Do we need Wonders?

[DarkCloud]

That is exactly why the 'Knowledge' wonders should not be in the game at all.

[hHydro]

I may as well just be TheLimey posting under another name for this one...

.. I agree wholeheartedly that;

There should be an OPTION to limit civs to one wonder per 'age'.

I would never do away with wonders, because they add a huge gamewinning element to Civ/SMAC that makes the game more fun.

However another thing that makes a game fun is the ability for the underdog to pull ahead and steal the lead. If series of wonders are available for a given age, but each civ can only have one, then it makes sense that each civ would grab the wonder that most benefits their situation either by offsetting their weakness or enhancing their strength.

The beauty of this is that the civs in the lead will not likely have much use for wonders that promote explosive development or growth; they will likely prefer wonders that enhance their happiness or economy. There could of course be exceptions ( and of course denial strategy) but this would generally leave the trailing civs (who are more worried about raw growth and research than infrastructure and happiness)with wonders that promote these values instead.

If I was allowed one magic phone call to the big red 'Sid-Phone' at Firaxis, I think I'd use it to push this idea. (I would have previously used the call to preach about the Unit workshop, but...)

And most importantly, I reiterate that this should be an OPTION just like iron-man or barbarian activity, so that we can choose it when we want it. Or you know what? make it a 3-way option; choose whether you want "Full wonders", "Limited wonders", or "No Wonders".
[This message has been edited by hHydro (edited December 27, 2000).]