Wonders strongest in civ ...?

[carn]

In all civ games there was always the tempting option to slow expansion to grab some or many wonders. So there always was the waging between additional units, settlers, normal buildings and wonders. Wonders are in a game more powerful, if it is sensible to decide very often for wonders in that decision.
Also with this poll i ask to assume, that the chances to get wonders are irrelevant, e.g. in civ3 hardest difficulty, 16 players, it was nearly impossible to get more than 1 ancient age wonder, so the competition is between spending x resources on other stuff or guarantee to get a wonder.

I did not play civ 4 very much, currently lacking a adequate computer, but so far my opinion, mainly by trying to understand game mechanics, it seems to me that power of wonders, from least to most is number of "-" indicating the gap between: civ1 --- civ 3 - civ 4 --- civ2 (----------- SMAC)

Civ1 wonders are rather unimportant i think, since tech advance is so fast, that they are obsolete too fast.

What do you think?


Carn

 

[Thalassicus]

SMAC: Hunter Seeker Algorithm > all!

Any wonder that makes an entire line of strategy obsolete, permanently, with no counter....erm...

 

[petey]

I think it depends on the Wonder. However, I think that Civ III has the edge (only played III and IV), since it had some super-Wonders which don't have the equivalent in Civ IV.

For instance, if you could get the Great Library in Civ III, you could just set your research level to zero and still keep up with the tech lead for the entire first part of the game, getting a massive bank account to fund whatever you like. There's no Wonder in Civ IV to compare with that, but for the rest of them, I think the power of Wonders is about even between the games.

 

[grunthok]

The war machines that are possible in CivIII after you build Sun Tzu's, Leanardo's, and Adam Smith's easily outweighs any set of wonders in CivIV.

 

[Gufnork]

Wonders in Civ IV are fairly irrelevant. Pyramids is huge, but too expensive. Oracle helps a lot and a few others are useful in situations. But most of the time they're not worth building unless you don't have something better to do. The same cannot be said about Civ III. How the heck do you remember Civ I? I barely remember what Civ 2 was like, Civ 1 was like ages ago.

 

[GIO888]

Grunthok is right.

I really miss the effect of Sun Tsu's and especially Leonardo's Workshop.

That said, with all the "teething" probs Civ4 has had technically, maybe auto updating all cities with a barracks, etc, might be a step too far.....

CIV ON!

 

[MamboJoel]

All Civ3 wonders had less effects than their equivalent in Civ2.
For instance:
Leonardo in Civ3 halves the price of promotion of units cities with barracks whereas it promotes every units everywhere automatically for free (when you reach the new tech that provides the new unit) in civ2.

 

[Smaxiboy]

I would def say that civ2 wonders were more important than those in civ3.

 

[Zombie69]

I voted for Civ 1. Some of those wonders were huge. The pyramids for instance were crazy. Pyramids are one of the best wonders in Civ 4, and they're nothing compared to the power they had in Civ 1.

 

[rcoutme]

I voted Civ II (I never played Civ I). I agree that I miss the wonders of Civ III (Leo and Sun Tzu). I really kinda wish they had included an upgrade wonder as the upgrading is very expensive. It is usually cheaper to rush a unit than to take an older unit and upgrade it.

 

[jafink]

i voted for civ 2 although i never played civ 1.

 

[carn]

Wonders in Civ IV are fairly irrelevant. Pyramids is huge, but too expensive. Oracle helps a lot and a few others are useful in situations. But most of the time they're not worth building unless you don't have something better to do. The same cannot be said about Civ III. How the heck do you remember Civ I? I barely remember what Civ 2 was like, Civ 1 was like ages ago.

If i would know why i remeber civ 1 it would be great, because then i would know why i remeber so much useless informationen and forget so much important.

Carn

 

[carn]

SMAC: Hunter Seeker Algorithm > all!

Any wonder that makes an entire line of strategy obsolete, permanently, with no counter....erm...

I agree its among the best, but the combination space lift and the thing that caused cities to grow every turn till food surplus is zero is also fantastic - from tiny village to huge city in 30 turns.

And several "get a xxxx in every city", that were spending 200-300 resources on a wonder and receiving 40-80 resources and 1-3 gold per turn for every city.

Therefore i did not include SMAC in the vote, otherwise i could have just asked "do you know SMAC?" and would have received the same poll result.

Carn

 

[carn]

All Civ3 wonders had less effects than their equivalent in Civ2.
For instance:
Leonardo in Civ3 halves the price of promotion of units cities with barracks whereas it promotes every units everywhere automatically for free (when you reach the new tech that provides the new unit) in civ2.

It is even better, everybody can upgrade units in civ 3, while no one can in civ 2, except for the one having leonardo and he gets it for free. Its among the must have wonders of civ 2, if one intends to build units prior modern ages, it will be a gain in the order of several thousand resources, if a big ancient army was built.

Carn

 

[Crimso]

Civ II wonders were the strongest. I especially liked the Statue of Liberty, which provided all types of government and (IIRC) no anarchy. Sort of a precursor to Civ IV's Spiritual trait, you could turn on Democracy to get techs in one or two turns, and then switch to Fundamentalism to conquer a few civs. Leonardo's Workshop was also overpowered. There was another one, I think King Richard's Crusade, which only lasted a short while but provided a huge boost in shield production in the Middle Ages.

I would say Civ III's wonders were the weakest overall.

 

[carn]

I voted for Civ 1. Some of those wonders were huge. The pyramids for instance were crazy. Pyramids are one of the best wonders in Civ 4, and they're nothing compared to the power they had in Civ 1.

Pyramids in civ 1 enabled all government forms and reduced anarchy from ~6 turns to 1 turn.

Governments very soon avaible were despotism, monarchy and republic. So pyramid made avaible democracy and communism and reduced anarchy. As i never saw early on a advantage of democracy over republic(no commerce corupption against little corruption) and think that early on monarchy is better than communism(settlers require only 1 food upkeep in monarchy), i can only see its advantage in changing from war to peace government, which i never did much, because it was problematic with happiness if suddenly military police was no longer needed/ was suddenly needed everywhere.

So i cannot see the big thing about pyramids.

In civ 2 200 resource pyramids provided granaries everywhere, which meant, as granaries where needed nearly everywhere(causing more new cities and faster terrain improvement), 60 resources + 1 gold per turn per city, which is a no brainer investment, if one ever plan to have more than 5 cities. A real must have, if one cannot conquer it.

Carn

 

[Tholomeo]

Civ2 wonders rule! Great Library, Sun Tzu, Leonardo, Crusade, Marco Polo, Darwin's Voyage, SETI program, Cure for Cancer!!!

As for civ4, there are no "must-have wonders" (if we're not talking about OCC). If you lose a race for any wonder, it is tolerable.

 

[Coase]

SMAC: Hunter Seeker Algorithm > all!

Any wonder that makes an entire line of strategy obsolete, permanently, with no counter....erm...

Alien Crossfire toned this down a bit, for those who don't know. I believe it negated all spies; however, there was some attachment players could put on probe teams that could override the Hunter/Seeker algorithm (though success was still reduced by half or something.)

As far as I'm concerned, Civ II should win by the mere virtue of the existance of Leonardo's Workshop. That thing kicked ass. If I had to rank, I'd say Civ II, Civ I, Civ III, then Civ IV. I also think Civ II's Wonders were the most creative: I loved King Richard's Crusade, Marco Polo's Embassy, and Adam Smith's Trading Company. I only rank Civ III lower because it became harder to actually acquire those Wonders without being able to rush them.

 

[anti_strunt]

As far as I'm concerned, Civ II should win by the mere virtue of the existance of Leonardo's Workshop. That thing kicked ass. If I had to rank, I'd say Civ II, Civ I, Civ III, then Civ IV...

That sounds about right, and dito on Leo's Workshop... Man, those were the days...

 

[Pie-es-Tasty]

Civ2 wonders rule! Great Library, Sun Tzu, Leonardo, Crusade, Marco Polo, Darwin's Voyage, SETI program, Cure for Cancer!!!

As for civ4, there are no "must-have wonders" (if we're not talking about OCC). If you lose a race for any wonder, it is tolerable.

Yeah, I feel the same way. In the Civ IV it's like "Eh, I missed a wonder, oh well," but in II and III, I remember waging holy crusades to get back wonders that I missed, especially Lenardo's Workshop! Geez, that was THE wonder to have in Civ 2.