How my games begin

[Brutus66]

I remember an observation someone once made here (I wish I could find it so I could credit the author), "building wonders = a great way to suck at civ".
That pithy statement stuck in my mind for some reason, and I have found it to be pretty accurate.

These days I usually don't bother with the pyramids anymore; for me it's all about horses rather than stone- great for hammers in the controlling city, getting in a chariot rush, the knights that come later are handy, and if the Russians are nearby you definitely want to get to those tiles before they do.
The only time I chase any wonder anymore is if it's directly related to the victory path I am pursuing and if there's a reasonable chance of getting it.

What I have learned about this game is the importance of developing a plan early, based on immediate resources and my civ's abilities.
Beware of neglecting the military, for there's always some warlord civ out there who will come after you. Even if you are technologically far advanced, these knuckleheads will show up with stacks of obsolete units and try to give you grief (esp. with aggressive AI in BtS). When you're involved in a race to build spaceship parts, the last thing you need is to get involved in a protracted war with some backwards blockhead like Monty or Tokugawa.

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by Brutus66
I remember an observation someone once made here (I wish I could find it so I could credit the author), "building wonders = a great way to suck at civ".
That pithy statement stuck in my mind for some reason, and I have found it to be pretty accurate.

It certainly wasn’t me because it is not actually true. For the more successful games (I’m talking SP here) you will want to be looking at the possibilities that wonders give you.

If there is a problem with wonders, it is possibly that people are not using them properly or that they don’t know which ones work best in different situations. Take humble Stonehenge – one of the least valued wonders around. For a mere 120 hammers (60 with stone, 80 as industrious, 48 as both), I get myself a Prophet in 50 turns (25 if Philosophical). More than likely this will get me a religion.

120 hammers < settler + archer
60 hammers = worker
80 hammers = 3 chariots (nearly)

Even at the most expensive option, I’d probably value an early religion above an additional city.

Some wonders don’t work well in some circumstance so may end up being a little too expensive. But sometimes, wonders pay off so handsomely it is a crying waste to miss them

[Saygame]

My experience tracks that of Couer's. A wonder that compliments your terrain, leader and tech strategy can be a great turn advantage creator. Having representation early with its three happiness boost (x six cities) can be a great advantage creation over other civs that have to cap out their cities early at 5, 6 or 7 population due to happiness.

That being said, I play alot of local MP games that play like SP games. And my experience there is that sometimes players (including me) get so mesmerized with the fun of wonder creation that they neglect their gameplan and the other more mundane but mandatory aspects of city building/expasion and army building. That usually results in the player getting hemmed in by the AI countries who have relentlessly expanded.
With nowhere to expand but many wonders a critical loss is not far away. Moderation in wonder building and crafting of only those that seem to meet my gameplan is essential in my book.

[rah]

In MP, if you build too many wonders you usually end up building them for someone else.

[snoopy369]

Mysticism->Polytheism(lose the religion 50% of the time)->Priesthood(build oracle)->while oracle is building Mining/tech that gives you Pyrimads(can't remember which one does that)->pop bronzeworking with oracle->chop rush pyrimads. Get early advantage on civics.

Echoing what others have said, don't go for polytheism, almost ever really. Code of Laws is the way to go for religion. I don't go for Oracle unless I have marble AND an industrious civ, because it is too stifling of my early growth. If you do, definitely pop CoL with it, and not bronze working; that's a terrible waste.

It sounds like you're building Oracle with only one city... that is your big mistake. Build should be something like
Worker-Warrior-Warrior-Settler-Worker-Settler-Granary-Archer-Settler-Library-Archer-Settler

in your capital, unless you have a second city that's just fabulous.

My tech path is usually
(Ag or AH) -> Mining -> BW -> (IW if no copper) -> (AH or Ag) -> Hunting -> (Archery if no copper/iron) -> Wheel -> Pottery -> Writing -> Mathematics -> as needed for CoL -> (Calendar if useful) -> as needed for Civil Service -> [ Philosophy -> as needed for Liberalism -> as needed for Economics] or [as needed for Gunpowder -> as needed for appropriate Gunpowder units based on civ+situation] ... and then it goes all over the place from there. It's not consistent in any of that, but that's the basic concept; the civ, the start, and the strat i'm playing drastically affect what I get.

[Crossfire]

I used to go the same path and aim for liberalism first but I have started detouring for markets and banks first. I find that in BtS I need to expand fast enough and far enough that I am a bit short of money for a while and getting markets and banks a little earlier really lets me explode into the middle part of the game and provides all the money and research I need to crush opponents without losing my tech edge.

At the same time I almost always build worker/worker/settler at the beginning of the game while researching BW so that I can chop that second worker and first settler and it gets me pretty far ahead of the AIs early.

[JackRudd]

Oracling Bronze Working = not good. Oracling when you already have Bronze Working, and can thus get Metal Working from it = rather better. Metal Working is very useful early on, but also pretty expensive.

[joncnunn]

Actually since without the failed wonder conversion is only half the gold that having run wealth would yeild, all the double hammer from resoures for failed wonder is doing is bringing you back up to the level that having run wealth in the first place would have given you.

Originally posted by Saygame

2. Anytime you have stone or marble you can essentially turn your hammers into double gold if you don't get the wonder (each hammer is doubled with a stone or gold
wonder and then converted to gold when you miss getting the wonder---if you do get the wonder it sometimes is ashame).

[joncnunn]

I don't know but I wouldn't go quite as far, instead I would say something like "blindfully building wonders" ... or "building the wrong wonders" ...

I much agree that Pyraimds is very much overrated, except perhaps when playing a Spiritual Civ with Stone nearby but even then there are several Stone wonders that seem much more cost effective.

I find the new BTS that opens up all Relgious Civics much better (provided you have gold nearby and also are planning on using it as part of a found multiple religions and run Free Religion). But if your plans are instead early Pacifism, it's much more cost effective to Oracle in Code of Laws and beeline from there to Philosphacy.

Originally posted by Brutus66
I remember an observation someone once made here (I wish I could find it so I could credit the author), "building wonders = a great way to suck at civ".
That pithy statement stuck in my mind for some reason, and I have found it to be pretty accurate.

These days I usually don't bother with the pyramids anymore; for me it's all about horses rather than stone- great for hammers in the controlling city, getting in a chariot rush, the knights that come later are handy, and if the Russians are nearby you definitely want to get to those tiles before they do.
The only time I chase any wonder anymore is if it's directly related to the victory path I am pursuing and if there's a reasonable chance of getting it.

[joncnunn]

In BTS, I'd go so far as to say Stonehenge cost should be double what it is. When it expired at Calendar, sure the ultra low cost made a lot of sense.
But in BTS it lasts until Astronomeny and in addition means you only need to have three cities to build Statue of Zeus (normal map). Without it, you need to build 3 Monuments as well.

Originally posted by couerdelion

It certainly wasn’t me because it is not actually true. For the more successful games (I’m talking SP here) you will want to be looking at the possibilities that wonders give you.

If there is a problem with wonders, it is possibly that people are not using them properly or that they don’t know which ones work best in different situations. Take humble Stonehenge – one of the least valued wonders around. For a mere 120 hammers (60 with stone, 80 as industrious, 48 as both), I get myself a Prophet in 50 turns (25 if Philosophical). More than likely this will get me a religion.

120 hammers < settler + archer
60 hammers = worker
80 hammers = 3 chariots (nearly)

Even at the most expensive option, I’d probably value an early religion above an additional city.

Some wonders don’t work well in some circumstance so may end up being a little too expensive. But sometimes, wonders pay off so handsomely it is a crying waste to miss them