Worst wonder?

[Funky]

No, what you have done is *claim* that you had a case where SE "won you the game", but have yet to show evidence that such was the case. (...) You can't even give a decent quantification of the #turns it saved or how many hammers.

Man, I'm sorry I didn't use flipcharts to draw graphs and statistics showing the influence of my decisions in my game. I was playing for fun, like I always to do, not to prove anything, and I never thought I would have to justify my game decisions in a forum to someone essentially accusing me of making up stories. Personally I find it rather remarkable to argue for the existance of absolute truths in an open game like Civ. But I'm really getting tired of this, so if it makes you happy, ok the SE is ALWAYS useless and you know how my game went much better than I do. What I said in my previous posts were either lies or depictions of bad play. Settings, different situations, and player styles don't matter at all, you are always right.

 

[Lennier]

Or your game was one of the ~0.1% where SE might be useful. (If it really is useful in more like 5% of the games, you should have more than one example.)

 

[faipalgugus]

What irony, i just won a game where the space elevator was useful.

I hadn't any intention to built it, but i bulbed "accidentaly" 2 engineers in ten turns (20% probability) and i get Robotics in the same time via internet. So i build it. But it is a very situational.

 

[faipalgugus]

If you can cut down the single most technologically advanced AI in the world such that you can take his capitol and live to tell the tale, you will have enough oomph to just kill everybody else too.

I'm almost always agree with you but this is wrong. I razed countless times the capitol of the top ai with tac nukes+commandos to prevent him to winning. But at immortal and deity, the top ai is almost always way more powerful than me. All i need is to
keep my capitol a few turns. It's possible with a small military and some tac nukes.

Well, sure, if i'm 40 turns short to winning, i can't keep him off long enough but otherwise it's very possible. You can also have a third ai in the same time who is near a cultural victory but can't prevent him because his legendary cities aren't costal and you have not commandos units anymore. Therefore, an "internet" engineer SE can win a game.

Ok, my scenario happens 0,01% of the game, but still

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Man, I'm sorry I didn't use flipcharts to draw graphs and statistics showing the influence of my decisions in my game. I was playing for fun, like I always to do, not to prove anything

That's fine. In fact, I would assert that's the best way to play the game.

However, it's also true that you don't prove anything when playing for fun and not to prove anything .

not to prove anything, and I never thought I would have to justify my game decisions in a forum to someone essentially accusing me of making up stories

I don't doubt that you stopped a space win, built a wonder that slowed you down, and won anyway. The problem isn't that your story is made up, but rather that your conclusions based on your experiences are not plausible. It's very unlikely that the wonder "won you the game", and lacking anything in your story to suggest it actually did...well.

Let me just say that one could also build 3 cities all game and claim that "doing so won the game". Yep, he built 3 cities. Yep, he won. Therefore, he won because he built 3 cities? Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzt, wrong! That, my friend, is not a logically valid construct. That is all I was pointing out.

I find it rather remarkable to argue for the existance of absolute truths in an open game like Civ.

99.9% is not an absolute truth. "Worst wonder" isn't either, if you change the criteria sufficiently. But, on a game-to-game basis the SE is easily the worst wonder from a "how much did this contribute to my victory" standpoint, because in the VAST majority of cases it has a negative contribution, and even under "ideal" circumstances rarely saves more than 1-2 turns.

you know how my game went much better than I do

I don't. However, I assert you don't either, and if I had a save, THEN I could know your game. That's all I ask for; one, just ONE pre-robotics save where going to robotics and building SE speeds up the victory date. It hasn't been done yet. You at one point asserted this wonder is useful 5-10% of the time, but we have 0 evidence of it ever being useful, aside from anecdotal correlation nonsense that could literally be applied to make objectively awful decisions look like "winning choices" using the exact same logical construct...but that isn't really evidence.

What I said in my previous posts were either lies or depictions of bad play.

My estimate falls under the "bad play" category, since most people would consider choices that slow down victory and lower your %chance to win as bad play. Your story certainly sounds like bad play to me...but I can't even say THAT for sure, since we don't have a save. Maybe you're right, but it's dubious since no such situation has ever actually been demonstrated.

Settings, different situations, and player styles don't matter at all, you are always right.

I don't believe I claimed I was always right, but I see you're resorting to additional logical fallacies as you run out of objective evidence. I do believe that the SE is so bad that playstyles actually don't matter. I have given the #'s as to why that is numerous times (the most common reason being that it can't possibly save more turns than the time it takes to research robotics unless you research robotics in 1 turn). The other reason is the tech bottleneck; even hammer-poor empires tend to have a research bottleneck. Because of the ability build space parts concurrently while researching and the research bottleneck, you want the last space tech faster. It's the kind of thing where you can begin the last space part after researching the final space tech, and when it finishes it will usually be the last part completed...this is not an instance where you'd even consider going to robotics.

That leaves the "do I need this to conquer the AI" part. The answer is "generally, no". There are multiple techs that give better military options than MI if you have the resources. On space techs alone you can build modern armor and nukes/subs. If you can pick up advanced flight, jet fighters + anything can also easily assault coastal and even inland cities.

So now, we need ALL of the following to be true before building SE is worthwhile:

1. We are behind in tech and need to conquer at least 1 AI city to prevent losing. (note, if we are not behind in tech, we do not need MI to do this)
2. Despite being able to conquer that AI city, we can't win outright with military
3. Despite being behind in tech, we are able to secure robotics in time to build SE
4. Despite being behind in tech and production, we can build SE and still conquer the AI city.
5. We do not have oil + aluminum together
6. We do not have uranium
7. We don't have the means to trade for military resources or conquer AI with infantry/arty/antitank/SAM

It would take the stars aligning for all those to be true. That's going to be close to 100% for not happening, but not quite 100%. Indeed; times where MI are necessary or even speed up war are relatively rare. Why? Because they're worthless by themselves as anything but stack or city defense. They can't bombard or cause collateral, so you wind up relying on artillery, planes, or nukes anyway. If you soften defenders, infantry can easily kill anything. The only reason you'd need MI is to get ambush on them to help deal with modern armor/other modern AI units attacking your stack. Otherwise infantry/arty/antitank/SAM walls everything except modern armor well (note that infantry get a gunpowder bonus vs MI, but MI don't get that, so the difference between the two is less than appears). If you have uranium, you have the best military unit in the game from space techs only and using MI over tactical nukes, even with SDI in play, is strictly inferior.

Well, sure, if i'm 40 turns short to winning, i can't keep him off long enough but otherwise it's very possible. You can also have a third ai in the same time who is near a cultural victory but can't prevent him because his legendary cities aren't costal and you have not commandos units anymore. Therefore, an "internet" engineer SE can win a game.

1. Build tac nukes and paras (paras can take empty cities after a paradrop)
2. Base them in an open borders AI next to your culture target OR base then in transports/subs
3. Tac nuke the culture city, then paradrop it and take it. If you're using subs/transports, first capture a coastal city, then move transports in + nuke/para the inland city (paras can drop from coastal cities out of transports on the same turn)

You'd have to be on something like highlands or great plains AND have a legendary city not be near another AI's city before you'd actually need troops with the commando promo.

Ok, my scenario happens 0,01% of the game, but still

I said 99.9% though . That's good enough to make it hands-down the worst wonder. Also, "can win a game" and "actually does" are different. Remember that this thing will still shave at most a turn or two from the launch date (and maybe nothing, depending on when you get robotics from internet). For it to win the game you must have an engineer that can't be spent on a golden age AND have a margin of victory of 1-2 turns AND enough cities to build it while still building all available space parts. Pretty rare.

Somewhat ironically, the highest chance of SE being useful is probably to capture it without researching robotics.

 

[faipalgugus]

1. Build tac nukes and paras (paras can take empty cities after a paradrop)
2. Base them in an open borders AI next to your culture target OR base then in transports/subs
3. Tac nuke the culture city, then paradrop it and take it. If you're using subs/transports, first capture a coastal city, then move transports in + nuke/para the inland city (paras can drop from coastal cities out of transports on the same turn)

Yes, but if there is one worker in the city and you can't take it.

Your power has to be at least decent to have a chance to hold a city even only one turns. If your ennemy is too powerfull, he will slaughter your paras and others troops. In my last game, if i had paras instead of commando i would have lose because there were a tons of commercial society directors in my target town. And obviously, they won't die despite being nuked (Not to mention that the city was too far to paradrop anyway and i had no chance to hold a coastal city even one turn)

 

[strijder20]

Yes, but if there is one worker in the city and you can't take it.

Your power has to be at least decent to have a chance to hold a city even only one turns. If your ennemy is too powerfull, he will slaughter your paras and others troops. In my last game, if i had paras instead of commando i would have lose because there were a tons of commercial society directors in my target town. And obviously, they won't die despite being nuked (Not to mention that the city was too far to paradrop anyway and i had no chance to hold a coastal city even one turn)

AI has a tendency to mass all it's units in one stack, nuke it and the enemy won't retake the cities you capture.

 

[Antilogic]

The Bunga Bunga party would be the worst wonder if it were in the game.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Yes, but if there is one worker in the city and you can't take it.

Your power has to be at least decent to have a chance to hold a city even only one turns. If your ennemy is too powerfull, he will slaughter your paras and others troops. In my last game, if i had paras instead of commando i would have lose because there were a tons of commercial society directors in my target town. And obviously, they won't die despite being nuked (Not to mention that the city was too far to paradrop anyway and i had no chance to hold a coastal city even one turn)

That does make it a bit harder, I admit. I never liked that glitch. You have to plan a little extra and get even more "gamey".

1. In the captured coastal city, send enough 2 movers to disembark and pillage roads/rails. This pretty much flattens any serious AI ability to retake the city. Leftover chariots will suffice too. Gunships are even better but more costly and less realistic to have in this scenario.
2. Paradrop around an area you want to make sure the AI can't sweep. Pillage those roads or rails too. Drop remaining paras on that tile
3. Nuke + raze the city the following turn.

This gets a lot more complicated if your target has a serious stockpile of nukes, although you could probably pre-empt that. You also need to nuke away fighters/jet fighters or they intercept paradrops. This process is a LOT more costly than a simple 1 turn nukeraze...but it's still made no easier by having mech infantry mind you ^_^.

Commando is definitely preferred in this situation, but if you have a limited # of them, make sure to use them on the guys who are parking execs in the capitol (almost never will all 3 culture cities have civilians for example, but capitols might).

A full-scale intercontinental invasion of an AI with an inland capitol, tac nukes, jet fighters, and techs nearing space is going to be nearly impossible with any ground forces. Either you can come up with enough subs/nukes to triple raze basically every coastal city and 1-turn spank them, or you're probably going to get counter-nuked by some random sub out of the arctic, spanked by 1 ICBM, and have whatever forces make landfall nuked to oblivion too. That's generally too large a hit to production to win space OR stop the next guy.

This is also a lesson in why you want to commit one way or the other. Rather than teching, you could put your assets into simply building the nukes/subs ASAP and actually get the 60-80 tac nukes + scouting necessary to obliterate a superpower. If it looks you're being outraced to space, that is probably the more intelligent option, because space elevator <<< high level AI bonuses. Mech infantry do not beat nukes, air power, and 100 unit stacks!

 

[AdamCrock]

TMIT Your posts are too large !

 

[bestbrian]

TMIT Your posts are too large !

That's what she said.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

TMIT Your posts are too large !

Being a fast typist is a blessing and a curse.

For me, it is a blessing. For everyone else, it is a curse

 

[Ataxerxes]

I only insist on building the Space Elevator because I'm such a fanboi of the real thing. I'll build it whenever I go for a space victory (it's a handicap I give myself). Now, only a small portion of my games are space victories, but still, it's thematically important to me.

Well, here's a good reason to build it. It would be an awesome wonder and it has great cinematics. That might be a good idea for another poll - which wonder has the best/worst cinematics.

I understand that Next World has the SE in a decent place on the tech tree. I imagine some modders probably placed it somewhere reasonable in the tech tree as well (like it was in vanilla).

 

[lindsay40k]

What if the SE was a National wonder and a prereq for building parts, eh?

 

[rfcfanatic]

Angkor Wat.

Not sure if getting Great Prophets in mid-game is that useful. Sure, a Priest specialist yields , but so does an Engineer. Priest specialist also yields , but a Merchant does it more efficiently. Besides, Great Engineer and Great Merchant are much more useful in that game phase.

 

[Mec AntiKythera]

In vanilla, Notre-Dame was a terrible and terrible wonder. Only one happy per city for that investment...come on. At least, in BTS we got 2 happies...but personally I would like three. Anyways, doesn't matter as Engineering is an AI tech and by the time I usually get it ,the wonder is gone.

Funny to see Notre getting no votes as bad wonder while MoM get some. Seriously.

It has one of the best movies though, I would build it just for that.

 

[Drakarska]

Well, here's a good reason to build it. It would be an awesome wonder and it has great cinematics. That might be a good idea for another poll - which wonder has the best/worst cinematics.

I understand that Next World has the SE in a decent place on the tech tree. I imagine some modders probably placed it somewhere reasonable in the tech tree as well (like it was in vanilla).

Really?, hmnn, I don't remember seeing that one in the list of mods. May be time to revisit the mods section

 

[drewisfat]

*Note* I don't want the following anecdote to give the impression that SE isn't a useless turd.

In a recent game of mine I ended up building the space elevator. I was on a continent and got involved with a massive war with the other continent's runaway. I had some sloppy play and let the frontline city packed with my units, some jets and nukes of my own, get nuked and ended up losing the city. Given that the war was now greatly extended and would require infinitely more effort I decided just to switch gears to space. A couple turns later I got robotics from the internet. I even had an engineer doing nothing but waiting for a possible GA. Obviously this wouldn't have been faster than just straight going to space or having a better military campaign, but it may have been the optimal play for switching strategies because of horrific blunder.

That said, two things have always confused me about this poll:

1. Why are people rating the Internet the worst 'wonder' lol. In late game scenarios you can just beeline towards the Internet and then turn off research.... completely...

2. Why aren't more people rating Stonehenge as the worst wonder? Most of the wonders in the game aren't even close to worth it for their effect. But they can still be good for fail gold and culture victories.

The wonder goes so extremely early, the only way to secure it is to like settle capital on a stone hill.
Even in that situation it directly competes with, imo, the greatest ROI from a wonder in the game -- the GW. Comparing the effects of free monument and garbage gprophet with GSpy and no barbs is fun.
It's too early for fail gold to be good.

Is it only spared because people might build it in like noble marathon huge games or something?

At least space elevator only costs you a few turns, who knows the devastating countersnowball building stonehenge might have.

 

[MilesBeyond]

1. Why are people rating the Internet the worst 'wonder' lol. In late game scenarios you can just beeline towards the Internet and then turn off research.... completely...

I think the answer is that it comes too late. By the time the Internet's around, the game's likely already decided - if it even makes it that long. That being said, it can be very useful in Space Races for the reasons you described, but mostly on higher difficulties where the AI can be relied upon to reach the Future era. On lower levels it's pretty useless as you've likely got a significant tech lead anyway, so what's the point?

2. Why aren't more people rating Stonehenge as the worst wonder? Most of the wonders in the game aren't even close to worth it for their effect. But they can still be good for fail gold and culture victories.

I see a lot of debate around here as to whether or not Stonehenge is a bad wonder. The arguments in favour of it basically come down to this:

Earlier culture pop means you can take advantage of second-ring resources much quicker, allowing your cities to grow and develop at a much faster pace than otherwise. Due to Civ's snowballing effect, in the Ancient era being able to work your entire BFC several turns earlier than otherwise can provide quite the benefit.

Of course, it's utterly useless if you're CRE, and I personally would never go for it unless you start with Mysticism and Stone. But if you meet those conditions, it can be pretty helpful.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Stonehenge can be good or it can be a waste of hammers. As Miles noted, it's worthless if you're creative. It's also not worth it if the land around you is highly contested which it often is.

With Stone and/or Industrious it comes quite cheap so if you really don't need to grab more sites ASAP it can be a good build. It's also useful for Charismatic leaders. Maybe it should be called DeGaulle's wonder? Cheap and useful for him. Saves having to chop out monuments in all cities.