Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Phoenix1595, Jul 7, 2013.
So like, alt-tabbing?
Like MD's three types of culture that helps memorize the game mechanism, wonder theme bonus can also be classified into 3 types ( from easy to hard):
1. Broadway, Global theater, Sydney Opera House, Sistine Chapel*, Uffizi*
2. Great library, Oxford, Hermitage (two national wonders)
Type 1 focuses on internally generated great works, with last two * more on art work
Type 2 requires great work trading or some digging outside your territory ( therefore unlikely for peaceful MP)
Type 3 is the ultimate CV indicator, requires aggressive trading or digging (maybe impossible for peaceful MP, or diplomatic relationship trade off in SP)
Museum seems easy to get the 2 bonus.
I'm not sure I understand. What I said was, out of the several Museum themed bonuses, it would be great if each player could only get each of the bonuses once. How does restricting the number of times you get the same bonus make it impossible to get this bonus? And what does it have to do with getting Da Vinci in a given game?
Consider if you assign one artist, writer and musician specialist each, you tend to get GA, GW, GM each later. The deversification is built in, no need of further restriction. It is harder to produce only GAs by yourself, so it may be simpler to trade from others as well.
Just go autocracy and 'liberate' the great works from other humans
but yeah, that's a nice way of thinking about the theming bonuses. Some are really easy to get (Museums) while others require trading with other to get the bonuses. I wouldn't bank on no GW trading in MP though, as someone else is likely to benefit from a trade as well (their theming bonus vs. yours).
With diplomat, trading partner can see what is needed for bonus, unless the great works are hidden in other cities first and then rearranged once all items are collected
The louvre is really hard in MP, unless the antiquity sites outside culture territory also has nationality attached.
About that, just how smart is the AI regarding its threatened GW?
It goes without saying that a human player would quickly move great works away from a city that is about to be conquered, provided he can. Does the AI do the same?
Also, if you don't have free slots in any other city, can you destroy or sell a Great Work? Just to prevent your enemy from getting it.
Well, assume great works are mostly stored in capital or big cities, if these cities are lost, there is no point moving them around.
On the other hand, will a portion of great works be destroyed like the buildings when city is captured? Hope not, but again, this may reward war too much, and it leaves to world congress to balance it correctly.
The AI will move their GWs if they are about to lose a city, provided of course they have space in their other cities.
No, but you can Swap a GW to another Civ for a GW that the conqueror might not directly benefit from that particular one.
I don't know, but it shouldn't be too hard to code. (when city health<70% and enemy units present, evacuate GW if possible)
An AI might not be able to set priorities for which GW to evacuate, if the slots are limited.
That will probably be the main limitation on evacuating... you can only evacuate a GW of writing if you have a writing slot somewhere else in your empire.
That was also mentioned by MadDjinn as a limitation on Capturing GW.. ie it Sounds like when a city is captured all GW still in the city are removed, and got to available slots the conqueror has... if the conqueror doesn't have the slots, the GW may be lost forever.
Something i haven't listed is each Themeing Bonus has "AI Priority" on it.
Moving the Great Works away from endangered cities is possible and realistic. Destroying them, on the other hand, should not be possible as this would be a very "game-y" action - in real world only the most demented tyrants acted that way.
What's that? Like France always go Louvre?
There should be an option to "Store" great works, so they could be easily traded, but would provide ZERO culture and tourism. Who knows, they might implement that somehow.
I think they should be destroyed, but only if the Invader has nowhere to put them. Essentially, it is a cost to the Invader (if the Defender couldn't evacuate them)
I don't think they should be "storable", except in existing normal slots.
Separate names with a comma.