Has Pingala made the early game duller?

Will Pingala made the early game duller in your view?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 9.9%
  • No

    Votes: 57 70.4%
  • don't care

    Votes: 13 16.0%
  • In thread response different to the above

    Votes: 3 3.7%

  • Total voters
    81
With the ability to boost science culture early with Pingala have we lost that early desperate rush for a first envoy at a culture CS or such a need to settle on that mercury? Not such a need to build a monument? Everyone gets to knights faster.

So it may be fairer that everyone gets similar culture if they choose so early but it feels like it takes the edge off trying to claw any culture I can out of an early game.

I am looking forward to using Pingala with Rome for a game or two even though I know its going to be very OP.
I expect to mess about with a few OP things tonight but after that I am going to just use the worst Civs for the most part.
I want to figure out or read about what the chop ratio will be before you destroy your cities.
I am guessing you should be able to get a few chops in per city without any repercussions.
I am also interested in seeing what happens when I chop everything in every city!
I voted yes by the way and am in the minority of the poll.

As stated earlier in another post: "Governors should not be free"

I agree with this.
The game should make you pay in some way to obtain governors and their abilities.
You should have to make a serious choice to obtain Magnus or Pingala... etc etc.
Free Governors basically means duller or easier game IMO.
However, I don't mind abusing the game.
One of my favorite things about Civ is Exploitation.
 
Last edited:
The problem is it doesn't apply to the situation. Having more culture is better than less, as you go through the civic tree faster.

It is not relevant to having half a sandwich or 12 sandwiches for lunch. The faster you get to key civics, the better off you are, whether you are aiming for more food and extra builder charges, culture districts, or cheaper, faster military.
Proportion is very relevant to the context of the OP. You're better off having twelve than eleven, but the difference is not as profound as you would be going from half to one. That's why, for instance, the first two policy cards give little +1 bonuses that you eventually outgrow. The OP was referring to something more than just the notion that more is always better. It was referring to the sense of a "desperate rush" to get anything because you started with basically nothing assured.
 
Last edited:
I think you mean you may end up sacrificing too much to gain the extra bits. That is not 'self-indulgence'...
 
Top Bottom