Sistine or Bach's?

[JoeinBH]

Both the Sistine Chapel and J.S. Bach's Cathedral are available to
build at roughly the same time. Which is the better one to build? I have seen on this forum that many people think the Sistine Chapel is the best wonder of the middle ages, and perhaps the most valuable wonder of the game. I'm not so sure I agree. As I understand it, the Sistine Chapel doubles the effect of all cathedrals. A cathedral turns 3 unhappy people content, so with the Sistine Chapel and a cathedral in the city, 6 unhappy people would be made content. But Sistine has no effect on cities without cathedrals. Bach's on the other hand, as I understand it (and correct me if I'm wrong) makes 2 unhappy people content in all of your cities WITHOUT requiring a cathedral.

During the middle game, I'm focusing on building up my infrastructure by building workers. My main city improvements are growth related (aquaducts and harbors) and scientific (libraries and universities). Many of my civs will have temples, but setting aside the effect of the wonders, I would build a university over a cathedral anyday. So to me, it seems that Bach's is a better wonder. You get 2 unhappy people per city made content immediately - without cathedrals. Then, if you ever build a cathedral, you'd cummulatively have 5 unhappies made content (vs. 6 if you had Sistine's). If I'm not planning to put cathedrals in most of my cities until at least the industrial age, it seems like I'd get a lot more out of J.S. Bach's than the Sistine. Mathematically, I think my cities would get more (and sooner) overall happiness by having 2 + 2 + 2 ...[build cathedral] + 5 + 5 ... than by having 0 + 0 + 0 ... [build cathedral]+ 6 + 6...

Do I understand these wonders correctly? Given so many people's strong preference for the Sistine Chapel, I'm thinking I might have something wrong. Thanks in advance for any help.

Joe

P.S. - I play all my cities on one large continent, so if either of
these wonders only apply to one continent (as some do) that's
irrelevant to my preference.

[punkbass2000]

It depends on play style, I guess. I usually play Religious and build Cathedrals, which I think is the case for most of the people here who like Sistine. IIRC, JS only affects one continent, but that may be a false impression leftover from Civ2, not that it matters to you anyway. Based on your description of how you play, you're probably better off with JS, IMO.

[Jack_www]

I build both. I usually get almost all the wonders, the computer maxiumizes food production, instead of sheilds in their cities, and because of this I can build a lot of wonders, in my games the computer players usually only are able to build 3 or4 of the wonders, and I get the rest, but the highest level I have played so far is monarch. I use to not be able to build etheir wonder, but I got smart and now I get them 99% of the time.

[Arrian]

I play religious civs and consider the Sistine to be the #1 wonder in the game. I build cathedrals everywhere, so the bonus is huge for me, especially in the middle ages when I may only have 3 or 4 luxuries. Luxuries + markets + cathedrals + sistine = WLTKD at 0% luxury spending for many of my cities, which cuts down waste.

But, like punkbass2000 said, your playstyle suggests Bach may be the better choice. Personally, I want both wonders, but if I had to choose, I'd go with the Sistine.

-Arrian

[Worthingtons]

It's also Worth Considering that Bach's makes 2 extra citizens happy in the city it was built in. Based on the Principle that it would probably be built in a big important city, that can make a small, but notable difference.

As with everything in this game, it circumstancial, but I'd slightly prefer Bach's as I'm not a religous civ, and it gives new cities (which arent connected to luxuries yet) without cathedrals a VITAL start.

[Cyclotron]

I like sistine better because I always play very culture-heavy, and that cathedral doubling is extrememly powerful in the late game when I need it most (without it and Sufferage, endgame wars while in Demo are... very difficult).

[Thrawn05]

For me, it's all or nothing between the two. I've played a few games were the AI beat me to one or the other, and let me tell you, playing with only one of them is not very fun. It was one of the few times I had to switch to Communism.

[Nym]

Well, I try to get both, like other wonders, but I often only get one. In my current game (Regent) I miss both . AI was not far enough from me in tech race and was able to switch from a wonder to another one and I needed to make choices. But it's not terrible as I am able to provide all types of luxuries to my people.
But to choose, I would say I prefer Sistine.

[Tingkai]

One factor to consider is that the Sistine C can be built earlier than JS Bach.

[DrFell]

Originally posted by punkbass2000 IIRC, JS only affects one continent, but that may be a false impression leftover from Civ2, not that it matters to you anyway. Based on your description of how you play, you're probably better off with JS, IMO.

Actually the manual in civ2 was misleading, and all the wonders which supposedly effected one contient really worked on all your cities

[Saint Marcus]

If I'm a religious civ I prefer Sistene, otherwise Bach's. I usually get at least one of them.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by DrFell


Actually the manual in civ2 was misleading, and all the wonders which supposedly effected one contient really worked on all your cities

Really? Damn. I would have thought that I would have noticed that, but then again, I never really built JS (mainly because of that reason, and the fact that it was a dead end). In Civ2 I was pretty convinced that the Michaelangelo's Chapel was clearly the better choice (Cathedral in every city! Plus Monotheism was also one of the techs I would typically beeline towards anyway.)

[DrFell]

Yeah Mikes is still great in civ2, Bachs is only better if your fighting war in a demo or republic.

[PGM]

I usually have enough lead to build both, but if I'd have to choose between them, I'd go for Sistine.

[Sava]

Just build both. If you can't, then that aspect of you need to work on that aspect of your strategy instead of worrying about these wonders.

[SirSebastian]

Anyone who complains when they don't get both needs to get more realistic and step up the difficulty level of your game. Multiplayer is going to be hell if everyone _HAS_ to get BOTH. I rarely get any wonders, though I'll usually pick up 1 early on that the AI doesn't care about, and maybe rack up some late game ones if I'm ahead. It really is more fun to play on Monarch / Emperor, guys... and it will better prepare you for the vicious onslaught of MP

[Allemand]

It's easy enough to build both if you're playing Monarch or below. Even at higher levels you can use leaders to get both. I rate Sistine as the best wonder with Hoover a close second, but Bach is great if you have lots of little cities springing up all the time. On a large/huge map, 100 cities is not unusual so you'll always have some small ones struggling to grow. They benefit the most from Bach.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by SirSebastian
It really is more fun to play on Monarch / Emperor, guys... and it will better prepare you for the vicious onslaught of MP

I feer you already.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by SirSebastian
Anyone who complains when they don't get both needs to get more realistic and step up the difficulty level of your game. Multiplayer is going to be hell if everyone _HAS_ to get BOTH. I rarely get any wonders, though I'll usually pick up 1 early on that the AI doesn't care about, and maybe rack up some late game ones if I'm ahead. It really is more fun to play on Monarch / Emperor, guys... and it will better prepare you for the vicious onslaught of MP

Some of us are never going to play Multiplayer anyway. The game is already slow, waiting for other players to finish their turn is going to make it slower.

As slow as the AI is, it still will make decisions faster than a human player. Even if that decision sucks.

[Worthingtons]

I agree with SirSebastian, I'd LOVE to have Both in every game, but I play on Monarch level, meaning it is usually only feasable to get one of them, although i will try for both.

[Akka]

Originally posted by DrFell


Actually the manual in civ2 was misleading, and all the wonders which supposedly effected one contient really worked on all your cities

Mmh, I'm sorry but I disagree on it. Bach was actually working ONLY on the continent it has been built in Civ2.

[Dominae]

If you're playing in any level above Monarch, I would imagine Cathedrals are a necessaty in all your core cities (which can be quite a few, if you've placed your FP well). Given this, the Sistine Chapel thus turns the necessary into the extraordinary ("Cathedrals make 6 citizens content...sure, I''ll build one of those!").

By the same token, you're always going to need Theology on the higher levels. Music Theory is a dead end tech, which is huge in an age where techs are so important.

Another point against J.S. Bach's is that your small cities are usually fine happiness-wise due to your luxuries (assuming you're connecting all your cities to your trade network, which is good practice). Thus, you shouldn't need any Wonders helping those cities out until they reach size 5+ (although a Temple always helps to expand your borders). But by the time your cities get that big, you might as well grow them to size 12, in which case you're going to need Cathedrals, and so the usefulness of the Sistine Chapel is all too apparent.

Finally, the fact that the AI places a greater importance on SC than JS is no mistake; the designers knew which Wonder is better. The consequence of this is that JS is easier to get than SC, making it less of a priority.


Dominae

[Txurce]

I don't always get even one of the two happiness wonders, but with enough luxuries, I sometimes don't need either. If I have a choice, it would be the SC, because it's more powerful in more circumstances, allows me to skip researching a tech (as Dominae points out), and has even more value with a religious civ, which I think is the most valuable trait.