Are Pyramids worth it?

[IRON_BRIGADE]

I realize I may be sending everyone back to first grade with my question but that is where I pretty mush am in this game. I've read all the strats and pointers so this question really was not answered.

Does obtaining the Pyramids so you can have instant graneries really give a benifit in the early stages?
I realize it might depend upon your civ pick I pesonally like a scientific and militaristic or commercial. So with those choices how am i affected by rejecting the pursuance of Pyramids? This plays off of getting pottery from a goody hut quite early. Being scientific i pursue the great library vigurously.

also could some one explain the whole granery concept to me agian. I've been away for awhile playing wolfenstien.

I ask because I read that irrigating in despotism is futile or fruitless so the aquiring of food is linked to graneries and such.

thanks

[vondrack]

Re: Are Pyramids worth it?

Originally posted by IRON_BRIGADE
I realize I may be sending everyone back to first grade with my question but that is where I pretty mush am in this game. I've read all the strats and pointers so this question really was not answered.

Does obtaining the Pyramids so you can have instant graneries really give a benifit in the early stages?
I realize it might depend upon your civ pick I pesonally like a scientific and militaristic or commercial. So with those choices how am i affected by rejecting the pursuance of Pyramids? This plays off of getting pottery from a goody hut quite early. Being scientific i pursue the great library vigurously.

also could some one explain the whole granery concept to me agian. I've been away for awhile playing wolfenstien.

I ask because I read that irrigating in despotism is futile or fruitless so the aquiring of food is linked to graneries and such.

thanks

IB, the importance of pyramids depends on personal preferences, I guess, but I would bet that most people here will not consider them THAT important (at least, definitely not the best ancient wonder). I, for one, am seldom trying to build them at all... they come very early in the game and I often find myself having more troubles making my cities happy than having too little population to build settlers/workers. Having granaries in every city would just make things "worse" for me...

The granary makes your city grow faster. Every time the "food storage" column fills up, a new citizen is born and the column is emptied (and, sometimes, grown a bit up). If you have a granary in the city, it is just half-emptied, so it takes less time to make it full again.

Irrigating under despotism is often useless, since if you irrigate grassland, you make it food=3 instead of food=2. However, due to the constraints of despotism, you lose that one extra food, so you still get two food only. However, floodplains, cows, and wheat tiles are worth irrigating even under despotism (since they already have one of their food "taken out" by the despotism inefficiency).

Hope this helps.

[Traelin]

Pyramids are definitely not that important to build, especially because you start the game in Despotism. I'm usually mining the crap outta the tiles around my cities anyways. While that does make it easier to build a Wonder or two in the AA, I don't really concern myself too much with it. I'd much rather pump out military units to take the cities of rival Civs that have the useful Wonders.

[vmxa1]

I agree with vondrack , it depends. If you are on the higher level, it is a moot question, you are not going to have it. I tend not to want them in more than 1 or 2 cities whileI am Rexing. When I go to making Hospitals, I do not want the growth nor do I need it. Pyramids can help get you rolling from size 6 to 12 and become strong. Before they seem to not be needed and after not needed.

[alva]

I used to think it wasn't that good a wonder to have, but in recent games I was able to build it, and I must say that the Pyramids are much better then I thought. I won all off these games quite comfortable/easy. (Emperor level)

[IRON_BRIGADE]

I guess a good question would be doesnt the aquisition of the pyramid boost your cities growth to the point of putting out settlers and workers faster? or no?

[vondrack]

Originally posted by IRON_BRIGADE
I guess a good question would be doesnt the aquisition of the pyramid boost your cities growth to the point of putting out settlers and workers faster? or no?

It allows you to build settlers/workers more frequently, as your cities (re)grow faster. But it does nothing to how fast you can build these units (i.e. how many turns it takes to build a settler/worker).

Arguably, one or two thoughtfully built granaries may serve the purpose just as well, without making one of your core cities (the one building the Pyramids) occupied for many turns (with an uncertain result).

[john_deimos]

I personally find it one of the best early wonders of the game. Here are my reasons.

1.) less time for population to grow
2.) works great when building settlers during the first 30 turns of the game so you colonize really fast.
3.) you don't have to spend that extra one gold per turn for your granaries(spelling?)

Sun Zu's War wonder is also a good example. If you have 15 cities with no GP, then you have to pay 15 gold per turn for your granaries. It really helps having that extra gold so you can buy more units and conquer and your enemies.

With Sun Zu's War wonder, same concept goes as the GP but its for barracks. Makes wonders when you capture a city and automatically you barracks and a granary in your city, so you can start building your defenses up right away.

But this is merely my two cents worth on the GP.

john_deimos

[IRON_BRIGADE]

hey your from celina where exactly is that i live in north texas work in dallas. cool

well another thought is for those who choose not to take the pyramid at what point do you build graneries or do you ever build them

[vondrack]

Originally posted by john_deimos
1.) less time for population to grow

This is true, but the fast population growth is not always desirable. More people = more unhappiness = more happiness improvements and more luxuries needed to keep your cities from rioting.

Originally posted by john_deimos
2.) works great when building settlers during the first 30 turns of the game so you colonize really fast

Just that you never finish Pyramids before these 30 turns are over. IMHO, twice as many turns will be over before someone builds them...

Originally posted by john_deimos
3.) you don't have to spend that extra one gold per turn for your granaries(spelling?)

Correct, however... do you really need a granary in every city? As I have said before, fast growth is not always desirable.

I believe that the importance of Pyramids is inversely proportional to the difficulty level you are playing at. The higher the difficulty, the lower their importance (as keeping your people happy becomes more of a problem).

EDIT: re-reading my post, I feel it sounds somewhat harsh, which was not my intention... I believe that jd's reasons may be pretty valid on lower difficulty levels. I just find them rather controversial from Regent up.

[Inverse Icarus]

simple answer: no.

i'd rather have that # of shields in units / settlers.

but thats just me.

[Wormwood]

It's not really that the Pyramid is all that bad, but at higher levels, you really get one shot at a wonder in the ancient era, and it had better be the GL.

[Long Happy Man]

in short...

in short...it DOUBLES the growth of all your cities in the same continent. a very powerful wonder at early stages.

[Fitz]

One of the most critical early wonders, beats the GL on the lower levels (since you will always have the tech lead).

The "grow to fast" argument makes 0 cents to me. You can always turn the extra worker into an entertained if you need to, in which case he takes care of himself. And if you do get the luxury that allows you to use him, you dont have to wait for him to grow.

The only time you have to worry about growing to fast is in the industrial era (pollution) and the solution to that is to not build a hospital, regardless of the presence of granaries.

Pros:
1) Faster growth = more resource workers = more shield income = faster building.
2) Faster growth = more population = more setter/worker raw materials
3) Free graneries = less maitenance = bigger army or faster research.

Cons:
1) Ties up a single city for x building turns.
2) You may not beat the AI to it.

The first con is counteracted (in a big way) by Pro number one and number 2. Losing a building turn in a city means losing x shields towards another project, and potentially lose x turn advantage in producing a settler. But when you build the Pyramids, you can get that back and far far more within a few (say 20-30) turns by the much faster pop growth. Basically you stagnate early to explode later. (Edit: Besides, depending on your play style, you may spend shields on those granaries anyway)

Only time that's bad is when you get attacked early. If you attack early, I consider it to be a form of stagnation , since your shields are going into military that could be better used expanding/infrastructure.

However, on the higher levels you need the Great Library to stay in the tech race (although the Pyramids can be a poor substute for this in a way).

[vmxa1]

It makes the food box half full all of the time. That is what graneries do. Pryamids give you one in each city on the land mass that it is built on and pays the upkeep for them. This is swell, but not required. As you move up the levels, it gets less valuable and harder to get. At EMP/Deity you ain't getting with out a leader. As was mentioned at above Regent, more people means more unhappiness. At the lower levels, you can do whatever you like. Early shields are better spend on other things than this wonder. Especially if you fail to get it by the 1 turn as so often happens at the middle levels.