The militaristic civs would ignore it anyway.Originally posted by TheKing
I think the Geneva Convention would make a good wonder but Im not sure what it should do.
Originally posted by EddyG17
Porn Industry:
2 happy faces
Maybe, but maybe not, considering religious civs don't have to waste 400 or so shields.Originally posted by dexters
A wonder that lets you switch govs in one turn will imbalance the religious trait.
Originally posted by WillJ
Maybe, but maybe not, considering religious civs don't have to waste 400 or so shields.
Then again, you're probably right. If there's a wonder that a civ's trait takes care of, we should have wonders for all of the traits, to make it fair. And I guess I'd rather have no new wonders with effects found in a trait.
Yeah, it would unbalance the religious trait. However, that would be incentive for a religious civ to get it: to keep another civ in anarchy that much longer.
Originally posted by dexters
No, it will be an incentive for a human player to get it for themselves, religious or not. And will make the AI even weaker. It is not a secret wonder building isn't the AI's strong suit and they usually loose out because humans employ prebuilds.
Whether pre-building is exploit or borderline is not the issue. The issue is we add yet another wonder that the AI won't get 80% of ther time.
Originally posted by joel
they need a Golden Gate Bridge that allows you to bridge two pieces of land that are separated by one water square. This minor wonder is perfect for small island games.