wonders rushing is stupid in civ3.....

[akinkhoo]

and why are there no way to rush wonders?
all the damn wonders of the world were rush
with a lot of money or force labour...... it is the truth....
that many will die (pyramid) or alot of money are wasted (apollo)



i hate the idea that leaders are used to rush things.....
i mean HOW CAN a guy build pyramid in a day? that is stupid....
I rather a leader can increase productivity when he is used....
like civil time mobilisation or something.... which is more realistic.



there should be a way for other city to help
construction of improvement and wonders another city.
something like a modify caravan design to aid production only.
it is common in country to help build infrastructure at less well of part....
there will of course be a penalty to prevent misused (50% lost in transit)...
i think it is less stupid than disbanding tanks, which doesn't work for wonders still.

 

[God]

It would be stupid if you could rush the wonders. In Civ 2 all people did was build tons of caravans and have them rush the wonders. That way you can get all of them.

Like somebody else said in some other thread: If you want realism, go outside.

 

[mydisease]

You appear to have posted in the wrong forum, moaning about civ 3 should be reserved for General Discussions

 

[Zouave]

Stockpiling your resources to rush Wonders makes much more sense than having some Superman-type Leader magically create a major Wonder from scratch in one turn.

At least in Civ 2 I didn't see so many hundreds of shields wasted on Wonders that can't be finished as another civ built them. Some (not all) of those shields should go into Wealth.

As for "realism", I found more of it in Civ 2. Civ 3 was supposed to not go BACKWARDS in that area.

For those of you who do not care about either realism or history (like Firaxis) you just need Civ 3.

 

[JollyRoger]

I think Great Leaders should provide a productivity boost to a city, but not allow the instant rushing of a wonder (unless, of course, the name of the Great Leader is Wonder Boy). I also think that all shields should be wasted if you lose a Wonders race. It may be frustrating if you lose a Wonders race, but at least the AI has to start over too. How many times have you seen Wonders completed on consecutive turns when it is obvious that the losers of a Wonders race are just cashing in their production on whatever Wonder is available? Pre-building a Wonder through working on a palace is also lame. There should be a option in the editor to accomodate hardcore Wonders races. Of course, the more softcore players probably want an option in the editor to allow their lethal bombardment units to have the ability to rush Wonders, but I digress.

 

[ChickinSht]

Originally posted by Zouave
Stockpiling your resources to rush Wonders makes much more sense than having some Superman-type Leader magically create a major Wonder from scratch in one turn.

At least in Civ 2 I didn't see so many hundreds of shields wasted on Wonders that can't be finished as another civ built them. Some (not all) of those shields should go into Wealth.

As for "realism", I found more of it in Civ 2. Civ 3 was supposed to not go BACKWARDS in that area.

For those of you who do not care about either realism or history (like Firaxis) you just need Civ 3.

Go play EU and shut up already. Either that, or, if you are really into realism, GO OUTSIDE.
Nah, I'm just joshing you. I find your posts funny. Keep it up!

 

[Zouave]

Hey, no Sht!

 

[eighty]

Well, according to the manual, they explain it by saying that the leaders whip the population into a frenzy so they complete it. It doesn't indicate that the leader himself builds the wonder through some magical wonder boy properties. And remember, one turn can actually be many years until modern ages, plenty of time for a whipped population to complete something.

I don't find it as unrealistic as converting the palace into a wonder though. That should be not allowed, not on the basis of realism, but on the idea that moving the palace is what it takes to move a capital. What happens to the old one? Does it just disappear or is it taken apart brick by brick and transported to the new site? I would rather see different civs all have different ways of moving the capital. Anywho, this isn't really any strategy or anything so I will shut up now.



(Don't Panic!)

 

[Koronin]

Because to allow it is total cheese.

Yeah, it was like, so challenging to hoard up caravans and build the hoover dam in one turn.

Wanna rush them? Fight your butt off early and gather some leaders to do it.

Originally posted by akinkhoo
and why are there no way to rush wonders?
all the damn wonders of the world were rush
with a lot of money or force labour...... it is the truth....
that many will die (pyramid) or alot of money are wasted (apollo)



i hate the idea that leaders are used to rush things.....
i mean HOW CAN a guy build pyramid in a day? that is stupid....
I rather a leader can increase productivity when he is used....
like civil time mobilisation or something.... which is more realistic.



there should be a way for other city to help
construction of improvement and wonders another city.
something like a modify caravan design to aid production only.
it is common in country to help build infrastructure at less well of part....
there will of course be a penalty to prevent misused (50% lost in transit)...
i think it is less stupid than disbanding tanks, which doesn't work for wonders still.

 

[SirJethro]

I would prefer for leaders to provide something like a four times productivity boost and eliminate corruption for 20 turns or something. Or until the city completes one improvement or wonder. I agree the rushing in one turn is a little cheesy. Why would anybody use a GL for an army???

 

[The Last Conformist]

SirJethro, do you mean that you never use a GL to build an army? That'd mean you can never build Heroic Epic (which's great for further wonder production) nor Military Academy ... which seems a pretty large sacrifice. I always use my first GL to make an army.

 

[Koronin]

I always use my first for the Forbidden Palace.

I know that where I will want the forbidden palace to be located, it will take 300 turns for it to finish, way too long.

After that, definitely build and army and get it to win a fight.

 

[Richard III]

Originally posted by The Last Conformist
SirJethro, do you mean that you never use a GL to build an army? That'd mean you can never build Heroic Epic (which's great for further wonder production) nor Military Academy ... which seems a pretty large sacrifice. I always use my first GL to make an army.

I've never built an army, ever. The things are obviously useless.

As for the leaders being able to rush, I think it's an ok and creative game feature. It would feel more realistic if more of the leaders were political, religious or scientific visionaries; perhaps a nice game reform for IV would be to have more leaders appear, but leaders able to do certain things only: for instance, a religious leader could only have an impact on religious buildings and wonders, but a military leader could be used to create armies. Each civ would get them in proportion to their traits.

As for the rushing realism, though, keep in mind what a turn represents. Is it really SO hard to beleive that a great Aztec leader could help to complete some pyramids in a 20 year turn? Or a Lighthouse, or some Gardens? Or that a Russian leader like Peter the Great could create a stable national debt market (e.g. the badly misnamed Adam Smith's Trading Co) in five years? Or build a Pentagon in two? Magellan's Voyage took just over a turn in game time. The Cathedrals (Sistine and JS Bach's) might be slightly unrealistic timewise, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not that far off.

The Americans took five years to develop the Atomic Bomb. Why? Because Great Leaders in two fields (Einstein & Roosevelt) took action. Other countries that were working toward the goal took longer or didn't get there first because they didn't apply their political and economic capital in the same way.

So, if you look at what history really is, instead of what you as gamers expect it to be, you'll see that to complain about this is, you guessed it, more whining.

Get back to playing the game and have a good time, already! Or spend some time writing on a Mideast thread - your logic will fit in well there!

R.III

 

[Koronin]

---
As for the leaders being able to rush, I think it's an ok and creative game feature. It would feel more realistic if more of the leaders were political, religious or scientific visionaries; perhaps a nice game reform for IV would be to have more leaders appear, but leaders able to do certain things only: for instance, a religious leader could only have an impact on religious buildings and wonders, but a military leader could be used to create armies. Each civ would get them in proportion to their traits.
---

DUDE! That's one of the best suggestions I've read ever. Get that to Firaxis's attention, spam them, post it everyday

 

[Tweedledum]

The problem with Leader-rushing is that their appearance is so infrequent. I hardly ever get one (and yes, I know how to...)

I've just finished a game: Large Pangea, default number of opponents, won by conquest. How many leaders? None (again)

There is no logical reason for not allowing the rushing of Wonders. Make it expensive? Yes... but allow it? Yes...

 

[eighty]

I agree with you Richard, thanx for adding to the perspective of how long a turn really is.

I would, however, suggest trying armies. On offense they do kind of lack. A tank army can only attack twice, but 4 tanks can attack 8 times. This is a serious flaw, I agree.

But an army of fortified mech infs is hard to kill. I use them for defense on the front lines or when the enemy has those annoying 100+ stacks of units.

I also think that the earlier in the game the better for an offense army. An army of 3 swordsman is actually a valuable weapon against spearmen. In my humble opinion of course.

 

[CharlyFox]

You can still rush a good part of the wonder if you want. Just rush a palace and change to a wonder then ... This is one of the reasons I don t built all my wonder in the capital...

 

[RoddyVR]

CharlyFox, thats just plain wrong.
FYI
you cant rush a capitol,unless you use a leader, then you might as well rush the wonder
actualy i never tried rushing the capitol, but if you can rush it then you cant switch to a wonder afterwards, that i know for a fact.

 

[ChickinSht]

Aye, si, he is right. If ye rush, ye cannot switch to a wonder. And I donae believe ye kin rush a palace.

 

[Beam]

Originally posted by Zouave
Hey, no Sht!

Hey, a non-typical Zouave response! You could consider to do some refreshing in other responses as well, I can almost spell the current ones out.

With all respect for the mod you made btw, although it is not my cup of tea and do not share your view on the need of Civ3 to be historically accurate.