Cymsdale
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2005
- Messages
- 461
Unkillable unit? You can perma-block enemy armies. Nice.
Fire the designer.
(Such a thing sounds like it would work much better as a great person engineer.)
Last edited:
Not getting benefit of captured wonder
- Thread starter Graethyenne
- Start date
Unkillable unit? You can perma-block enemy armies. Nice.
Fire the designer.
(Such a thing sounds like it would work much better as a great person engineer.)
Cymsdale
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2005
- Messages
- 461
It's a hypothetical that doesn't seem very relevant. A unit and a policy slot are very different things. But as it is, I think giving what is essentially a great person from a wonder is a bit wonky and weird, so I'd say it's a poorly designed wonder.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
I'm not saying it's relevant, I'm just interested in your opinion about how such a case should be handled.
My question has nothing to do with policy slots, I am just interested in exploring your position.
The reason I made the example the way it is is simple:
Terracotta Army gives mortal units that don't transfer ownership. It would be possible for these units to change ownership - tag them as being units created by that wonder, then just move whatever is still alive to capital of the conquering player. That's obviously not super-practical, but possible. You seem to be okay with those units not transferring.
The thing I changed is that the unit that is granted by my pseudo-wonder is a "permanent" unit that can't be removed from the game, and I want to understand whether for you that changes something about how the wonder should be handled.
Again, has nothing to do with the policy slots, I think I made my case on that one, you made yours, it's obvious that we won't come to an agreement. I asked purely out of interest, so stop avoiding the question as if I was trying to get a gotcha-moment out of you - whether the wonder itself would be well-designed is irrelevant, it's just a vehicle for the effect.
My question has nothing to do with policy slots, I am just interested in exploring your position.
The reason I made the example the way it is is simple:
Terracotta Army gives mortal units that don't transfer ownership. It would be possible for these units to change ownership - tag them as being units created by that wonder, then just move whatever is still alive to capital of the conquering player. That's obviously not super-practical, but possible. You seem to be okay with those units not transferring.
The thing I changed is that the unit that is granted by my pseudo-wonder is a "permanent" unit that can't be removed from the game, and I want to understand whether for you that changes something about how the wonder should be handled.
Again, has nothing to do with the policy slots, I think I made my case on that one, you made yours, it's obvious that we won't come to an agreement. I asked purely out of interest, so stop avoiding the question as if I was trying to get a gotcha-moment out of you - whether the wonder itself would be well-designed is irrelevant, it's just a vehicle for the effect.
Cymsdale
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2005
- Messages
- 461
With your hypothetical design I would say the unit should not be transferred. I'd also argue it's a poorly designed wonder.
I think a better designed wonder which accomplishes a similar goal, would be a wonder that auto-produces a 1-charge builder every 10 turns, and on ownership change the newly generated builders would go to the new owner of the wonder.
I think a better designed wonder which accomplishes a similar goal, would be a wonder that auto-produces a 1-charge builder every 10 turns, and on ownership change the newly generated builders would go to the new owner of the wonder.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
I see. Well, that was a bit harder than anticipated, but thank you for answering my question!
About redesigning the wonder: Yeah, sure. I also think it would be a terrible wonder in terms of design, but again, I merely created it the way I did because I was interested in understanding whether making the unit a permanent bonus that can't be removed changes how you think about the effect of the wonder.
About redesigning the wonder: Yeah, sure. I also think it would be a terrible wonder in terms of design, but again, I merely created it the way I did because I was interested in understanding whether making the unit a permanent bonus that can't be removed changes how you think about the effect of the wonder.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,902
It seems the design is inconsistent which seems a shame and makes for a confusing life.
The effects of a wonder do seem to be more about the building nation. The builders that built in Egypt were efficiently managed and there was this religious element involved in what they did also. It makes sense to give these builders extra life. But if a foreigner took over the pyramids would their empires builders suddenly get it?
We talk the forbidden palace. That extra slot is about he mystique of the Chinese dynasty and the efficiency of the culture and how that building affected that. If the golden horde overrun it do they suddenly become a more efficient government?
Most importantly, the aggressor is normally a human player snowballing to domination and of course wants more toys along the way but does not need them.
One believes tile effects should be transferred (tourism, culture etc) but player effects should not and that those effects stay with the loosing nation. In a way the wonder is just objectification of their nations abilities.
The effects of a wonder do seem to be more about the building nation. The builders that built in Egypt were efficiently managed and there was this religious element involved in what they did also. It makes sense to give these builders extra life. But if a foreigner took over the pyramids would their empires builders suddenly get it?
We talk the forbidden palace. That extra slot is about he mystique of the Chinese dynasty and the efficiency of the culture and how that building affected that. If the golden horde overrun it do they suddenly become a more efficient government?
Most importantly, the aggressor is normally a human player snowballing to domination and of course wants more toys along the way but does not need them.
One believes tile effects should be transferred (tourism, culture etc) but player effects should not and that those effects stay with the loosing nation. In a way the wonder is just objectification of their nations abilities.
Similar threads
