Worst wonder?

[drewisfat]

Which has a bigger snowball, a border pop several turns earlier, or additional settlers/workers? Assuming you have at least 1-2 good tiles to improve right next to a new city, you can just build a monument and by the time your worker is bored and the city has grown, it border pops anyways. Your first few cities would probably just build warriors instead of monuments anyways. because the OC of just building monuments is so low, charismatic/ monument UBs don't make SH a better deal.

If you got industrious leader and early stone such that it's really cheap, well guess what's also super cheap early stone wonder. The Great Wall. Provided you have any nearby civs the GW means your economy will do fine til the late game without any effort. That's one heck of an opportunity cost for SH to compete with. And going for both SH and GW puts the second wonder at great risk and would pollute the GSpy pool and defeat the purpose.

Maybe if you were isolated, industrious and had early stone I wouldn't judge you for building SH, but hey I'm open to arguments about still just skipping SH for mids

As for the Internet, it can often boost your space race time with a high production/research ratio, and can help a military victory by going full commerce and buying units for the rest of the game. It coming late so you build it less is a reason the oracle is a better wonder, not the many completely useless / also too late to matter wonders.
I suspect there's just a bunch of people playing lower levels and having a monstrous tech lead late game. But that's just an issue of them not raising the difficulty enough to be challenging.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Early GProphet opens some shenanigans. Besides, if you'd otherwise have to build a monument, it can give some FV-reduced hammer usefulness too. Unlike SE, it comes on a tech you consistently need and the fact that it's been shown as conceivably useful instantly takes it away from "worst" territory. The monuments alone might be worth it if you're looking at an 8-10+ city REX being potentially viable, especially because are more scarce in cities being set up.

Gwall is of questionable value in some situations; it's rarely worth the barb protection unless on big maps and/or raging barbs, so you're really banking on that spy being useful, which sometimes it truly is. Others, such as semi-iso with a warmonger, or a situation where you can easily broker far ahead regardless, it turns into GPP pollution (so can a prophet). Point is, while Gwall > SH on average, it's not always better. The fact that SH can be useful (especially to open up AP cheese via theo bulb) instantly grades it over crap like chichen itza and especially SE.

 

[Tasunke]

I voted University of Sangakore not because it is the worst wonder but because it highly irritates me. I can never seem to get it to work properly yet it SEEMS to beatiful. Its like its just teasing me, poking fun at me. Like an itchy sore that won't go away. Like herpes (I would assume, never had the stuff).

Such a blight upon my existence, this foul and putrid Sangakore. If only it would work on all religious buildings and not just the state! Seems like a waste of a wonder for most optimal play, other than perhaps culture victory. Oh I'm sure some expert has done wonders with it, its not COMPLETELY useless, but I've only ever built it lately if I could spare the hammers (aka not feeling like making war and in too low a difficulty level to care).

Spiral Minaret is just as bad but I don't know ... it just isn't quite as spiteful to me. If I want gold for the sake of it then why not? Sure, just blow who knows how many beakers on an awkward tech. And damn! Versailles is there too. So why the hell not. Lets just make money for the ing sake of it. Lower maintenance here, add gold there, its a freakin lalapalooza.

But university ... oh university of Sangakore. How you tempt me so, you cruel ... cruel mistress! Your busty curves of extra science, with that tight location on the tech tree. Oh how you tempt me with your lusty promises of paradise ... yet any sane fool would turn you away. What daresay could you really give me Sangakore, that I couldn't get from an earlier University, more libraries, more land .... What do you give me but a measly +2 science on a building chain that's 2 per city, 3 on the big ones. Lets call it 2.25 per city. Oh joy, you give me a potential 4.5 science per city, oh how I love you. But wait! There is more. Not only do I get a measly 4.5 science per city (something that can later be increased to 9 science with bonuses) but I have to spend GOBS of hammers to get it! If I'm sitting here with a thumb up my ass building religious buildings in every city, I think I'd deserve to get invaded by 33.3145 egyptian cataphracts.

Seriously though, The sangakore seems like it will be a cool steal, sitting at Paper and being all tall and mighty, but really its just a pitiful waste of hammers better spent else where. Out. Out cruel candle. See how you strut across the stage of life and death, making a mockery of this fine establishment of a game. Begone! Begone from whence you came foul witch. We have no use for your kind ... you useless yet flavorful mole of noob trappery.

 

[Tasunke]

Which has a bigger snowball, a border pop several turns earlier, or additional settlers/workers? Assuming you have at least 1-2 good tiles to improve right next to a new city, you can just build a monument and by the time your worker is bored and the city has grown, it border pops anyways. Your first few cities would probably just build warriors instead of monuments anyways. because the OC of just building monuments is so low, charismatic/ monument UBs don't make SH a better deal.

If you got industrious leader and early stone such that it's really cheap, well guess what's also super cheap early stone wonder. The Great Wall. Provided you have any nearby civs the GW means your economy will do fine til the late game without any effort. That's one heck of an opportunity cost for SH to compete with. And going for both SH and GW puts the second wonder at great risk and would pollute the GSpy pool and defeat the purpose.

Maybe if you were isolated, industrious and had early stone I wouldn't judge you for building SH, but hey I'm open to arguments about still just skipping SH for mids

OH MAH GODDDDDDDDDDDDD

alright, alright. I hear you. I understand you. Now let me coddle you and pat you on the head dear boy, because it seems they need to give you your medicine. Don't worry, mama bishu has warmed up some tea and honey to make it all better.

But mocking Stonehenge? Seriously?
--------------


Anyways let us discuss this as rational adults. Its something you will learn when you get older.


So. Lets make a few assumptions here shall we? Lets assume you are a ladder player on the multiplayer over at the gamespy hosted servers. Now that we have a clear view of your crib, let us digest your circumstance.

At the blazing turn timer you are playing quite a different game than the average Civ player. Of COURSE you will think the GW is better than the SH because, assuming there is a turn timer, it will be impossible for you to maximize the SH benefits.

If you are building workers and settlers in your hammer high city, its not that you are playing incorrectly, it is that you are playing to your settings. People want useful units out *fast*. Therefore they will want workers and settlers out as soon as possible, and what better way than out of a high hammer city.

But wait! Then you say just build the GW. Well, if you are to build either wonder you should always build the SH (unless its obvious someone else will do the same, in which case its all WITOH and its a whole different ballgame). Assuming a single player game there is no reason to build the GW before the SH unless you have absoultely NO room for expansion or are playing a no settlers game.

Lets put it to you this way. One of your arguments said as much as the only thing better than culture pops were workers and settlers.

What are cities by themselves? Useful? No. They are a waste of maintenance. Culture and workers make them useful. Without culture and workers cities fall way behind the growth curve. A nation without stonehenge or cultural trait should just go ahead and overlap their cities to their hearts content. And I mean seriously pave the world. Of course, this isn't he whole game, just the opener, just the part where having more settlers than the other guy is most important. What stonehenge gives you is an opportunity to make better cities, more useful cities. If nothing else they make decent land grabbers for once. It isn't your capital that should be building your workers and settlers (imho) it should be your outlying cities. By all means micro whatever you need to, but in the meantime you make a few cities, the new cities start worker first (assuming there is anything workable nearby) and the wave of workers paves the way for the next round of cities. These workers make your cities useful. They make them grow and become productive members of national society.

What is civ without a ton of workers being maximized to steepen your growth curve.

Of course, it all comes back to the timers. Without a timer, you don't need to worry about barbs 'sneaking up on you', without a timer, you don't have to worry about 'losing worker turns' ... except for when those pesky barbarians poke their tiny heads. Also, if you are up on the growth curve, at least in basic civ, those barbarians will never be strong enough to threaten you seriously. Now, defensive diety is altogether a different ballpark, but if we go there lets talk 'what is the most defensive wonder' not 'what is the best'. And even then I couldn't go anywhere near calling Stonehenge one of the worst ... In fact, culture is a key factor to defense (at least 10% per city, if we count just the first pop), so in some ways you could say building the SH is like building a mini walls in each city. Does the Great Wall have that going for it? Does it protect you any from other civs' units? No. No it doesnt. It gives you some more generals to help out in a war you are already losing. On the other hand, its GREAT if you can trick a sub par opponent into suiciding against you ... but then again, is that really better than a MINI CREATIVE TRAIT!?

Seriously. Lets look at the brass tax. Maybe *I* would pick creative because of the faster libraries ... but what would a sane person pick Cre for? THE CULTURE. What else? And guess what. With stonehenge (or Incan terraces) you don't have to worry about not having CRE because your cities are getting culture ANYWAYS. Sure its +1 instead of +2, and you don't get extra speedy libraries .... but man, that's nearly half a whole trait! Just from a wonder at that.

Imho, there are three early wonders. Pyramids, Oracle, and Stonehenge. And in a real city spam situation? Stonehenge would be top of the list.

 

[Qgqqqqq]

Tasunke, I think most people in this thread are looking at it from a SP viewpoint.
That means
a) stonehenge falls early (I'm presuming high-level)
b) barbs are more scary then a normal MP game
c) you can con the AI in ways impossible against humans

 

[Tasunke]

yes, I suppose diety SP would be another place where stonehenge wouldn't be worth it.

 

[Funky]

I voted University of Sangakore not because it is the worst wonder but because it highly irritates me. I can never seem to get it to work properly yet it SEEMS to beatiful. Its like its just teasing me, poking fun at me. Like an itchy sore that won't go away. Like herpes (I would assume, never had the stuff).

Such a blight upon my existence, this foul and putrid Sangakore. If only it would work on all religious buildings and not just the state! Seems like a waste of a wonder for most optimal play, other than perhaps culture victory. Oh I'm sure some expert has done wonders with it, its not COMPLETELY useless, but I've only ever built it lately if I could spare the hammers (aka not feeling like making war and in too low a difficulty level to care).

Spiral Minaret is just as bad but I don't know ... it just isn't quite as spiteful to me. If I want gold for the sake of it then why not? Sure, just blow who knows how many beakers on an awkward tech. And damn! Versailles is there too. So why the hell not. Lets just make money for the ing sake of it. Lower maintenance here, add gold there, its a freakin lalapalooza.

But university ... oh university of Sangakore. How you tempt me so, you cruel ... cruel mistress! Your busty curves of extra science, with that tight location on the tech tree. Oh how you tempt me with your lusty promises of paradise ... yet any sane fool would turn you away. What daresay could you really give me Sangakore, that I couldn't get from an earlier University, more libraries, more land .... What do you give me but a measly +2 science on a building chain that's 2 per city, 3 on the big ones. Lets call it 2.25 per city. Oh joy, you give me a potential 4.5 science per city, oh how I love you. But wait! There is more. Not only do I get a measly 4.5 science per city (something that can later be increased to 9 science with bonuses) but I have to spend GOBS of hammers to get it! If I'm sitting here with a thumb up my ass building religious buildings in every city, I think I'd deserve to get invaded by 33.3145 egyptian cataphracts.

Seriously though, The sangakore seems like it will be a cool steal, sitting at Paper and being all tall and mighty, but really its just a pitiful waste of hammers better spent else where. Out. Out cruel candle. See how you strut across the stage of life and death, making a mockery of this fine establishment of a game. Begone! Begone from whence you came foul witch. We have no use for your kind ... you useless yet flavorful mole of noob trappery.

Just wanted to say that while I don't agree with you, I adore your way of writing!

 

[drewisfat]

I don't like his way of writing, as it opened up condescendingly and so I stopped reading. (Internet life lessons!)

I do assume SP deity. And I don't think space elevator > stonehenge. I just don't think stonehenge could ever have value with the settings I play on. If you use it for AP cheese i concede that it is worthwhile.

But I don't think outside of that it will be useful. It's not that stonehenge isn't sometimes worth its hammers, I just don't think there is ever a situation in which it helps more than alternatives. In the vast majority of games building workers/settlers is going to be more useful for expanding, especially in a big rex game (which is one of the times SH would appear to shine). The only time it would be more useful than those is if you had fierce wonder bonuses, (industrious+stone).

GW is not built for barb defense, that just helps cover some of the OC. Instead of building a few extra warriors you put your hammers in GW. It's interesting how in a lot of maps GW is worth it for that reason alone. But it's really because early GSpy is absolutely broken and the sheer THOUSANDS of beakers it guarantees you is insane. Gspy isn't going to be pollution because if you're building the GW you want the gspies, even more than one, as you've then unlocked several barriers to espionaging.

If you have a darling economy and you've had great tech trading luck then sure you the GW might not save your game, but I've never had a game where I was unable to steal techs for some reason. I've never had a game where I didn't get thousands of beakers in value, unlike the Oracle where the return is very large, but extremely dependent upon tech trading fortune. Also stealing techs unlike trading doesn't help the computer. GW is safe, the beakers are secured and horror barb luck losses are avoided.

I ramble about GW only because it is unlocked by the same conditions as SH and is just plain better, unless you don't have anyone near you. And if you are isolated than I feel than you don't have to rex, you compete with no one and expand at the most efficient rate. As for culture isolated it's not horrible, but I'd still probably just focus on mids and keep the GE as pure as possible.

Settling a GP is stronger than settling anything else early, but settling is still weak. What shenanigans do you use early GP for? (Besides theo bulb -> AP cheese). Is early theo bulb strong play on its own?

I guess the main difference though is that I would still consider a wonder worthwhile as far as this topic goes if it can be used for fail gold or culture, so that's why I rank it lower than the rest of the bad wonders.

 

[mintegar]

yes, I suppose diety SP would be another place where stonehenge wouldn't be worth it.

Saw AZ use it recently http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1jYS5bfd3U

 

[TheMeInTeam]

But I don't think outside of that it will be useful. It's not that stonehenge isn't sometimes worth its hammers, I just don't think there is ever a situation in which it helps more than alternatives. In the vast majority of games building workers/settlers is going to be more useful for expanding, especially in a big rex game (which is one of the times SH would appear to shine). The only time it would be more useful than those is if you had fierce wonder bonuses, (industrious+stone).

Your settings make "big rex game" smaller than usual. If you're expanding 10+ cities that need border pops SH can easily be worth it, and only on higher difficulties will you really struggle to hit that count. Also, opp cost for SH is less on lowever difficulties because you can easily chop it out in 2nd or even 3rd cities and still get it.

It just isn't a deity wonder typically. Thing about space elevator is, it's not an "any difficulty" wonder. I don't see how SH can even be close to that bad.

I ramble about GW only because it is unlocked by the same conditions as SH and is just plain better

SH does not require masonry, and with some civs is available immediately (not that you'd want to build it so soon...except maybe as fail gold optimization etc).

Settling a GP is stronger than settling anything else early, but settling is still weak. What shenanigans do you use early GP for? (Besides theo bulb -> AP cheese). Is early theo bulb strong play on its own?

AP cheese is the real reason, but theo bulb by itself isn't bad:

- AI doesn't use it consistently well, so it's not too bad to trade
- Trade value is pretty solid actually, and once you have it AI won't tech theo for a long time normally
- An extra promo on catapults, aggressive melee, or charismatic mounted after 1 fight is useful
- In low level games, it can be used to help unlock oracle education .
- OCCASIONALLY, you can do some interesting religious trolling, especially with SPI + Espionage.

I guess the main difference though is that I would still consider a wonder worthwhile as far as this topic goes if it can be used for fail gold or culture, so that's why I rank it lower than the rest of the bad wonders.

A lot of civs can use it as a placeholder while growing if they don't need warriors. Below deity where it goes instantly it is a viable fail gold wonder. I don't think any difficulty rescues SE, so SH is better outright, especially since SE has virtually no worth in terms of fail gold .

 

[drewisfat]

Imagine a game where you have a decent amount of cities/production but are hopelessly tech backwards (semi isolated meets lovefest). You beeline towards the Internet to catch up. Soon after that the Internet gives you robotics (could even much later if you have a spare GE) the SE could hypothetically save you a few turns, possibly saving you the game. This scenario is more likely on higher difficulties.

 

[AdamCrock]

Well I guess "Chicken it's Ya" deserved it Not like I would vote for the internet

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Imagine a game where you have a decent amount of cities/production but are hopelessly tech backwards (semi isolated meets lovefest). You beeline towards the Internet to catch up. Soon after that the Internet gives you robotics (could even much later if you have a spare GE) the SE could hypothetically save you a few turns, possibly saving you the game. This scenario is more likely on higher difficulties.

Actually, it's extremely unlikely. The combination of making it that far, still pursuing space, not having to intercept culture (and thus ignore a wonder that slows military production), getting internet when two AI have robotics quickly AND getting SE when two AI have robotics quickly is actually going to be very, very rare. 99.9% is about right. I certainly have never seen this scenario across hundreds and hundreds of games. I've seen a full health knight lose to wounded catapult, but not a case of SE being useful. I know it can happen in theory, but in practice it's easily the worst wonder.

The most comical thing is even if the stars align as you suggest, it will still only "save" you 1-2 turns. Amusing still is that if you can use that GE for a golden age, burning it on SE is also a waste lol.

Even on deity SH is many times more likely to be useful in a given game than SE.

 

[reddishrecue]

So SE is the worst wonder then. The free techs from oracle and the great prophet for theocracy are good especially with a phi leader that takes the oracle. Getting liberalism first is also another way to earn a free tech.

 

[drewisfat]

The situation is actually more likely to happen when you have to intercept culture cities. If domination victory is out (you're too small to conquer someone too big), but you're also tech behind and would likely lose space, your only victory path may be a late space win after targeted war to kill culture cities / capitals. In such an event you would have to invest a decent amount in military first to avoid losing. An efficient limited contribution to the space race would be Internet, and then when the AIs get robotics you build SE.

This isn't an unbelievably improbable because these stars are likely to align together, for instance in a rough deity isolated game.

I would argue that the SE is worth it in the closest, hardest of games. (a great player like yourself can avoid these !) I think it's somewhat fallacious to say that since it's rarely built, it's worthless.

Consider: the US Vice President only votes in the senate to break 50-50 ties. As such, he only votes like .1% of the time. Would you say his voting power is meaningless?

 

[lymond]

^^^bad analogy. SE is rarely built because it is worthless. President only votes in rare situations as it is necessary. cause and effect. effect and cause

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The analogy is bad but I think the situation might be valid.

You aren't delaying the space ship to research tech for the SE, you have the techs. You aren't delaying production of parts by building the SE because you have enough cities to build parts anyway now that you can stop building units. You've got a GE so you can halfway rush the SE and make all those part building cities build them faster.

While it seems like you perhaps should have won this game some other way already I can see how such a set of conditions could come up...in fact it is happening to me in my current game.

That said, any wonder that requires an obscure set of circumstances to occasionally get around the basic mathematical realities that building it is a negative certainly deserves a vote for 'worst wonder'.

 

[drewisfat]

My point is that just because it is rarely useful doesn't mean it's not an important wonder, because it is important in the hardest of games that otherwise may be lost. Do you value wonders based on how often their built, or how much they raise your percentage of winning games. I may oracle in 25% of games, and when I oracle the games usually go pretty easily. GLh I may only build 4% of the time, and those games are very hard. But if I could only keep one of those wonders available in the game I would keep the GLh, because when it is useful in a game that may otherwise be unwinnable, unlike the oracle. If the start is good enough to build the oracle I could probably win without it.

The point is that you are underrating SE because I low frequency. (Like the VP, although I made he classic forum mistake of using an analogy. Ppl always view a point differently than you, then hate on analogies then huge sidetrack ^^)

It's also going to be useful less often because it comes later. That's an inherent problem, so regard that as you will.

Lastly it's being attacked because it admittedly "only saves you a couple turns."
Imagine if that standard was used against any other wonder? Prove to me that the Hagia Sophia or The pentagon or SoL can save more than 4 turns? Very few wonders in practice can save ou more than a few turns over alternative choices ( the early snowball wonders ). And even these are so hard to evaluate b.c of snowballing that it's pretty hard to prove.

I think ultimately wonder utility is extremely dependent on th weight you place on different settings.
I only care about about SP deity, normal or quick, pangaea or fractal, and ignoring AP and cultural victories. Under those conditions I view the SE as rarely optimal, but over half the wonders I consider NEVER optimal. Therefore I don't consider it the worst wonder, I consider the worst wonder to be a tie between the ~60% or so completely useless wonders. If I had to tiebreak I'd do it off fail gold potential, of which SH has zero (goes too early IMO). And that's why I think Stonehenge is the worst.

 

[Qgqqqqq]

"only saves you a couple turns."

Actually its generally attacked because it saves no turns, and is generally of detriment to a space race.

 

[Lennier]

Actually it's attacked because 99% of the time, it costs you turns to pursue it, and in that less than 1% of the time it saves you turns, it's only going to be a couple of them.