Some advice for people trying to beat wonder addiction.

[cheffster]

Mr. Monkey seems to be taking his time replying to this thread, but from the looks of things, I do not blame him

And as for Mr. Cheffster, I would be very interested in looking at one of your deity games. I just would not want to see some sort of exploit like 'And now, we accept our permanent alliance signature with Musa!'

I actually posted a couple Deity games in these forums from a while back (Sept/Aug) here are the links:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=242678&page=3 (I started near the bottom of the third page, I gave a fairly detailed description of my game, with saves an all)

here's a cultural Deity win (which obviously is different from most other wins, but I still followed a similar strategy including lots of wonders)
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=243430&page=3

 

[CivCorpse]

My poimt was not that building all the wonders is a good strategy, but rather that the OP was making a case that the wonders were useless.
A. Most people with wonderoholism do not play the nhigher levels.
B, That the wonders he listed and bashed were not worth building. If you are script player that basically plays war war war, then wonders are not a factor. But many people play the game for a more well rounded approach and enjoy building wonders. i typically play monarch/emperor level games. i build some wonders and play with agg Ai so the games are both enjoyable and challenging. I could probably play higher levels, and have on occasion. but they make playing too rigid. Less room for doing what i want to do rather than being forced into things. A lot of people enjoy the game at lower levels. i have a friend that is addicted to civ and struggles at time on warlord. H ecould streamline his play and I frequebtly answer my phone at 3am because he isn't sure what to do or how to get himself out of a jam. Is he a good player? I would say he is an excellent player. Why? Cetainly not because he has a firm grasp of the mechanics and nuances of the game. But because he loves to play and has a great time when he plays (which is all the freaking time). It's a game. let people build their wonders. let them play the lower levels if they like. Playing higher levels doesn't make you a better player. It makes you different. I have read the walk throughs of the so called experts...and they are all the same, and end all the same....B-O-R-I-N-G. The only games I follow are sistual's because he tries different approachs to everything and aims for different goals each game. For all of you that play to axe rush then liberalism race to cav rush.....go play checkers...it's about as varied.

 

[Winston Hughes]

I'd remind you that the title of the thread is Some advice for people trying to beat wonder addiction.

Anyone who's happy building stacks of wonders every game can carry on doing so. Nothing wrong with that.

But for those who want to stop, and learn to play a different way at least some of the time, having a few wonderless games is the best policy imo.

And "Sometimes play without wonders" is much less limiting a proposition than "Never play without wonders".

There's a whole world of wonderless fun to be had out there.

Try it, you may be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Bureaucracy]

I am tempted to start up my own thread. "For those of you trying to stop warmonger addiction."

#1 Stop building military units.
#2 In fact, Don't build any military units, period.
#3 Modern Tanks are the most useless units in the whole game, and here is a list as to why:



Just kidding, but you see how silly some of these things can get


And Cheffster, thanks for the links. I scanned through your games last night. The culture one was a little hairy, requiring a lot of 'luck' as you mentioned in timing to work out twice in a row. I suppose if you didn't care about finishing a culture so EARLY, you could have possibly had an army ready to prevent the luck-factor with the backstabbers. But I'm still sure you were felt pretty proud after that. Any time you break new ground it makes you feel good.

Your other game was the most interesting. Do you normally build cottages all over and run free-speach?

 

[popejubal]

I am tempted to start up my own thread. "For those of you trying to stop warmonger addiction."

#1 Stop building military units.
#2 In fact, Don't build any military units, period.
#3 Modern Tanks are the most useless units in the whole game, and here is a list as to why:

I've seen some challenges where people built only one unit per city as a peacekeeper/police unit (necessary for happiness) and I've seen someone play Ghandi where he built absolutely 0 military units (settlers and scouts only) and had only the initial warrior parked in his capitol.

I think that a closer analogy to building 0 wonders is to build 0 offensive military units. Building 0 military units altogether would be more like building no buildings of any kind and using Worldbuilder to delete any buildings you find in cities that you conquor.


...and as for your statement that Modern Armor is the most useless unit in the game: I disagree. I think that the Explorer takes that prize. Modern Armor is not an especially useful unit in about 99% of my games, however. By that point in the game, it is exceptionally difficult to wage war and the game is almost certainly already won or lost by that point. I do use Tanks/Panzers and I do use Bombers and I have put Mech Infantry to good use, but Modern Armor is a rarity.

 

[Winston Hughes]

I am tempted to start up my own thread. "For those of you trying to stop warmonger addiction."

#1 Stop building military units.
#2 In fact, Don't build any military units, period.

Just kidding, but you see how silly some of these things can get

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

Playing without military (except for one warrior in each city for happiness reasons) is a great way to force yourself to improve at diplomacy.

Probably best to grab the GW asap, though.

 

[Kanidyen]

Playing without military (except for one warrior in each city for happiness reasons) is a great way to force yourself to improve at diplomacy

...and win culture games... and yes, on Deity too

 

[cheffster]

I am tempted to start up my own thread. "For those of you trying to stop warmonger addiction."

#1 Stop building military units.
#2 In fact, Don't build any military units, period.
#3 Modern Tanks are the most useless units in the whole game, and here is a list as to why:



Just kidding, but you see how silly some of these things can get


And Cheffster, thanks for the links. I scanned through your games last night. The culture one was a little hairy, requiring a lot of 'luck' as you mentioned in timing to work out twice in a row. I suppose if you didn't care about finishing a culture so EARLY, you could have possibly had an army ready to prevent the luck-factor with the backstabbers. But I'm still sure you were felt pretty proud after that. Any time you break new ground it makes you feel good.

Your other game was the most interesting. Do you normally build cottages all over and run free-speach?

Hehe, yeah the culture game was truly fluky in some areas - Obviously I could have built up proper defences if my only aim wasn't to win cultural as early as possible, once I knew I was within 20 turns or so, I just didn't bother with anything besides my focus, which was before after I got attacked.

After a certain point, I almost always run free speech + mass cottages, but moreso if I'm playing a financial Civ. Whether I do this earlier or later depends on many things - such as how much I'm getting from specialists, and how many cities do I have with lots of towns.

I used to even mass cottages in my Military city and Ironworks city and run Universal Sufferage for production, one game on Immortal with the Inca's I had every single tile possible made into a village or town by 1600, and it was perhaps my best economy ever, I remember marching in with modern armor in the 1820s vs muskets and riflemen.

Great advice about those wanting to quit their 'warmongering addiction', warmongering is only possible at lower difficulty levells really - once you move up emperor+ you need to only build perhaps 1-2 military units per era.
And I vote axemen as the most useless unit that alot of 'war-mongers' struggle with, and waste resources on that could be used for -Buildings, settlers, workers, wonders, scouts, gold, science, spies, work boats, etc...
Once people understand the true opportunity cost of building a military they realize its only something that can be done in strict moderation.
However, I'm not saying military units are in essence bad, but you should only attempt to build an army once you know you can play without it.

 

[AnyKeyz]

Why beat wonders addiction ?

 

[popejubal]

Why beat wonders addiction ?

So that you can win games at a higher difficulty level and/or enjoy the game in all of its dimensions instead of just playing sandbox?

There's nothing wrong with playing without opponents (and after you've gotten the hang of the game, anything below noble really does count as that) if that's what you want, but I'd personally like to explore more of the game and be challenged a bit more as well.

 

[AnyKeyz]

OK I see
I am the type 'too strong for Noble, too weak for Prince'
So wonders are welcomed

 

[popejubal]

Great advice about those wanting to quit their 'warmongering addiction', warmongering is only possible at lower difficulty levells really - once you move up emperor+ you need to only build perhaps 1-2 military units per era.
And I vote axemen as the most useless unit that alot of 'war-mongers' struggle with, and waste resources on that could be used for -Buildings, settlers, workers, wonders, scouts, gold, science, spies, work boats, etc...
Once people understand the true opportunity cost of building a military they realize its only something that can be done in strict moderation.
However, I'm not saying military units are in essence bad, but you should only attempt to build an army once you know you can play without it.

I know that you were being sarcastic above, but replace "1-2 military units per era" with "1-2 military units per city" and I agree with pretty much everything you said there.

I think that warmongering can absolutely be overdone and that relying on the AI to build all of your cities for you while you build nothing but units is disrespectful if not downright foolish. I think a lot of people have noticed that if you don't have Quecha, then a very early rush is much more difficult in 3.13 BTS than in the original vanilla. Axemen are certainly powerful, but they certainly do have their limits.

Learning how to play without Axemen is just as important as learning to play without Pyramids, IMO.

 

[Gwynnja]

Statue of Zeus (It allows you to cause some extra unhappiness to a civ you're at war with if and only if the battles are taking place on your turf... yeah...)
[/mod]

I'm by no means the best player around, (I've yet to master the Noble difficulty,) but I tend to built the Statue of Zeus so I don't end up warring with whoever builds it first

 

[Dier]

My poimt was not that building all the wonders is a good strategy, but rather that the OP was making a case that the wonders were useless.
A. Most people with wonderoholism do not play the nhigher levels.
B, That the wonders he listed and bashed were not worth building. If you are script player that basically plays war war war, then wonders are not a factor. But many people play the game for a more well rounded approach and enjoy building wonders. i typically play monarch/emperor level games. i build some wonders and play with agg Ai so the games are both enjoyable and challenging. I could probably play higher levels, and have on occasion. but they make playing too rigid. Less room for doing what i want to do rather than being forced into things. A lot of people enjoy the game at lower levels. i have a friend that is addicted to civ and struggles at time on warlord. H ecould streamline his play and I frequebtly answer my phone at 3am because he isn't sure what to do or how to get himself out of a jam. Is he a good player? I would say he is an excellent player. Why? Cetainly not because he has a firm grasp of the mechanics and nuances of the game. But because he loves to play and has a great time when he plays (which is all the freaking time). It's a game. let people build their wonders. let them play the lower levels if they like. Playing higher levels doesn't make you a better player. It makes you different. I have read the walk throughs of the so called experts...and they are all the same, and end all the same....B-O-R-I-N-G. The only games I follow are sistual's because he tries different approachs to everything and aims for different goals each game. For all of you that play to axe rush then liberalism race to cav rush.....go play checkers...it's about as varied.

Heh, nice rant. I tend to measure a successful game in terms of enjoyment as well.

 

[lukep]

There is a need for sinergy between wonders and your strategy :

ToA/GLh couple has already beend mentioned, but there is some others :

* GW/Stonehenge eventually Oracle give you a nice supply of early prophets in Warlords (no bts here, i'm on mac). So Ankhor What? becomes even more powerfull if you settle them. In warlord, GW/stonehenge is usually easy to get up to emperor, higher it is more tricky but still very valuable.

* Colossus can be very powerfull if you are fin and lot of your cities are coastal. Ragnar really shines in that case.

* an expansive leader having settled load of early cities will get the nicest boost of Hanging gardens and so on. Very well suited for Memhed.

So the key point is to know what each wonder gives you and build it only if it is usefull to *YOU*.

Even the less good ones, like Chicken pizza can be nice under the right circumstances (at least for the rare GE points it gives, or making your protective civ very hard to attack, need lees units).

It is no different than buildings, not every city need a barrack.

More, wonders give you GPP points and great people are absolutely essential at the higher levels (settled or lightbulb).

 

[Unconquered Sun]

Play hammer economy. No cottages. No specialists. No trade routes. Learn the worth of hammers.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

I think the whole point is to have a strategy for your wonders. If you are building them "just because" then you shouldn't be building them. And pare the strategy down to just what is really needed. The Oracle is great, but unless its essential to your strategy then skip it.

Sometimes the strategy involves getting lots of wonders for GP points - ala Obsolete and Cheffsters games. Which is great for an industrious leader. But if your strategy is to push cottages everywhere, or run an early war, then most wonders are a distraction that will interfere with your main strategy.

I think the key to wonder addiction is giving up GOOD wonders that aren't part of the strategy so you can focus on ones that are. For example the Great Library is fantastic - but if you are playing an isolated start, the opportunity cost of pursuing it is that you are researching Aesthetics + Literature - two techs that aren't on the way to Optics and aren't required to support your economy. The Great Library and Collosus on the other hand are directly on your research path.

So there is a trade off involved in building a wonder - and if you can't answer the question of why its worth that trade off then you shouldn't build it.

The exception is industrious leaders, which should build lots of wonders to maximize the advantages of the trait.

 

[AnyKeyz]

I'm by no means the best player around, (I've yet to master the Noble difficulty,) but I tend to built the Statue of Zeus so I don't end up warring with whoever builds it first

I personnaly love the Statue of Zeus, as it can have a significant impact, especially if you're at war most of the time.

 

[noto]

Dude...what are you talking about? Some of the wonders you listed are great for certain strategies and others are really not as bad as you make them out to be. The Angkor Wat is great if you are going for a cultural win as Sal and you've founded 4 religions and need shrines and are thus running oodles of priests. The Parthenon is a great wonder...in almost any situation. The Sistine Chapel, again, useful for cultural wins using a SE. Notre Dam weak?? What?? +2 happiness in all cities on continent?? That's amazing. If you have stone and beeline to engineering you can easily get it.

I don't have wonder addiction. I play many games building 1 or even 0 wonders. It all depends. If I'm playing as Boudica I might grab stonehenge and that's it, no more wonders for me. I'll let other people build them for me and take them by force. If, on the other hand, I'm playing a philo leader like Alexander and there is stone nearby...pyramids, anyone?

 

[Iranon]

Most wonders are reasonably powerful... the important question is whether they are worth the investment and whether they get in the way of something more important at the time.

If you can conquer a rival civilization gaining ~3 cities and cripple another shortly after (raze easy pickings, steal their workers, pillage everything they have) you will have secured yourself a huge advantage that is likely to outclass early wonders.
Depending on the location of the lame duck, you have set up a victim to keep the warmongers out of your hair or you have secured yourself a personal . .. .. .. .. . who will donate workers to steal and improvements to pillage for a long long time.

I suppose many players build wonders excessively because they don't realise they have other gainful things to do... but a bit of warmongering and the diplomacy that follows can set up the game for millenia to come.