The Statue of Zeus

[Magean]

I play in King difficulty where wonders are still affordable.

I just wanted to know what was your opinion of the Statue of Zeus when playing aggressive expansionist civs.
Do you think the +15% against cities is worth the time spent building the statue, which could have been used for extra units, or settlers if you expect to go to war a bit later ?

Thanks in advance

 

[Traejun]

The +15% vs. cities is totally "worth it" in an Emperor or below game. Build, then go wipe out your nearest neighbor during the Classical era.

If you're going for a peaceful victory condition, it's not worth the hammers.

If you're playing Immortal/Diety difficulty, don't even think about it.

Edit: A little later in the game, with more powerful units vs. more defensible cities, it can make an invading force unstoppable.

 

[Browd]

Since SoZ is useless on defense, you're better off building your empire without it and targeting for early conquest whoever did build it.

 

[The Pilgrim]

Not worth it, IMO. Let other civs build it and capture it. The bonus is good, but not really necessary early on when CB's will crash everything without it. 2.5 CB's that you can have with those hammers will do more damage and in fact, it's more like 4.5 CB's because you'd better build archers and upgrade them anyways. Also Bronze Working detour will just slow you down.
The only case I would consider building it is when you pop BW from ruin, have a huge army already you barely can pay for and marble near you capital. But even then there are probably better things to build like market, coliseum etc.

 

[Emperor Giulio]

I play in King difficulty where wonders are still affordable.

I just wanted to know what was your opinion of the Statue of Zeus when playing aggressive expansionist civs.
Do you think the +15% against cities is worth the time spent building the statue, which could have been used for extra units, or settlers if you expect to go to war a bit later ?

Thanks in advance

It is definitely a prime target to conquer. I would only go for it myself if I was dealing with an opponent that has better than average defense, like Babylon. Other than that, I would just depend on building many soldiers. Or perhaps I would be tempted if I was near marble, which would give me a production advantage for it.

 

[Browd]

185 hammers is still a lot of production to spend on a wonder that is more easily captured. The 15% marble bonus makes 185 hammers equivalent to 161 "regular" hammers, which means you could pump out 4 archers (total 160 hammers) or two archers and a spearman (total 136 hammers) for less than the cost of that one wonder. And those extra units should provide more incremental firepower than the SoZ 15% city attack bonus.

 

[Emperor Giulio]

True, it also makes early units and early conquest all the more logical path to take. Let the enemy waste time on wonders, while you figure how to take it from them.

 

[guinsoo]

Statue of Zeus is a fine wonder for king difficulty I think. Early in the games, yeah 4 archers is surely better.

But if you're playing a little more relaxed game where you want to tech up a bit and then eat everyone with a technologically superior army, I think SoZ is fine for that purpose. It works all game long and I believe even with planes (I know it works with ships).

 

[Magean]

Thanks all for your answers

 

[marekb]

But if you're playing a little more relaxed game where you want to tech up a bit and then eat everyone with a technologically superior army, I think SoZ is fine for that purpose. It works all game long and I believe even with planes (I know it works with ships).

There are better early wonders to try if you feel safe (have gold/hammers for settlers/workers and descent defence). It is better to try ToA or HG and later capture SoZ. As Browd noticed: SoZ is useless for defence

 

[Hambil]

The only caveat I'd add is that building it stops other civs from getting it and using it against you. As far as cranking out archers and spearman and capturing stuff, if you want to play conquest that's solid, but I've won plenty of games (*certainly at your king level*) without conquering or having a huge militarily. Sometimes a best defense is a good offense and I've been known to steal offensive wonders I don't plan to use, just to safeguard them and to get the wonder points.

 

[The Pilgrim]

I've been known to steal offensive wonders I don't plan to use, just to safeguard them and to get the wonder points.

That's not good offence. Good offence means doing all the fighting outside your territory and never let enemy units get anywhere close to your cities.

 

[Hambil]

That's not good offence. Good offence means doing all the fighting outside your territory and never let enemy units get anywhere close to your cities.

Half a dozen of one six of the other. I'm lazy, and hate all the combat. I do it only when I have to. You can tell me how much more effective it is to micro manage and army (and you'd be right) till your blue in the face but you'd be wasting both our times

 

[The Pilgrim]

Half a dozen of one six of the other. I'm lazy, and hate all the combat. I do it only when I have to. You can tell me how much more effective it is to micro manage and army (and you'd be right) till your blue in the face but you'd be wasting both our times

No problem. Just clarifying things in case OP will see your post as advice rather than sharing your personal preference. I have a feeling s/he has some interest in effectiveness, otherwise this thread wouldn't have existed.

 

[Kazdum]

I've built once, on a emperor game, turns out that it was a "monumental" waste of time/hammers. Never did it again.

 

[Deau]

Not worth it, IMO. Let other civs build it and capture it. The bonus is good, but not really necessary early on when CB's will crash everything without it. 2.5 CB's that you can have with those hammers will do more damage and in fact, it's more like 4.5 CB's because you'd better build archers and upgrade them anyways. Also Bronze Working detour will just slow you down.
The only case I would consider building it is when you pop BW from ruin, have a huge army already you barely can pay for and marble near you capital. But even then there are probably better things to build like market, coliseum etc.

Exactly my thoughts on the topic. Plus, the status doesn't give your units any extra survival against the city itself which is really the more problematic point of early rush. Just build extra units that you can swap in and out or a few extra to keep pushing if you have some losses.

It's not even in my priority targets for civs to DoW against.

 

[sufficiency]

I feel that the Statue of Zeus is useless. One of the reasons is that the bonus doesn't work well on siege units.

 

[ssnitrousoxide]

+15% bonus vs. cities is a meh since that is negligible for siege units (the only thing you want to attack a city with in early game). There are so many useful wonders in ancient era that you have to compete for, i.e. GL/Artemis/Pyramid/Stonehenge. This is the last one you want to get.

 

[dpunk]

It's one of the better wonders in the game if you plan on playing domination IMO. Unfortunately it becomes available at a time when your better off spending your hammers on necessary early units/buildings.

 

[Matthew.]

King difficulty? I suppose you could try building it in a secondary city and if you get it, great. If not, *shrug*

For that early in the game I find coming up with gold to support an army is more important, thus something like Halicarnassus/Colossus will probably work out better, if you want to rush a wonder to help with early game domination.