1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Pyramids can be built only on desert tiles

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Krajzen, May 12, 2016.

  1. Krajzen

    Krajzen Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,461
    Location:
    Poland
    http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/civilization-vi-first-details/

    Wonders now also exist on the map, each taking up their own tile. Placement requirements for each wonder, such as the Pyramids needing a desert or Stonehenge needing a flat grassland, further complicate the puzzle of laying out each city.

    Wait, what?
    I'm sorry but that's completely ridiculous. There is nothing innate in Pyramids or Stonehenge that would somehow require particular climate or biome to be built in. Massive pyramid structures were build in Central America, South Asia and many other parts of the world, n very different geographic locations and climates, yet somehow 'these' pyramids require a desert tile? Why? Can they only stand on sand? Similarly, wtf with Stonehenge buildable only on grass, similar megalythic structures were found all over the world, from cold steppes to tropical islands.
    If both wonders really had to be geographically limited (and I don't think this should happen to Wonders in general, with very few exceptions such as Machu Picchu or Great Lighthouse) then it should be supply of stone resource.

    It isn't actually that nitpicky 'cosmetic' or 'common sense' problem but a gameplay one, I can bet civilisations will also be prone to spawn in particular terrain so some of them will have great advantage in getting wonder bonuses. This means lack of balance.

    Also, I can bet Egypt will spawn close to deserts with some national bonus to architecture (those are very classic and basic tropes of this civilisation in this series) + with civ6 focus on AI personalities its leader will probably be crazy about building wonders, so good luck at building pyramids if Egypt is in game.

    What do you think?
     
  2. Talcove

    Talcove Slayer of Spies

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    792
    Location:
    Mississauga
    I'm fairly sure that by 'Pyramids' they're referring specifically to the Great Pyramid(s) of Giza. As for Stonehenge, I'm fairly certain that the requirement was the city having access to stone.
     
  3. m15a

    m15a Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,471
    Like you said, there are plenty of pyramids and henges in the world, but they are not thought of as being as "great" in real life and aren't represented as Wonders in the game. In Civil VI terms, since the Great Pyramids will have the desert requirement, they are representative of large ancient wonders built in a desert environment, while Stonehenge is the same built on grass (or whatever).

    In the end, Wonders are usually built either to recreate history in some way (so the restrictions kind of make sense) or for game benefits which are usually completely unrelated to the actual real world impact of the wonder.
     
  4. Sezneg

    Sezneg Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    149
    The more they try to force pre-existing history onto a game about recreating the world's history, the more I hate it.

    Of course, I always thought it was stupid that something about choosing to be "America" in ancient times made me inherently better at building the internet...
     
  5. Mobfire

    Mobfire Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2016
    Messages:
    341
    Location:
    Canada
    I just think it'd really hurt the strategy aspect of the game to restrict the wonders you can build to your surroundings. I know people from Firaxis have said "we want you to have to use a new strategy every time you play" and have emphasized having to go with the flow of things, but this has the potential to completely screw over players with bad starts and give huge boosts to players with good starts - which, in my opinion, is lame.

    I agree that variety can be a good thing, but freedom is too, and at the moment it seems like terrain will end up forcing players' hands when it comes to constructing wonders.
     
  6. cazaderonus

    cazaderonus Actual Dad.

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2014
    Messages:
    640
    Excuse me but petra worked the same way in civ v, how is that new ? If pyramids are the new petra aka they give desert tiles special yields, would it make sense to build them in grass plain area ? Dont think so.

    You dont know the effect of those wonders..Jumping the gun a bit hey ?
     
  7. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,150
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah. Some wonders are products of their environments. Also with BNW they've been moving towards more restrictions in building some wonders to prevent clean sweep and cherry picking of wonders and to tie strategy more closely with starting and local terrain.

    Nothing controversial here
     
  8. Krajzen

    Krajzen Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,461
    Location:
    Poland
    I disagree. Civ5 limitations of wonder construction were very few, and those few were entirely making sense, unlike 'stonehenge is build from grass' current abstraction (or, if you prefer, 'stonehenge enhances grass terrain').


    Petra was one of rare exceptions, there were around 50 wonders in civ5 and of them very few were linked to the terrain:
    *unavoidable and obvious "require coastal city": Great Lighthouse, Colossus, Prora and Sydney Opera - make sense
    *very much making sense "require mountains nearby": Machu Picchu and Neuschwashtein
    *Petra (the only wonder requiring to be build near exact biome/terrain; at least it made sense in the context of what real life Petra is - water conduit system allowing the city to flourish on the desert - Petra would be nonsensical concept outside of desert so it's logical it requires this terrain)

    So, out of 50 wonders of civ5, just 7 required specific terrain, six of those seven were pretty obvious regarding those requirements, and the last one was exception making great sense in the real-life context of a wonder it was inspired by.

    Meanwhile, so far we know two wonders of civ6 and they both require some terrain, and both requirements are not intuitive or obvious in any way, nor making any sense in the context of what those wonders were in real life.
    Pyramids certainly didn't influence habitability of desert in any way, unlike Petra, and Stonehenge wasn't some geoengineering feat like Banaue Terraces that required and enrichened the particular terrain it was built on.

    So far I have great hopes for civ6 basing on what I know, but one of worries I have is devs "forcing" us to develop civilisation "as in real life" without regard for organic features of in-game universe - tech quests, those limitations of world wonders construction, tight AI personalities instead of more adaptive ones etc.

    Can you give me some reasons for Pyramids/Stonehenge, blocks of stone, being buildable only in the particular climatic zones?
    Even if there are such reasons (which I very much doubt) they should be secod priority after game's balance, which is disturbed by randomness (terrain generation) affecting so powerful thing as "universally available" wonder bonuses.
     
  9. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,265
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    In addition

    - Bordobur - Requires Holy City
    - Hanging Gardens, Pyramids, Statue of Zeus, University of Sankore, Forbidden Palace, The Uffizi, The Big Ben, The Louvre, St Peter's Basilica, Statue of Liberty and The Prora :p, all requiring Social Policy opener. Not to mention the last three were super exclusive to which Ideology you had.

    They added more restrictions.

    The devs are actively trying to deter a perfect strategy and to be honest I think it's a right move. Games that are less predictable are in my opinion more fun, if this means that making certain wonders harder to build, I welcome it.
     
  10. m15a

    m15a Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,471
    Why does Sydney opera house being on the coast or Neuschwashtein being on a mountain make more sense? There are opera houses and palaces all over.

    It's true that a large percentage of the Civ 6 wonders we know about have restrictions, but that could be a result of the fact that specific wonders were mentioned primarily as examples of map restrictions.
     
  11. ehecatzin

    ehecatzin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,064
    I actually like this, if anything I want more wonders with terrain restriction, having a decent patch of desert close was enough reson to consider going for Petra. And seeing as they want us to actually pay attention to the terrain this makes perfect sense.
     
  12. Krajzen

    Krajzen Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,461
    Location:
    Poland
    Bad analogy, because regarding social perk limitations you started from the same point as other civs regarding religions and social policies, and you could pursue and reach all those things by pursuing particular social policies/ideologies/religions. That was part of reliable planning.

    Terrain restrictions are completely different thing because they are entirely random and cannot be affected by player directly. If a wonder requires desert and you start on the far north, there is no chance you can get it before desert start civ (especially and mainly if it is early-mid game wonder, when you can't found city half across the world). If a wonder requires rainforest and you start on steppe, you are screwed and that's randomness, not strategy unlike "requires x social policy you can pursue".

    In civ5 terrain restrictions of wonders were very few and only when they were obvious and unavoidable due to the nature of particular wonders. In civ6 two wonders we know have completely pointless and artificial restrictions that are not intuitive or organic in any way, and look to be created just to limit the game.


    It doesn't 'deter perfect strategy' but favors randomness over any strategy, and it doesn't mean 'they are harder to build', it means 'screw strategy, you got bad roll and bad terrain, you can do nothing about it'.
    As I said, it would be okay if it made sense in the context of those wonders ("oh I am inland - well no coastal stuff I guess"; vs "oh I have different colour of tiles so I can't build this thing because of pointless arbitrary restrictions").

    I hope so, but it still doesn't make sense to me why pyramids can't be build on grassland or stonehenge on desert - both things are basically "big pieces of stone built for ritual purposes'. They both have nothing to do with the vegetation or terrain surrounding them.
     
  13. m15a

    m15a Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,471
    To me, the similarity between Stonehenge and The Great Pyramids is why restrictions make sense. They can both be called Big Ritualistic Ancient Wonder (BRAW). If you build a BRAW in the desert, it's given the name and image of The Great Pyramids and has some artificial game bonuses. If you build the BRAW in the grass, it given the name and image of Stonehenge and has some different artificial game bonuses. The gameplay goals of variety and difficulty to build all the wonders is maintained, while the real world aspect of all sorts of civilizations building BRAWs is also maintained.
     
  14. AriochIV

    AriochIV Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,617
    Location:
    San Jose, California
    I think it's an unnecessary restriction, but it doesn't really bother me.

    You could build a pyramid in a swamp, but it would burn, fall over, and sink into the swamp. :D
     
  15. AerisDraco

    AerisDraco Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 9, 2016
    Messages:
    16
    Location:
    Northern Cuba
    I see another problem with the new wonder system.
    That would be that the bonuses conferred by them would have to be really good. Possibly even like Civ V Petra-in-landlocked-desert-surrounded-city good. Each wonder, which I remind you takes up a whole tile (out of 36 possible tiles) must compete with districts, which take up the same tile space; but improve over time.

    Also, RIP dreams of true wonder-whoring.
     
  16. Matthew.

    Matthew. Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,179
    You make it sound as if the game designers are completely unaware that you can prop up stone in a circular pattern on ground other than grassland.

    Obviously they are aware of this, so it is a gameplay decision. It is a bit pointless to keep bringing up whether or not it "makes sense".

    As for how it will affect gameplay, it is too early to tell. On the one hand you could look at it as "I got a bad start, looks like I'm screwed", but then how often did that happen with wonders in Civ 5? Petra only got some mention because of how powerful it was, but I can't recall anyone ever starting a map and going "I can't get Neuschwanstein, better reroll!".

    In fact most wonders were never highly sought after anyway, which leads me to the other point:

    On the other hand, by restricting wonders to geographical locations, it actually removes some of the gamble. No restriction means anyone with that tech can start building said wonder... oh you had a few less hammers? You miss out on it by 1 turn. That isn't strategy any more than the restricted wonder, and you are still bound by the RNG start of having more hammers than the competition building the same wonder.

    With restrictions, you are effectively removing the number of competitors, thus removing a lot of the gamble of trying to build it. See similar wonders in Civ 5 as an example: Petra, Machu, etc. can sometimes last an extremely long time in game if nobody has the requirements, which means you can sometimes still get them on higher difficulties.
     
  17. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    I'm fine with the concept in theory. I do think it's a bit of a shame for the Pyramids to be restricted since, to me, it's the core example of a world wonder that everyone should covet. It may be the most famous wonder of the world.
     
  18. Eagle Pursuit

    Eagle Pursuit Scir-Gerefa

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    14,137
    Restricting Wonders to certain terrains may be a counter to the Wonders being more powerful.
     
  19. UWHabs

    UWHabs Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,995
    Location:
    Toronto
    "Stonehenge built on flat grassland" doesn't make sense to me, but "Stonehenge build next to Stone" does. I miss the resource bonuses from before - I loved in 4 when you had a copper/coastal city, you looked and was like, "hey, you know, I think I can get the Colossus up in this city". It never really made sense to build the Colossus if you have no access to copper.

    And given that they seem to want even more emphasis on terrain, I like having more terrain restrictions. Now, I don't think every wonder needs them. Something like The Great Library shouldn't need any specific terrain or resources, but if you have conditions on maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of all wonders, that makes sense to me.
     
  20. darkskies

    darkskies Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2013
    Messages:
    278
    When I first saw that I thought "oh-oh more rerolling my starts." But we'll have to see how it's all balanced before we can truly tell, there may be other compensations so it isn't as bad as it seems.
     

Share This Page