No Wonders?

[Percy]

By the way, I find it odd that you talk about experiencing all there is to civ and then suggesting that OP be Romans, the cheapest civ thanks to Praet-rush, and on Pangaea, the best map for Praet-rush.

Well, to try a new strategy, it can be helpful to be cheap.

 

[popejubal]

I don't think I misunderstood your cheerleading of the no-wonders strategy, not when you wrote stuff like "No World Wonders" is absolutely a great strategy. and "Even with the idea that some Wonders can be useful under the right circumstances, avoiding Wonders entirely has one enormous benefit: You get lots and lots of hammers that you can spend on other things instead." Be careful when you use words like "absolutely." You didn't say "wonderspam people ought to try different strats sometimes" or "skipping many wonders can do you good" but were much more forceful in your view.

Did you read the original post?

I'm trying to kick the wonder addiction and thought how about I try a game where I don't build any wonders AT ALL. This means saying no if even I find that I could build a wonder in 9 turns or something. Just saying NO.

Do you think this is a good strategy to kick the habit?

I'm cheerleading for the No Wonders strategy for people who are addicted to Wonders. Also, I never said that you should absolutely not build Wonders. What I said was that not building Wonders is absolutely a great strategy. Building Wonders is also a great strategy when done properly as well.

Saying that something is absolutely great does not mean that other things cannot also be great.

Yes, I was forceful in my view. Taking the OP into account, I think it's absolutely reasonable to read my post as saying that the OP should play without building any World Wonders. Did you also notice that even while I was suggesting that the OP should play without building any World Wonders (as a cure for Wonder Addiction if nothing else), I also suggested that he might want to build some National Wonders at the same time. I do not believe that my post was anything like the fanatical anti-Wonder zealot's rant that you seem to imply.

By the way, I find it odd that you talk about experiencing all there is to civ and then suggesting that OP be Romans, the cheapest civ thanks to Praet-rush, and on Pangaea, the best map for Praet-rush.

That's exactly why I suggested it. If you tend to be a turtle who stays home and builds World Wonders all day long while neglecting your military, then this is exactly the game that can help break you out of your turtle's shell. If I want someone who doesn't like vegetables to experience all of the wonderful foods that the world has to offer, I'm not going to start him on canned spinach. I'm going to start by offering him a garden fresh tomato with a little basil or some fresh baby snap peas and corn on the cob picked just that morning.

Baby steps.

 

[axident]

Did you read the original post?



I'm cheerleading for the No Wonders strategy for people who are addicted to Wonders. Also, I never said that you should absolutely not build Wonders. What I said was that not building Wonders is absolutely a great strategy. Building Wonders is also a great strategy when done properly as well.

Saying that something is absolutely great does not mean that other things cannot also be great.

Yes, I was forceful in my view. Taking the OP into account, I think it's absolutely reasonable to read my post as saying that the OP should play without building any World Wonders. Did you also notice that even while I was suggesting that the OP should play without building any World Wonders (as a cure for Wonder Addiction if nothing else), I also suggested that he might want to build some National Wonders at the same time. I do not believe that my post was anything like the fanatical anti-Wonder zealot's rant that you seem to imply.



That's exactly why I suggested it. If you tend to be a turtle who stays home and builds World Wonders all day long while neglecting your military, then this is exactly the game that can help break you out of your turtle's shell. If I want someone who doesn't like vegetables to experience all of the wonderful foods that the world has to offer, I'm not going to start him on canned spinach. I'm going to start by offering him a garden fresh tomato with a little basil or some fresh baby snap peas and corn on the cob picked just that morning.

Baby steps.

Ah, okay. Though it's an odd phrasing for you to say, essentially, that "X is an absolutely great strategy but doing the EXACT OPPOSITE of X can also be a great strategy." I think it'd be clearer to get rid of the "absolutely" altogether.

In my first post in this thread, I wasn't even replying to your post, but to the OP and hermit. Because it's not black-or-white like OP's thread title. Some wonders are more worthwhile than others, and consider also the benefits of denial. So I was kinda surprised when you took my post to be commentary on yours in particular.

By the way I don't disagree that it'd be helpful for a wonder addict to play a game, however cheap, as Romans on Pangaea, but they need to follow that up with playing on other maps with other civs, too. Else their available strats are wonderspam or Praet rush on Pangaea, which is a pretty limited set of options.

 

[vale]

Fact: Wonder addiction is something that held back my ability to progress to higher difficulty levels in the past (I'm sure others have had similar experiences)

Fact: A no-wonder game is a very good way to overcome such an addiction because it allows no room for leeway. There is no saying to yourself "I will only build the most important ones", and then later talking yourself into the idea that Chicken Itza is an important one for whatever reason (extreme but this is the slope you can head down if you allow yourself to make exceptions for "obviously" important wonders).

Fact: A no-wonder game is not optimal.

Opinion: Who cares? The OP is interested in progressing past a much more suboptimal style of play and this is a tool to enable him to do so. These types of games where one forces oneself to broaden one's horizons can be eye-opening in terms of later strategical development.

To the OP: Hannibal is an excellent choice for this type of game in my opinion. He has the two best traits for developing a strong early economy in addition to a solid war machine.

 

[axident]

Fact: Wonder addiction is something that held back my ability to progress to higher difficulty levels in the past (I'm sure others have had similar experiences)

Fact: A no-wonder game is a very good way to overcome such an addiction because it allows no room for leeway. There is no saying to yourself "I will only build the most important ones", and then later talking yourself into the idea that Chicken Itza is an important one for whatever reason (extreme but this is the slope you can head down if you allow yourself to make exceptions for "obviously" important wonders).

Fact: A no-wonder game is not optimal.

Opinion: Who cares? The OP is interested in progressing past a much more suboptimal style of play and this is a tool to enable him to do so. These types of games where one forces oneself to broaden one's horizons can be eye-opening in terms of later strategical development.

To the OP: Hannibal is an excellent choice for this type of game in my opinion. He has the two best traits for developing a strong early economy in addition to a solid war machine.

I agree with this post. Actually any leader with either Fin or Org, and either Agg or Cha, makes for a pretty good warring leader. Also certain UBs can sub in for org/fin (shaka's, charlie's, etc.).

 

[Stolen Rutters]

I actually like capturing the wonders I want. It's a fun strategy to try, not building a single wonder. It made it so much easier to warmonger when I decided to try combat as a strategy.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

A good thing to do is identify crappy wonders and resolve never to build them. Here's a list I stick by:

Parthenon (WHOO A NEGLIGIBLE BOOST TO YOUR GP FARM)

Temple of Artemis (Only an inland city can reasonably scrounge up the hammers to get this, and those cities don't get a whole lot from trade route boosters. Plus, bombing a GM in a city with the ToA increases the yield the GM's owner gets, so by building this you neuter your GMs and beef up the ones owned by rivals on your continent)

Great Lighthouse (similar to the temple of artemis, only here hammer rich cities are flat out incapable of making this)

Schwedegon Paya (I think I mongled the spelling of that. Anyway OR and Theocracy are easy to get the old fashioned way, Free Religion is great late but kinda sucks early, and Pacifism sucks no matter how far into the game you are)

Chichen Itza (That extra 25% defense is sure going to last a while against a stack of siege units!)

Angkor Wat (Because eeeeeeveryone wants to run tons of priests and crank out swarms of great prophets in the mid-late game!!!!! no.)

Hagia Sophia (Good wonder on paper, but the AI has a raging boner both for it and the tech required to get it. You won't win a race to this wonder even on a duel map with Montezuma on Settler with gold, gems, pigs, corn, iron and marble in your capital. Don't try to.)

Notre dame (Oh, for christ's sake...)

Versailles (It's like the Forbidden Palace, only like five times as expensive!)

The 3 gorges dam (too late, too expensive. Broken effect on paper, but it's going to last you like 10 turns then someone wins the game.)

 

[Percy]

Schwedegon Paya (I think I mongled the spelling of that. Anyway OR and Theocracy are easy to get the old fashioned way, Free Religion is great late but kinda sucks early, and Pacifism sucks no matter how far into the game you are)

Some good players think Pacifism is a very strong civic.

Angkor Wat (Because eeeeeeveryone wants to run tons of priests and crank out swarms of great prophets in the mid-late game!!!!! no.)

With Angkor Wat, your Priests actually turn into Engineers that bring an extra gold. And you can often assign more Priests than Engineers (it's easy to build a temple). Great Prophets can be very good when settled in your Wall Street city, or to build Shrines.

Notre dame (Oh, for christ's sake...)

Very useful if you're in shortage of happy resources.

Versailles (It's like the Forbidden Palace, only like five times as expensive!)

It's like the Forbidden Palace, only you can only build the Forbidden Palace once, so this allows you to have a second one!

 

[axident]

A good thing to do is identify crappy wonders and resolve never to build them. Here's a list I stick by:

Parthenon (WHOO A NEGLIGIBLE BOOST TO YOUR GP FARM)

Temple of Artemis (Only an inland city can reasonably scrounge up the hammers to get this, and those cities don't get a whole lot from trade route boosters. Plus, bombing a GM in a city with the ToA increases the yield the GM's owner gets, so by building this you neuter your GMs and beef up the ones owned by rivals on your continent)

Great Lighthouse (similar to the temple of artemis, only here hammer rich cities are flat out incapable of making this)

Schwedegon Paya (I think I mongled the spelling of that. Anyway OR and Theocracy are easy to get the old fashioned way, Free Religion is great late but kinda sucks early, and Pacifism sucks no matter how far into the game you are)

Chichen Itza (That extra 25% defense is sure going to last a while against a stack of siege units!)

Angkor Wat (Because eeeeeeveryone wants to run tons of priests and crank out swarms of great prophets in the mid-late game!!!!! no.)

Hagia Sophia (Good wonder on paper, but the AI has a raging boner both for it and the tech required to get it. You won't win a race to this wonder even on a duel map with Montezuma on Settler with gold, gems, pigs, corn, iron and marble in your capital. Don't try to.)

Notre dame (Oh, for christ's sake...)

Versailles (It's like the Forbidden Palace, only like five times as expensive!)

The 3 gorges dam (too late, too expensive. Broken effect on paper, but it's going to last you like 10 turns then someone wins the game.)

You way underestimate how strong of a production city a seaside capital can be with some seafood and hills.

That said, I don't think ToA is as bad as you make it out to be, as it gives +5 GP (2 from wonder, 3 from priest) and some priestly stuff (better with Representation). And the trade route bonus, too.

GrLight really depends on the map, it's kickass on water-heavy/coastal-heavy of course. Nevertheless I tend to never win the race for this on Emperor.

Hagia gives GE points if I'm not mistaken, so I'll go for it if I have marble.

Notre Dame isn't that expensive with stone and can help if you are low on Happy resources. Or want to deny them. I don't mind letting someone else build it for me though.

My position is that most Wonders are skippable so I mostly agree with the rest. Esp. Versailles if I'm gonna war soon anyway--why should I build it? Make the AI build it--I'll capture it and since the AI built it, it will be farther away from my capital and even more useful!

 

[mice]

To the OP, try an 'Only One wonder' strat. You look at the map and decide that you will allow yourself one wonder. Then beeline the tech that allows you to build it.

Throughout the game you can decide if the wonder really helped you get your victory condition or not, and this is really the point of wonders.

 

[Carnage04]

Actually, abstinence may not be as big of a challenge for you as chipping. Maybe you can determine three or four wonders beforehand, depending on what style of game you choose to play, and attempt to build ONLY those. If you miss one or two of them....tough luck, keep going and maybe you'll get the next.

Running through the game staying away from wonders....you might not miss them. Imagine targeting Great Wall...JUST missing it even though you have stone....eying up those Pyramids out of desperation and avoiding them because they are not on your list.

 

[Bast]

Thanks for all the suggestions guys.

Started a game as Pericles and had Montezuma as a neighbour. I popped two warriors right next door to his capital. This is Noble, is that too easy? But I was using scouts. Anyway, the temptation to strike was too strong. Montezuma is an absolute pest to have next door. So used both warriors to declare war and turns out he had only 1 warrior defending his capital. The pest was crushed in 2840BC. His capital was actually far from mine, could fit about 2 cities in between. I took it and turns out that the city had copper, gold and corn in the BFC compared to Athens which had deer only. Nice balance random map generator.

Stuck to my "no wonders" policy, got Metal casting and ran an engineer in that city which is growing rapidly. I'll get a Great Engineer in a few turns and the Pyramids are still available. What to do? Rush it with the Engineer? It's still like 800BC and ran Representation? Remember I'm philosophical.

Or settle the engineer?

I'm taking on the advice of some that not all wonders are bad. My plan was to not build any. But when an opportunity like this presents itself, I really think I should take it.

But who knows someone could build the Pyramids in the next few turns and I could miss out anyway.

 

[Bast]

BTW, Genghis Khan - another pest - turned up annoyed because I declared war on his friend. What friend? Montezuma had no religion and had only 1 city. How could they have been friends? Is this the warmonger modifier thing? That is so annoying.

Anyway, I'm #1 in population and soldiers. Only #2 in land to Charlemagne who is spamming settlers. I think I'll find Genghis Khan and crush him too. He's coming last in points score.

I hate pests.

 

[vale]

I'm taking on the advice of some that not all wonders are bad. My plan was to not build any. But when an opportunity like this presents itself, I really think I should take it.

Well just playing Devil's Advocate here:

You started the game with the goal of "no wonders". "Somehow" you arrived at a situation where you are soon to pop a Great Engineer and can't pass up the opportunity that has presented itself.

So, how did this opportunity really arise? I would argue that it is not at all by random chance but by choice. You started with a leader who is Cre/Phi, a trait combination that is practically begging you to pursue early cheap libraries and run scientists to produce Great Scientists, yet for some reason, Metal Casting has worked its way in there somewhere relatively early and your (first?) great person will be an engineer.

This is how wonder addiction can be so nefarious. It is very hard to stick to a hard limit even if that was your plan. If you haven't already rushed the Pyramids, I would say try to stick to your original guns and try to play out the wonder-free game by settling him in the most appropriate city (probably your primary military factory).

There is no doubt that the Pyramids are a great early wonder, and Representation in 600 B.C. is very nice. The key words there are no doubt though. There is very little to learn from continuing on that path as it is I'm sure one you have tread frequently in the past.

Playing self-imposed variants like no wonders, no slavery, no chopping, no drafting, no cottages, no lightbulbing etc. allows a freshness to that particular game and quite probably future games as new perspectives are obtained.

/end Devil's Advocate

 

[axident]

Well just playing Devil's Advocate here:

You started the game with the goal of "no wonders". "Somehow" you arrived at a situation where you are soon to pop a Great Engineer and can't pass up the opportunity that has presented itself.

So, how did this opportunity really arise? I would argue that it is not at all by random chance but by choice. You started with a leader who is Cre/Phi, a trait combination that is practically begging you to pursue early cheap libraries and run scientists to produce Great Scientists, yet for some reason, Metal Casting has worked its way in there somewhere relatively early and your (first?) great person will be an engineer.

This is how wonder addiction can be so nefarious. It is very hard to stick to a hard limit even if that was your plan. If you haven't already rushed the Pyramids, I would say try to stick to your original guns and try to play out the wonder-free game by settling him in the most appropriate city (probably your primary military factory).

There is no doubt that the Pyramids are a great early wonder, and Representation in 600 B.C. is very nice. The key words there are no doubt though. There is very little to learn from continuing on that path as it is I'm sure one you have tread frequently in the past.

Playing self-imposed variants like no wonders, no slavery, no chopping, no drafting, no cottages, no lightbulbing etc. allows a freshness to that particular game and quite probably future games as new perspectives are obtained.

/end Devil's Advocate

Yeah, might as well go no-self-built-wonders for the whole game and have fun. He needs to reroll anyway because how often can you jump a neighbor with a pair of warriors and win?

 

[Bast]

Well I took on the advice that I shouldn't ignore wonders for the sake of ignoring them. So I didn't actively go out and build. That's been the key for me here.

But I did get Metal Casting before Writing and got the forge up because I thought I could use Tenochtitlan as a production city and when the city was growing fast, I thought, ok why not pop in an Engineer there? I did get the Pyramids with that Engineer and switched to Representation and now with my Libraries in every city I'm running scientists.

I didn't build the Pyramids which I think was the key. I didn't waste a single hammer on it. The problem I recognized with my previous games were that I was wasting hammers on wonders because whenever an opportunity arose I took it and started building wonders. I'm not doing that. That's been the key I think for me.

If I get another engineer down the track and if I can rush Great Library, should I? Maybe. I don't know. But I know I'm not going to spend hammers on wonders. That's been going into my army, workers and crucial buildings like granaries and libraries.

axident, I'm playing on Noble but remember I jumped on Montezuma very early. He only had a warrior and a worker in his city. Is this normal even for Noble? I had the warriors next to borders and then stormed in. Here's a screenshot of when it happened. I know it was incredibly lucky.

 

[axident]

axident, I'm playing on Noble but remember I jumped on Montezuma very early. He only had a warrior and a worker in his city. Is this normal even for Noble? I had the warriors next to borders and then stormed in. Here's a screenshot of when it happened. I know it was incredibly lucky.

Hey when opportunity knocks, open the door! I haven't played Noble in ages so I don't know how normal it is, but it'd be highly unusual for Emperor and probably most Monarch games. Good job playing a different style--it must take some getting used to. If you master all aspects of the game--rush, wonderspam, spying, diplomacy, etc., you will be a complete player, so if that is your goal, it's good to play different styles and maps to become more complete and flexible given any starting position/resources. (Frankly it's also more fun to play different styles and to mix-and-match, at least for me.)

 

[DutchJob]

why is rushing wonders with great engineers per se 'part' of somebody's wonder addiction? Personally i consider them as free-bees since i usually go for a GS. But after forges...

But Bast: the MC-move high-lighted by an earlier poster does say indeed ALOT.

my first no-wonder game was sooo refreshing. since them i'm just opportunistic with them and only build them when i have the resource.

vale wrote very wise words in post #24.

Namaste

 

[futurehermit]

A good thing to do is identify crappy wonders and resolve never to build them. Here's a list I stick by:

Parthenon (WHOO A NEGLIGIBLE BOOST TO YOUR GP FARM)

Temple of Artemis (Only an inland city can reasonably scrounge up the hammers to get this, and those cities don't get a whole lot from trade route boosters. Plus, bombing a GM in a city with the ToA increases the yield the GM's owner gets, so by building this you neuter your GMs and beef up the ones owned by rivals on your continent)

Great Lighthouse (similar to the temple of artemis, only here hammer rich cities are flat out incapable of making this)

Schwedegon Paya (I think I mongled the spelling of that. Anyway OR and Theocracy are easy to get the old fashioned way, Free Religion is great late but kinda sucks early, and Pacifism sucks no matter how far into the game you are)

Chichen Itza (That extra 25% defense is sure going to last a while against a stack of siege units!)

Angkor Wat (Because eeeeeeveryone wants to run tons of priests and crank out swarms of great prophets in the mid-late game!!!!! no.)

Hagia Sophia (Good wonder on paper, but the AI has a raging boner both for it and the tech required to get it. You won't win a race to this wonder even on a duel map with Montezuma on Settler with gold, gems, pigs, corn, iron and marble in your capital. Don't try to.)

Notre dame (Oh, for christ's sake...)

Versailles (It's like the Forbidden Palace, only like five times as expensive!)

The 3 gorges dam (too late, too expensive. Broken effect on paper, but it's going to last you like 10 turns then someone wins the game.)

Parthenon is very powerful when running a SE. It's not the best for a CE I agree.

ToA is good to have in your gpfarm if possible. I build it if I have marble in my capital, otherwise yeah I usually take a pass.

GLH I build if my first 4 cities will be on the coast and I have a reason to research masonry or sailing early anyways. Most games I take a pass.

SP I don't generally build. I'm not sure it is that great of a wonder.

CI is for the AI and is reasonably powerful in the hands of an AI, especially a protective AI

AW is only good when playing specifically toward mass prophets or when going for a strat like Obsolete's. Saladin is a great leader for getting AW and prophet massing.

HS is amazing and is much easier to nab in BtS if you plan for it. It is a wonder that can REALLY impact your game and to say to always avoid it is foolish imo.

ND is another wonder that is much more 'nabbable' in BtS. It also got BOOSTED, something I rarely see people talking about on these forums. 2 free in all cities pre-astronomy? That's handy imo.

The problem with versailles is not the cost--which I would gladly pay every game--but rather the tech needed to build it. Unless you're going up the religious path (again, say with Saladin and mass prophets) it's not very useful.

3GD I pretty much always build. True, it comes late, but it is handy.

/ontopic: I think limiting wonders in general is a good idea--unless going for specific strategies.

I usually think like this:

-Am I industrious?

-Do I have stone/marble or other enabling resources?

-Do I have strong production potential/forests to chop?

If I answer no to all three questions, I don't build any wonders

If I answer no to question 1 and 2, I will build 1-2 key wonders

If I answer yes to question 1 only, I will build 1-2 key wonders and then look for production centers later to add later-game wonders

If I answer yes to question 1 and 2, I will make a run on wonders. E.g., I'm industrious and have stone. I'll build stonehenge, GW, Pyr, and HGard. If I have marble I'll build parth, oracle, ToA, and GL. If I have copper, colossus is nice.

If I answer yes to 2 but no to 1, I'll target key wonders. E.g., with stone I will consider pyramids. with marble I'll make a play for oracle, GL.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that if you're not industrious and you don't have marble/stone, why are you building so many wonders?

Conversely, if you are industrious and do have marble/stone, why aren't you planning to secure a bunch of wonders? (of course you need to plan carefully so your power graph and expansion don't suffer too much)

If you are not industrious but do have stone/marble then why aren't you planning which key wonders you want to nab?

 

[pigswill]

Bast: got a GE and MC but not building Wonders? Lightbulb machinery; half of maces, half of optics, 1000 free beakers early in the game.