Ruins ruin GOTM?

[StrideColossus]

There was a bit of a derail discussion in the GOTM68 opening actions thread around ruins (there are none in that particular game):

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=12751962#post12751962

So, to avoid further derailment...

Personally I enjoy having ruins in all games. Yes I understand that this means there is a random element where players are not going to get the same goodies from ruins (and at the most important phase of the game).

However I believe this is outweighed by that fact that it does promote adaptation IMHO, if you're unlucky and don't get the sweet technology that someone else got, well, them's the breaks.

But what is the communities opinion? Place your bets.

- stride

 

[Neuro]

Ruins are simply another piece of the game; sometimes good, sometimes bad. I don't mind them being off or on, as long as the removal has been clearly posted in the Announcement thread.

That being said, if the ruins are turned off when we play the Shoshone, I think that would be a travesty.

 

[Halcyan2]

I feel like we've had this discussion before!

Yes, ruins can affect the game quite a bit. But there are many things that do that as well.

The starting policies that the AI's choose can significantly shave turns off of a Culture victory (just like how Culture ruins of Faith ruins can). If everyone is taking Piety and Honor, it's going to be a lot easier than if they all took Tradition and Liberty.

Similarly, Pantheon choices by the AI can have a similar impact. If they choose culture producing beliefs (God of the Open Sky, Oral Tradition, Sacred Path, etc) then your Culture victory will take that much longer.

So I'm okay with ruins. I don't think every game needs to have ruins. But I also don't think we should completely excise ruins either.

 

[Finnrat]

my favorite option would be to convince the makers of civilization to include an option that ruins will have their content selected at start. Then the output will be the same for everybody even if you find them in a different turn.

 

[FeiLing]

What Finnrat said. I do however always want ruins to be on even if that will never happen. Without them games are much less entertaining.

 

[JungleIII]

Ruins encourage exploration and brighten the game, making it more exciting and adventurous. I will always pass on a GOTM5 without ruins on. Jeeesh... this is a game and it's for fun, no matter which way the ruin jackpot goes.

 

[glory7]

I understand that ruins are part of the game, but for competitive games like gotm I think no ruins is better. Getting early culture ruin provides significant advantage, for example.

One good example is gotm66 - a player founded a religion before t60 thanks to 2 faith ruins - he also got pantheon thanks to 1 faith ruin, so total 3 faith ruin till religion. Well.....

 

[cas]

If this is supposed to be a competition, you'd remove all random luck you can...like ruins. If it's only about fun, then you'd include ruins.

The same map is NOT the same game if one person gets early techs, faith, culture and pop while another gets barb locations, maps and a little gold.

I voted to leave it up to the map creator. I'd like to have some games with and some without.

Finnrat's suggestion would be great, but the devs won't implement it.

cas

 

[Arnold_T]

I voted to leave it up to the GOTM creator. Generally I prefer to have ruins on since it's more fun with ruins, and there a lots of other luck elements in the game anyway that can have a bigger impact than ruins.

 

[tommynt]

fun

Doent this fun get pretty old after 15 games?

 

[FeiLing]

No, it doesn't.

 

[VengerBR]

I don't care either way.

While they add to the early game experience and encourage exploration, they bring a definitely random element to every game, sometimes that works for the worse.

So it's good and bad at the same time, I don't have an strong opinion about ruins.