1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

No More Eternal Wonders

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Soundwαvє ▼, Mar 24, 2010.

  1. Soundwαvє ▼

    Soundwαvє ▼ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2010
    Messages:
    225
    Location:
    Brazil
    It's rare to we see antique wonders today, because they had been destroyed by natural disasters, wars and even because of revolutions or power change. So why in civ they resist so long?

    Also each 100 years should add certain income due to tourism.

    Just a thought
     
  2. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,647
    Location:
    Sydney
    Well a lot of wonders do lose their benefits, but retain the culture boost.

    If you were to destroy wonders after a reasonable amount of time, what would be the justification for allowing normal buildings to remain, when surely they would need replacing every once in a while?
     
  3. snipperrabbit!!

    snipperrabbit!! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,396
    Why ? tourism isn't 50 years old actually !
     
  4. Soundwαvє ▼

    Soundwαvє ▼ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2010
    Messages:
    225
    Location:
    Brazil
    Those buildings are general buildings.... Market (there is a market for the medieval, renascence, modern age), Barracks too, etc... So there is no need for it... but wonders don't, they are the same all the time. I'm not saying that we need to destroy them, but they should have less chance to survive as they have today (Almost 100%) just if someone raze the city.

    Actually many people even in the past liked to see old things. Not how we do today but it's something that generates money.
     
  5. wideyedwanderer

    wideyedwanderer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Messages:
    427
    Location:
    floating weightless
    I agree. Many wonders were destroyed by some combination of earthquakes, wars, social changes, ect. It's weird how the 6 of the 7 wonders of the ancient world were destroyed a long time ago, yet in civ4, they almost always last throughout the game. I guess the only way for a wonder to be destroyed would be to capture and raze the city it's in. It'd be nice if they improve this for civ5.
     
  6. Tantor

    Tantor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    238
    Location:
    Norway
    I`m not so sure. I`m a wonderaddict myself and I know quite a few others too. It would make sense to loose more wonders if realism was the objective, but then Civ woudn`t be Civ for me anymore......
     
  7. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    2,997
    I do not believe it is a major concern at all.
     
  8. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,647
    Location:
    Sydney
    So we can assume that normal buildings are upgraded and renovated and kept viable throughout the entire course of the game, but we can't assume that wonders are kept in a good condition?
     
  9. King Kalmah

    King Kalmah Magyar Madness

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    819
    Location:
    California
    The system is fine the way it is because your people would naturally protect the wonder and repair it over time since they'd have pride for it.

    I think an earthquake or volcanic eruption should be the only execption,but then Civ5 would have to have faults and all this geographic extra stuff....maybe Civ6...
     
  10. The Cosmic Kid

    The Cosmic Kid Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    Having a wonder you invested so much time and effort building be wiped out by a random event would not be fun, thus it should not happen. (Honestly, all it would do is induce me to save-scum.)
     
  11. moscaverde

    moscaverde Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    403
    Location:
    Brazil
    Your point is interesting, but how could it be implemented? The thing is, differently from real life, when a player build a wonder, its empire last to the end of the game, so it's not possible that another empire take out your wonder or your people stop liking it. Maybe obsolete wonders could be destroyed, randomly, by bombardment. I dunno, it's the kind of thing that would only frustrate the player.
     
  12. mjs0

    mjs0 The 4th X

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    Central Florida
    When I think about Wonders that no longer exist like the Great Library for example, they still in my mind are linked to the civilization that created them and add to the cultural heritage of that civ.
    In a way, by no longer existing, they have achieved a legendary or mythical status that actually increases their cultural value to that civilization.

    So, with some of Sid Meier's words from GDC ringing in my ears, I would suggest we think about what Firaxis did with dark ages...(i.e. they didn't add dark ages because they would not be fun so they added golden ages instead) and if you really want to destroy an ancient wonder through in game events then that should be possible, but the effect should be positive and the destroyed wonder is given legendary status, continues to provide its benefits and from then on adds even more culture to the owning Civ.

    The actual mechanism for the additional culture would need some thought...
    Perhaps it would continue to give the current level of culture to the host city and a small 1-2 point culture bonus to every other city. In addition, legendary wonders by their nature would not be subject to capture and could only ever benefit the original owner (at the time they gained legendary status), and even if the host city was lost (captured or razed) the original owner would continue to gain the benefits of the wonder and the legendary bonus in other cities.
     
  13. The Cosmic Kid

    The Cosmic Kid Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    I think realism collides with gameplay here. If someone beats me to a must-have wonder, I want to be able to go capture it. Plus, on an aesthetic level, making wonders capturable conveys the sense that you're actually building a building, not just spending your production to unlock some abstract and intangible special ability.

    And there are a few wonders that just stop making sense if they're not capturable. The Great Wall and the Hoover Dam spring to mind; it's supposed to be the actual structure that provides the benefits, so whoever's in possession of the structure should definitely get them.
     
  14. Morning Star

    Morning Star Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Dominion of Virginia
    Natural disasters in CIV suck. Keep chance out of it as much as possible.
     
  15. Jury-6

    Jury-6 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    Messages:
    66
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Seems to me the only way to replicate natural disasters would be through "random events", (barring scenarios or whatever) which would simply be frustrating, as has been stated.

    Conquest, on the other hand, I think is feasible. Why not include a very small chance that a wonder will be destroyed on capture, much like normal buildings can be? Of course, certain wonders should be exempt such as the Great Wall, maybe the pyramids, etc. but more conventional wonders like the Great Library or the Parthenon would be (and have been) completely susceptible to collateral damage. I think the "legendary status" idea upon losing a wonder is a little too abstract, but maybe if a wonder were destroyed on capture, ruins would be left that would retain the cultural advantage and lose all the others?

    Whatever happens, the risk of losing wonders, however small it might be, would further increase the priority of protecting wonder-heavy cities, the prospect that you can just recapture them all would be null.
     
  16. mjs0

    mjs0 The 4th X

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    Central Florida
    I'm not suggesting wonders should not be captureable, merely that if we allow for the random destruction of wonders then after their destruction they should continue to provide benefits to the owner at the time of destruction. Wonders can get razed in the game already and I would imagine the destruction would be a rare event (like razing) which for most wonders would occur after their effect (other than culture) have expired. Perhaps it could even be restricted to wonders that have expired?
    Regardless, if you are worried you may lose the ability to capture a must-have wonder that capture is surely urgent and likely to happen when the wonder is still young and effective.
    I do sympathize with your point about certain wonders that actually physically cause their effect but without introducing subclasses of wonders that behave differently based on whether they are conceptual versus tangible there will always be problems in this area.
     
  17. The Cosmic Kid

    The Cosmic Kid Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    I certainly don't think we should introduce such subclasses. But I think that in the absence of this distinction, we should treat all wonders as tangible by default. It's more straightforward and intuitive.
     
  18. mikesloug

    mikesloug Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    I agree. Many wonders were destroyed by some combination of earthquakes,But its depends upon earthquakes points 6 or more ...
     
  19. Tholish

    Tholish Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2002
    Messages:
    1,344
    Location:
    Japan
    In Civ IV you can easily make Wonders go obsolete with a certain tech. Its an XML tag like this

    <ObsoleteTech>TECH_THEOLOGY</ObsoleteTech> in Civ4BuildingInfos.xml.

    In fact this field is used to obsolete some wonders and also
    some buildings do go obsolete, namely Monastery.

    In Civ, you have city maintenance which justifies the continuation of many standard buildings. The market is being maintained, the Wonder loses its...Wonder.
     
  20. KIEJ.MANIK

    KIEJ.MANIK Tlaneloli

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    139
    Location:
    El Sereno
    Maybe you can have the choice of destroying a wonder for immediate benefit, like when wonders got taken apart for their materials, maybe they can also get naturually destroyed over time and you have to create restoration crews to undo this damage or keep it under control
     

Share This Page