Rillafane

Wonder Building

Wonder Building

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but Wonders proved to be a successful feature in Civ series.

Could we build wonder buildings (that cost enormous resources) in this game that offer chanellers certain traits? 

For example,  Jafar's Alchemist Lab would offer "alchemist trait" that can conver different crystals in a 1-1 rate. Fire to Air, water to earth...etc.

The Great library (increaes research and offer random spells...), Summoner's Altar(reducce summoning and maintenance cost....)........ :grin:

55,252 views 57 replies
Reply #51 Top

Quoting NTJedi, reply 25
Wrong... the basic core aspects of the game should not be optional and this section should be the most heavily beta tested to secure stability and game balance.  Critical features such as wonders should be optional because all critical features can't be fully beta tested before the games release.  Take a look at how AOW:SM originally introduced a critical feature such as "Surrendering"... it took many months of complaints on the forums before the developers changed their minds and made this optional while in the mean time all gamers had to suffer the results of this within their game.

Optional settings for critical features should exist due to bugs, game balance and user prefererence because at anytime any of these can be so severe that removing the option is the best choice.  As stated earlier the basic core game functionality such as swords(weapons) and champions and cities will be more heavily tested.

I misunderstood what you meant by "critical features." Nonetheless I disagree with the premise of your argument. Stardock's betas last a long time (It's scheduled to start by June, and to run pretty much until final release, scheduled to be ~Feb 2010, which will probably be postponed due to Stardock's tendancy to push back release dates until they're ready to release). June-Feb is eight months. Anything deserving of the label 'critical feature' will have plenty of time to be tested and tweaked, unless it's not implemented until the last moment (in which case I agree with you - little-tested major features should definitely be optional).

That said I am firmly in the camp that big features that can easily be made optional, without affecting game balance, should definitely be optional. If wonders are implemented the same way they're done in most games, they should be optional. If weather effects affect all factions equally, they too should be optional. But I am skeptical of making optional any feature that significantly disrupts game balance. (And note that skeptical does not mean rigidly opposed).

Reply #52 Top

Quoting pigeonpigeon, reply 1


 Anything deserving of the label 'critical feature' will have plenty of time to be tested and tweaked, unless it's not implemented until the last moment (in which case I agree with you - little-tested major features should definitely be optional).

That said I am firmly in the camp that big features that can easily be made optional, without affecting game balance, should definitely be optional. If wonders are implemented the same way they're done in most games, they should be optional. If weather effects affect all factions equally, they too should be optional. But I am skeptical of making optional any feature that significantly disrupts game balance. (And note that skeptical does not mean rigidly opposed).

Actually 8 months most likely won't be enough time for any games with moderate to great amounts of game depth based on results from previous games such as AOW:SM, Dominions_3 and even Gal_Civ_2.  Each of these had many beta-testers which tested the game for several months yet still some obscure critical bugs and unbalances appeared. 

The developers can provide recommended game settings as the default, but if a singleplayer gamer desires to play Faction Y without Wonders enabled thus altering game balance to be seriously more difficult for him then grant his wish.  Frequently I organize SP and MP games providing the computer opponents huge advantages and optional features make this easier. 

With the game having optional features it resolves many complaints because anyone complaining about XYZ feature can simply be advised... just disable the feature and thus they can enjoy all other aspects of the game.

Reply #53 Top

Quoting NTJedi, reply 2
Actually 8 months most likely won't be enough time for any games with moderate to great amounts of game depth based on results from previous games such as AOW:SM, Dominions_3 and even Gal_Civ_2.  Each of these had many beta-testers which tested the game for several months yet still some obscure critical bugs and unbalances appeared.

Correct me if I'm wrong but did any of those betas last 8 months? Not to mention, I have a feeling that the beta tester group for this game is going to be a little bit bigger than they were for the others (partially because beta testing is more common these days, and partially because Stardock has a bigger crowd than usual, partly due to GC2.

But yeah, no matter what there are going to be some bugs here and there come release. But anything really gamebreaking I am confident will be fixed pretty quickly. Yes, that means there will be bugs around that might affect the outcome of some games until it's fixed - but like I said before, I would rather SD spend its energy polishing the game and finding/fixing those bugs than making every non-core feature optional. The required dev time wouldn't be worth it, and quite frankly too many options would just be overwhelming.

Quoting NTJedi, reply 7
The developers can provide recommended game settings as the default, but if a singleplayer gamer desires to play Faction Y without Wonders enabled thus altering game balance to be seriously more difficult for him then grant his wish.  Frequently I organize SP and MP games providing the computer opponents huge advantages and optional features make this easier.

Well if your goal is to challenge yourself you don't need to stack the options to favor your opponents. If even the toughest difficulty isn't a challenge for you, you can always just handicap yourself. You don't need to disable wonders across the board, you could just choose not to build any.

Quoting NTJedi, reply 7
With the game having optional features it resolves many complaints because anyone complaining about XYZ feature can simply be advised... just disable the feature and thus they can enjoy all other aspects of the game.

Yes that's true. But the necessary consequence of having too many options is that many of the permutations will have unforeseen disruptive effects on gameplay. You can always say, "yeah, well if you don't like it, use a different combination of options." But what it really is is a design flaw; it means Stardock released a game that isn't really finished by providing you with sets of options that ruin the game. And unlike bugs, this is an inherent problem of too much freedom, and would in all likelihood be unresolvable.

No, what I want is for Stardock to provide us with a whole lot of options. I want to be able to disable and enable whatever features that can be done so without disrupting the game; features that don't equally affect everyone should in general be fixed. If there's a feature that isn't optional that you really hate, there's always modding. We don't really know details about how anything is going to work so it's way too early to say what should and shouldn't be optional. I just hope (and I do trust) that Stardock makes all of the options they give us meaningful, and that all combinations can be played through without everything going all whacky.

Reply #54 Top

I don't like it, that wonders can only be built once. Some wonders can be built once per game, some can be built once per player. If someone builds the pyramids in egypt, why am I not allowed to build pyramids in south america? If I built special training facilities in one city, and then i recognize, that they are good... Why am i not allowed to build them in another city? I also don't like, that the resources are gone, if I'm not fast enough in building the wonder.

On the other side, I like to have a special feature, no one else have. And I really like the race for the wonder. So it is a good reason to develop a special tech (...spell...) so I am able to build the wonder first. Why else should I force to develop a tech like "nonsense"? I could develop troop tech instead!

The one solution I read about here: Quests. Only with special artefacts from a quest, a special wonder can be built. A similar quest may hapen in the game, so another person is able to get "The Armor of Titan <Name>". With quests, I will not loose all my resources I put into the wonder, just because someone built it one round earlier. And the wonders could be built many times, depending on the quests.

The other solution I like to propose, is to create scalable wonders:

Let's say, I build the Great Library. Then I will get 50% additional science ressources. As soon player 2 builds his Great Library he will get 50% additional science ressources. But, because my Great Library is older, and my librarians have more experience, i then will get 75% additional science ressources. With the third player, the libraries will become 87%,75% and 50%. As soon as every player have a Great Library, the libraries are not that great anymore - (noone gets the bonus, or everyone gets the highest bonus)

Reply #55 Top

Quoting GreatVolk, reply 4
... Let's say, I build the Great Library. Then I will get 50% additional science ressources. As soon player 2 builds his Great Library he will get 50% additional science ressources. But, because my Great Library is older, and my librarians have more experience, i then will get 75% additional science ressources. With the third player, the libraries will become 87%,75% and 50%. As soon as every player have a Great Library, the libraries are not that great anymore - (noone gets the bonus, or everyone gets the highest bonus)

I'd really dislike this if it was just automatic--why should someone else building a huge library grant them access to mine, especially if we're at war?

But I'd definitely like it if the diplo functionality included some things like inter-library loans and co-operative research projects. I'd like it *lots* more if some diplo relationships required linked tiles in one of your cities and one of the other civ's cities, e.g. a Grand Library or Mages' Collegium.

Reply #56 Top

If someone builds the pyramids in egypt, why am I not allowed to build pyramids in south america?

I think its effected by what will cause influence.  The 1st great pyramid will be the most influential.   So for things like culture, the mayan pyramids wouldn't do as much.

This excuse may not work as well for a great library which should be full of info no matter how many exist, but maybe we shouldn't have that be a wonder.

The uses-a-particular-artifact type wonders like the eye of souran, or the wonders that might clash (two super-dimensional networks might cause the fabric of time to become too unstable, so only 1 will ever be allowed to be created since no channeler wants to kill themselves)  These may be the best ideas for Elemental Wonders.

Reply #57 Top

Quoting GW, reply 5

But I'd definitely like it if the diplo functionality included some things like inter-library loans and co-operative research projects. I'd like it *lots* more if some diplo relationships required linked tiles in one of your cities and one of the other civ's cities, e.g. a Grand Library or Mages' Collegium.

Building a wonder together sounds nice. The wonder "Gate From Hell" can only be created, if all two (three/4/5...) parts of the holy evil medallion are put together. Player 1 has one part, player 2 has the other part. What to do? Conquer the second part? Pay for the second part? Using the "Gate From Hell" together by building it on the borderline! The "Gate to Hell" will be mine alone, somewhen in future... Muhaha