[GS] St. Basil's Should Only Be Allowed on Tundra

[WackenOpenAir]

No it should definately not.

It is not just a wonder about improving tundra. Its a win condition.
For me it is in the first place a wonder that makes super strong combination with Mont st Michel.
Preferably in a single city. That wont happen if you make it turndra. Doing so turns it into a canada / russia only wonder. I say F canada and russia. And you can play against me instead of the AI, and i will also snatch this wonder without having a tundra tile in sight.
I hate it that there is AI's who are wasting this wonder on making a few tundra tiles useful

 

[Victoria]

It is not a very compelling argument that it should be on tundra because the AI beats me to it.
Nearly put me off my game.

 

[Pietato]

A better solution would be to require the city to have a certain number of Tundra tiles.

 

[Sostratus]

A better solution would be to require the city to have a certain number of Tundra tiles.

This would be the ideal hidden requirement for the Ai to build it. That's the crux of the issue - the AI builds it and wastes the production. If the Ai built it in good locations players wouldn't be nearly as salty.

 

[Archon_Wing]

learn to do Magnus chop

Yea pretty much that. If you are pursuing a religious or faith strat, you will often be able to faith buy a GE sometimes.

 

[tetley]

I get a volcano in tundra all the time, and have little trouble building it. St. Basil's always being near a volcano doesn't bother me at all.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

No it should definately not.

It is not just a wonder about improving tundra. Its a win condition.
For me it is in the first place a wonder that makes super strong combination with Mont st Michel.
Preferably in a single city. That wont happen if you make it turndra. Doing so turns it into a canada / russia only wonder. I say F canada and russia. And you can play against me instead of the AI, and i will also snatch this wonder without having a tundra tile in sight.
I hate it that there is AI's who are wasting this wonder on making a few tundra tiles useful

Build a strong military and your victory will be guaranteed while building an expensive wonder don't help you much at all other than possibly making your victory quicker in certain cases. Im not sure if any wonder is actually Worth to build given that you can Always build more units instead.

Tile requirment would atleast force the wonder to be placed somewhere it may use its tundra bonus, Assuming more than one tile have tundra.

This would be the ideal hidden requirement for the Ai to build it. That's the crux of the issue - the AI builds it and wastes the production. If the Ai built it in good locations players wouldn't be nearly as salty.

If the ai did not waste production on wonders and knew how to manage its military it would do alot better.​

 

[Tech Osen]

Build a strong military and your victory will be guaranteed

Not everybody likes the military solution, and some like a bit of variety. I often find it a more engaging challenge to not conquer any cities and see how it goes.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Not everybody likes the military solution, and some like a bit of variety. I often find it a more engaging challenge to not conquer any cities and see how it goes.

Yes it make the game harder which makes the victory Count for more, but Im not super found of the massive encouragment to build an army and chop Everything.

 

[Nefelia]

Is it not quite overpriced for a rather small benefit? So while it may be cool to have, maybe it should not be priced in the 900s to begin with and if the ai want to waste that sum and not even get the tundra bonus, maybe there is something wrong with the ai priorities?

Still making it tundra instead of being next to CS would make sense given its bonuses and also probably make the ai play somewhat better.

It transforms a small, limited tundra city into one that has potential to get large. In my current game I built it in a small frontier tundra city surrounded by small foreign tundra cities.
Several traders getting food and hammers to the city and the successful completion of St Basil’s saw my city big enough to start flipping nearby cities.
Not all games see such dramatically successful used of St Basil’s, but the transformation of a mediocre town into a valuable city is often worth the cost.

 

[Nefelia]

Yes it make the game harder which makes the victory Count for more, but Im not super found of the massive encouragment to build an army and chop Everything.

I chop very rarely, much preferring the long term benefits (and aesthetics) of forests, and eventually lumber mills.

Besides, the yield of chopped forests in the early game is not often worth the builder charge.

there is a reason I stick to Emperor difficulty. Employing the gimmicks necessary at higher difficulties (mass chopping, immediate military focus, the nonsense with keeping district costs down, etc) just kill the fun for me.

Eh we’ll, to each his or her own. I’m grateful the Civ can accommodate so many different play styles.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

I feel like there is some vagueness about how much and when cutting is good. The proponents of "cut-a-lot" often make it sound like they chop everything in sight as soon as the game starts. I don't think that is entirely so though. I think they cut a lot right when feudalism comes around. Indeed when you have 3 builder charges each producing 30 chopped production, the value is tiny. (and it wastes the huge opportunity for later) However, When feudalism comes around you probably are nearing turn 100, have 6 actions on a worker and now a single cut gives more production than the cost of the entire worker. At that point cutting is indeed gold and it is good to cut even tiles that you would otherwise like to work.

I don't do it either though. I don't like every gimmick that people suggest. I did every trick in the book (as long as it was considered legal) when i did (s)gotms and wanted to win as early as possible. Now i play for fun, and i play in ways that seem fun to me. That also includes playing pacifist styles. (I do however indeed have a lot of fun working with the district discounts and optimizing that kind of stuff )

 

[Banazir864]

Tundra is by definition without trees yet in Civ 6 we see plenty of tundra tiles with forests (which should be called taiga). It's a simplification of reality.

This. Civ VI's "Tundra" actually seems to correspond to taiga and similar biomes. IMO, actual tundra is better represented by Civ VI's "Snow" biome.

Kind of like how Civ VI treats all deserts as hot and sandy, or conflates Archeology with Paleontology (if I could mod, one of my first mods would be to change the Artifact symbol from a dinosaur skull to the Rosetta Stone, and ideally also replace the dinosaur outside the archeological museum, but I digress).

 

[blackcatatonic]

Stop crying and learn to do Magnus chop

Unnecessarily patronising response to what was a perfectly reasonable suggestion in the OP.

I don't think the issue is that it's not possible to build it, it's more that it's frustrating when the AI builds it in a sub-optimal location.

 

[steveg700]

St. Basil's having a tundra requirement would just be treating a symptom, not the disease.

The AI should build wonders in a little more strategic sense than "Do I have the capability to build this wonders? If yes, then by gum, build it".

Civ's should focus based on their current victory condition strategy, and certainly should take the number of turns it's going to take into account.

But barring better conditional programming, we're left with using terrain requirements. Definitely should be tightened up for Apadana and Machu Picchu, because every civ fast-tracks these and they player usually won't even finish the require research before it's been built.

 

[kb27787]

St. Basil's having a tundra requirement would just be treating a symptom, not the disease.

The AI should build wonders in a little more strategic sense than "Do I have the capability to build this wonders? If yes, then by gum, build it".

Civ's should focus based on their current victory condition strategy, and certainly should take the number of turns it's going to take into account.

But barring better conditional programming, we're left with using terrain requirements. Definitely should be tightened up for Apadana and Machu Picchu, because every civ fast-tracks these and they player usually won't even finish the require research before it's been built.

Don't you know that the AI is programmed to annoy you, rather than to win for themselves?

While you're at it you might want to fix them attacking CS that they have no hope of keeping through loyalty, or buying GP that they do not have any real way of using, or spending envoys on CS that don't give them any benefit.

If anything wonders still provide tourism and Theatre adjacencies. Given that the AI receives massive bonuses to wonder production I'd say they might as well build whatever they can if only just to thwart the human player.

 

[kb27787]

Unnecessarily patronising response to what was a perfectly reasonable suggestion in the OP.

I don't think the issue is that it's not possible to build it, it's more that it's frustrating when the AI builds it in a sub-optimal location.

Lol what you lot mean to really say (and let's be honest here) it's indeed frustrating when the AI plays to frustrate you and you're salty because you wasted your settler on that otherwise worthless tundra city and did not have the sense to think that the AI would make some effort to thwart your plans.

I would say this aspect of the AI is working exactly as intended. Carry on.

Moderator Action: Please make your argument and cease characterizing others incorrectly. It is trolling. leif
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[blackcatatonic]

Sigh. Nope. Try again.

You can build any wonder in the game if you focus on it (at King, anyway; I don't play anything higher than that). Not being able to build it before the AI isn't the issue, at least not for me. And honestly does anyone settle a tundra city just for St Basil's? I only would if there was a natural wonder nearby (Canada/Russia excepted, of course).

But when I capture an AI city with St Basil's and no tundra, it just seems like a waste. I just think any wonder that buffs terrain should require that terrain; it's logical.

 

[kb27787]

Sigh. Nope. Try again.

You can build any wonder in the game if you focus on it (at King, anyway; I don't play anything higher than that). Not being able to build it before the AI isn't the issue, at least not for me. And honestly does anyone settle a tundra city just for St Basil's? I only would if there was a natural wonder nearby (Canada/Russia excepted, of course).

But when I capture an AI city with St Basil's and no tundra, it just seems like a waste. I just think any wonder that buffs terrain should require that terrain; it's logical.

I've built mausoleum next to a lake harbor before... Zero coastal tiles to buff but I wanted the GE charges.
As long as there are other benefits I don't see any reason to restrict the placement.