Pyramids - The Ultimate Wonder

SmartFart · July 18, 2000, 06:59

It's a pure math.

In x1x1,Pyramids are at least equal important as Michelangelo's Chapel,because Pyramids = Michelangelo's Chapel.

Early Republicans needs Hanging Gardens,Mysticism,Temples and Marketplaces (Caravans) to get their core cities to size 7-8.

In the same time,owner of Pyramids need only Monarchy,Temple and 3 police units to grow up to the size 6 or 5 (depends of number of cities on deity) without any entertainers.
He will also have an early opportunity to hire scientists in 5+ cities and have
important lead in science.
Plus owner of Pyramids have ALL of his cities affected and unlike Republicans,he don't have any trouble with loss of shields up to 3 units per city (not to mention defensive/offensive value of 3 units per city).
He doesn't need a Temple to have small cities content and his expansion is waaaay easier than expansion of early republicans.

I am pretty much sure that Pyramids have same importance in x2x1 games,but i rarely play those and have no nerve to test this out.

suas333 · July 18, 2000, 09:15

Excellent, nice to see some recognizing the power of monarchy. Too Many republic leaguers now, especially with Eyes gone.

Ming · July 18, 2000, 09:55

In a 1x1x game, I can see your point.
In a 2x1x or 2x2x game, I'd rather have different wonders...
The population can grow too fast and cause some serious unhappiness problems with Pymarid. Now, if I get beat to the wonders I want, and I have to bail to another wonder, Pyramid isn't a bad one to pick

Aragorn · July 18, 2000, 10:43

Unless you pick bad building sites, Pyramids is a waste of resource.

SmartFart · July 18, 2000, 19:31

Ming: I disagree about unhappines problems.

One Elvis can make 2 bastards content. With Pyramids i could grow 2x faster than others,so i can afford entertainers and still have more workers on field. I almost consider Pyramids as a some kind of quasi-happy wonder.
With temples in bigger cities i don't even need an entertainer. I could use scientist to prevent disorder (in cities size 5 or 6 in some situations).

Aragorn: Brave statement. Could you explain it a little?
With Pyramids i can easily overgrow any WLTCD-er if i have enough land to expand. Or you were thinking about some another approach?
[This message has been edited by SmartFart (edited July 18, 2000).]

oedo · July 18, 2000, 19:50

eyes monarchy-friendly strategy was based on the fact that he usually hosted the games. he set up maps with large landmasses and big continents. that way most of the cities had no contact to the coast. early republik, however, needs coastal cities to produce enough trade and make WLT possible. almost useless to say that pyramids/monarchy do a much better job on those maps than HG/republik.
normal or archipelagos maps usually got enough coastlines and water squares, so you can build almost only coastal cities. with temples, HG and some micromanagement you can easily grow them to size 8, way faster than pyramids can do. (2xprod, king).

CornMaster · July 18, 2000, 23:27

In 1x games the pyrimids are very powerful but in double production I find it food no problem at all. I mean when you have 22 surplus in a size 8 city the pyrimids would make little difference.

I find the power of Monarchy and then Communism too attractive. I can declare war at will and face little happness problems. Anyway just my ttwo cents.

------------------
"I'm too out of shape for a long fight so I'll have to kill you fast"
"If the great Emperors of Rome, Egypt and Greece were alive today, do you think they would prefer Coke or Pepsi?"

rah · July 19, 2000, 07:53

In recent 2x1x MP games, I'm seeing more people build Pyramid. It really helps their early pop count and makes a good impression on the powergraph in games that aren't continued. I'm starting to believe that there is more advantage than I have previously given it credit for. Nice analysis.

Unfortunately old habits die hard and if I have a choice, I still lean to HG GW STWA MC Leos and SOL in MP games. Maybe I'll give it a try if I fall behind in the tech race.

Thanks for bringing it up.

RAH
As if the Ferrets don't multiply fast enough.

suas333 · July 19, 2000, 11:03

Good points by everyone, but i still take Monarchy in a 2x1x game. Even without eyes' settings, with enough land, I can outgrow republic WLTCD growth.

However, I see many republic players going for the feudalism/chivalry path eventually. Monarchists should go from philosophy straight to Monotheism. Crusaders attack better than knights and the monarchist should get Mike's Chapel to help happiness from pyramids. That along with temples and 3 units keeps enough happiness. Monarchy Production will let you get Mike's first.

Then build SOL to get Communism. With many cities far from the capital, turning Communist a lot of times puts science ahead of the republic.

Will eyes' monarchy die out?

suas of the O.W.L

Aragorn · July 19, 2000, 11:31

S.F.
Good city sites will max without Pyramids.
Effort is better spent on a different Wonder.
Explained?
[This message has been edited by Aragorn (edited July 19, 2000).]

Empress · July 19, 2000, 18:01

Well, I know they are the key to winning a powergraph game...

SmartFart · July 19, 2000, 20:06

Aragorn: Not really. If you re-read 1st post,you may see i was refering to x1x1,deity,settings i am usually playing.

I have played against many excellent WLTCD-ers and in 90% of my games i was 1st in population.
1st in population=most workers on the field.
Since this game is basically sucking off resources,calling Pyramids a waste of shields is a statement with a lack of seriousness. Pyramids could done much more tasks beside cutting the food box into half,but thats another story.

oedo · July 19, 2000, 22:13

I just found this little treasure in the archives. anyone remembers this thread?
[This message has been edited by oedo (edited July 19, 2000).]

July 19, 2000, 23:44

I'm a big fan of pyramids.

July 20, 2000, 00:30

i think in 1x1x there is no question about it, pyramids is the first thing to go for. there is no food to get, so spare it.
in 2x2x i used to go for pyramids, but going for hanging gardens and then go to republic seems a little more comfortable. there is another advantage to take for choosing to get pottery soon: seafearing. i have never played a game with seafaring where i didnt sack an undefended city. seafearing is a great task to slow down your enemy especially when he has pyramids. you can stack them in the middle of his empire on white mountains and look the trouble he is in. i know this is not what the discussion was about, but if you go for monarchy and pyramids, you wont have seafearing fast.

markusf · July 20, 2000, 00:51

2x they are useless.

1x they depend on your start position... Mostly good because you can crank out settlars at a high speed. As for beating a wltkd? I don't think so, you may in the short run but if you don't switch to rep you will fall far behind.

July 20, 2000, 01:04

Markusf, I agree but it is a big advantage in 1X even if you WLTLD because your cities get to 3 quickly. It makes a big difference to a large empire.

SmartFart · July 20, 2000, 07:25

They have same value in 2x prod.
You may look at them as free Elvis per city.
Of course,thats not only advantage of them.

Surely,picking them as your 1st wonder on a small/tiny map with double production and 4 players is ridiculous. But as long as you have at least 5 cities,they're never waste of shields.

There's no long way from Republic to Democracy,no matter double or single production. I can make up for less arrows with more cities. By the time someone switch to Democracy,i'll do it too. And i will have more cities in most cases. Unless i am playing Carnide,but more units could fill a gap.
[This message has been edited by SmartFart (edited July 20, 2000).]

cavebear · July 20, 2000, 20:57

When I was playing the computer (before learning about MP gaming), I always went for Pyramids and GW. Those served me well, because the Pyramids gave me food and the GW gave me protection. The shields and trade I could manage by development and city improvements.

Then I started learning how to improve my game (here and in MP play). I tried all the suggestions I could find. I actually got worse. Now, I can hardly beat the AI in development.

I was better off with Pyramids and GW, and I think I will go back to that strategy. My city development was better, my balance of population, shields, trade, etc, was better, and I had a stronger position going into the middle game.

I thin that the Pyramids relieve you of a great deal of struggle in the effort to get to size 7+ cities, and I *like* getting my city resource squares maximized.

Population = workers, and workers = shields and trade (and more food). I would rather have to work to keep a size 7 city happy than a size 5 one; the GNP means something.

------------------
Proud participant in GameLeague...

Proud Warrior of the O.W.L. Alliance...