowered academy spam was, which I had never tried before. I got everything in 307 turns. I set my own goal outside of the games win conditions which I turned off. I got to build far more stuff that time However I was basically gaming the system which I usually don't do because other things are more fun. Not in this game though.

    Am I expected to play this game like it's a set of green plastic army men in the sand, just setting up my own game and deciding how it plays out and when I win because there is nothing working against me?:gripe:
    As a child I got tired or action figures pretty early in favor of video games because there was some challenge to figure out how it works. I got civ 1 for SNES back when games didn't get big release days and actual game stores were certain to have it in stock so I had to get my mother to drive me around. I was quite excited for the game, :trophy: but I digress.

    My point is, I am not this person who's dissecting the game and min-maxing and killing the fun all on my own, or whatever character you've drawn for me that makes it easier to disregard my dissatisfaction. I am the type of player who goes for a cultural victory using autocracy. :c5occupied::tourism: I know how to have fun. I have had some fun playing this game, but in many ways the game has worked against that.

    If strategizing in a strategy game is the wrong, baby I don't wanna be right.
    That was the fun comment. This is the efficient comment that serves a purpose:
    If strategizing in a strategy game is the wrong way to play, then I think there is a flaw in the game.
     

Share This Page