Early pyramid construction

Insite · February 16, 2003, 19:49

A general recommendation for an early wonder to build is the Colossus. However I wonder what peoples thoughs are on the Pyramids in an early to mid game in the higher difficulty settings (king and above).

The increased population from having a granary equivalent in each city causes unhappiness as your population rapidly climbs over the threshold for number of citizens made happy under marital law etc. I'm thinking though that you always want as many citizens as possible regardless of circimstance. If they get out of control, you can move them to city squares which produce more shields and less food, such as forests and mined hills. This helps with inital prouction, especially of military units to keep your populous happy, allopwing you to get a bigger empire, with more arrows, trade and science. Also under monarchy the upkeep of these units is of couse free, another additional benefit. Alos you can have much more rapid settler generation, enabling you to stake out a larger portion of the map earlier in the game.

Having the HG as well makes the Pyramids a much more viable alternative. I suppose you could try and capture the city which builds the Pyramids (if you dont get them) in the mid to late game if you dont have them, but they are at their greatest advantage at the beginning of the game.

Thoughts? Comments?

SCG · February 16, 2003, 20:09

I've always liked the pyramids. Of course I've always looked at discontentment as an inconvinence rather than a problem. Until i started playing the OCC games, i used to always go directly to republic., never even considering Monarchy. I play a little more in Monarchy now, but still prefer the representative governments for happiness management.

Scouse Gits · February 16, 2003, 21:27

At Deity build the HG every time and enjoy celebration in you capital/SSC every time. As you say the Pyramids can be captured later.

------------------

SG(2)

rjmatsleepers · February 17, 2003, 03:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Insite
I wonder what peoples thoughs are on the Pyramids in an early to mid game in the higher difficulty settings (king and above).

Thoughts? Comments?

I used to build the Pyramids all the time (at Deity), but I no longer go anywhere near them. I found that growth came to fast and the resulting unhapiness was tedious to manage - particularly with an early switch to Republic. In anycase, a good run of WLTPDs works better than the Pyramids if you really want to grow a city.

RJM at Sleepers

Scouse Gits · February 17, 2003, 04:29

I too much prefer the Gardens to the Colossus - why improve one city when you can help the entire Empire?

After that I generally have other fish to fry and don't think much about other early WoWs except maybe the Lighthouse on a watery world.

The Pyramids are nice (and an excellent capture), but don't figure prominantly in my game.

SG[1]

DrSpike · February 17, 2003, 05:37

Pyramids are ok, even at Deity if you play it right. But SG is right, for high levels HG wins hands down........colossus or pyramids second.

At King pyramids is a fine early choice.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · February 17, 2003, 11:41

HG first, then Colossus, then Marco Polo.

Pyramids I might take later, but probably not. There are always more useful wonders to build, and the unhappiness can be a nuisance. When you're ready to grow, using WLTCD will suffice.

On lower levels I used to build them all the time - there's no unhappiness hassle.

Bloody Monk · February 17, 2003, 15:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
At Deity build the HG every time and enjoy celebration in you capital/SSC every time. As you say the Pyramids can be captured later.

------------------

SG(2)

Not necessarily "every" time.

In an Early Landing Attempt, HG will not be around very long. Solo has shown how Shakespeare's Theatre in the SSC is a good choice. But that is a very sparse, lean gameplan that focuses on quickly growing and "fitting out" the Super Science City to speed up tech advances.

So, the answer really depends on the type of game one wants to play. And the thing that makes Civ II such a superior game is the multiplicity of choices and paths one can choose.

Monk (being, hopefully, not too preachy)

DrSpike · February 17, 2003, 15:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Bloody Monk

Monk (being, hopefully, not too preachy)

For god's sake, you clearly have built up some competence now so stop being so humble.

[eyes mode] Say things like stfu you deity playing noob SG, you don't know jack about the game. [/eyes mode]

Bloody Monk · February 17, 2003, 16:00

Why thank you, Chucky; but it really is a monk thing

Monk

DrSpike · February 17, 2003, 16:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Bloody Monk

Not necessarily "every" time.

In an Early Landing Attempt, HG will not be around very long. Solo has shown how Shakespeare's Theatre in the SSC is a good choice. But that is a very sparse, lean gameplan that focuses on quickly growing and "fitting out" the Super Science City to speed up tech advances.

To address your point I think maybe. When I used to play early landing games we did random starts, and Solo's patented SSC + helpers was sometimes beaten in these starts by a SSC + sleaze. When sleazing HG always is worth its weight in gold (literally) early on.

In Solo's games I would concede you have a good point, though HG is still better than a kick in the teeth.

Bloody Monk · February 17, 2003, 16:17

Right-o. Early means always and constantly asking oneself what a particular action has as an opportunity cost in time. If you can make it work--finish early--then, obviously, sleeze away, or any other idea.

And yes, O Wise and Scary One, much better than a kick in the teeth, or a sharp stick in the eye, or a hammer to one's thumb...but then, the same can be said of the Tower.

Monk

DrSpike · February 17, 2003, 16:30

That's pretty tight; it might depend on who was doing the kicking.

Insite · February 17, 2003, 18:46

Ok but back to the point of the thread, whay wouldnt you want the extra population? If you have a hassle with extra population growth causing unhappiness, why not micro manage idivigdual cities to minimise the production of food, cutting down on the generation of new citizens.

If you quickly get a city to optimal size, workers can be shuffled around to other terrain squares or resources that produce more shields or arrows and less food.

Also, I have found that settler production, and hence expansion happens at a far faster rate if you do have the P. Especially if combined with the micromanagement strategy above. Mind you I can understand that this won't suit everyone as it does require a lot of fiddling at the end of each turn.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · February 17, 2003, 19:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Insite
Ok but back to the point of the thread, whay wouldnt you want the extra population? If you have a hassle with extra population growth causing unhappiness, why not micro manage idivigdual cities to minimise the production of food, cutting down on the generation of new citizens.

If you want to minimize food production, why build the Pyramids at all?

Quote:

If you quickly get a city to optimal size, workers can be shuffled around to other terrain squares or resources that produce more shields or arrows and less food.

Well, optimal size in the very early game that I play is size 2 - I always go maximum food at size 1, then maximum shields at size 2 (gospel according to DaveV

). And Pyramids doesn't get me to size 2 any faster. Size 3, sure, but that's not optimal for me.

Quote:

Also, I have found that settler production, and hence expansion happens at a far faster rate if you do have the P. Especially if combined with the micromanagement strategy above. Mind you I can understand that this won't suit everyone as it does require a lot of fiddling at the end of each turn.

The fiddling is a bit of a nuisance - city goes to size 3 faster, needs an elvis - if we could create eins at size 3, I'd like the Pyramids. And if I wanted to spend time building martial law units, perhaps I'd like Pyramids better. There are just so many other choices, most of which are better to me.

By the time I really want growth, I can celebrate, and get growth fast and regardless of owning Pyramids.

There are advantages. Cities founded late in the game hit size 3 faster, and can thus celebrate and grow faster. Starvation becomes a non-issue when the city maxes out. Growing cities with food Freights is simpler. Xinning size 5 cities lasts longer.

Despite all those... I still would rank Pyramids 4th or so among the ancient wonders. I don't usually get to build more than 2 or 3

Bloody Monk · February 17, 2003, 19:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Insite
Ok but back to the point of the thread, whay wouldnt you want the extra population? If you have a hassle with extra population growth causing unhappiness, why not micro manage idivigdual cities to minimise the production of food, cutting down on the generation of new citizens.

If you quickly get a city to optimal size, workers can be shuffled around to other terrain squares or resources that produce more shields or arrows and less food.

Also, I have found that settler production, and hence expansion happens at a far faster rate if you do have the P. Especially if combined with the micromanagement strategy above. Mind you I can understand that this won't suit everyone as it does require a lot of fiddling at the end of each turn.

Yes, of course, you can do that, Insite.

But for every worker you move to trees you have given up an arrow. And until size five you are limited to elvis. Unless you single-mindedly pursue Happiness WOW or improvements, these extra citizens will just get in the way.

Keep the population down and the arrows up to speed your scienc and income.

Later, when your science gives you superior weapons, and you have prepared for growth to begin, go capture the pyramids and prosper.

This sequence has been shown to be efficient; but, you are free to try another way. Many paths work and will get you success. This is known.

Monk

Bloody Monk · February 17, 2003, 19:41

The statement by STYOM to the effect that if you must minimize food, you do not need the Pyramids says it all.

Monk

Scouse Gits · February 17, 2003, 20:01

This is one of those discussions where everyone is correct...hence the beauty of the game.

To beat the game at Deity I used DaveV's formula of building the HG and sleazing. (I probably learnt more about the game from his posts than from any other source) Then other strategies were tried ... Lighthouse/Magellan - Super Ironclads rule on huge waterworlds! (Really fun games) Then ... playing a semi sleaze (cities two squares apart

) and going Republic to either land or conquer. And many other variations ... including the Trade Sleaze in Fundy giving many years with a tech a turn.

But I have been very impressed with strategies that solo has used for his early landings, which are rethinking several aspects of the game - often using knowledge which has recently been discovered. (Please see the comparison game on this forum)

So if you are new to Deity play ... yes build the HG every time. But if winning at Deity is becoming a habit then try something different.

Capture the Pyramids with Commie/Fundy after building SoL ... very powerful.

-------------------------------------------

SG(2)

Ben Kenobi · February 17, 2003, 20:16

Quote:

including the Trade Sleaze in Fundy giving many years with a tech a turn.

That's why you build SoL even with knowledge of Oedo years.

If you want to check out an example, you can look at the just finished Hard Times sucession game in the Civ 2 General forum.

War4ever · February 18, 2003, 00:31

i have never been one to build the pyramids in SP games....unless your talking civ 1 of course

Happiness really isnt' a problem on deity if you pick up HG....and/or a different wonder to offset happiness problems...or just keep your cities small like the many sleezers do around here

pyramids is someting i tend to acquire in the mid game during one of my raids into the infidel empire..if you can call that shoddy land they have an empire..real men would never be conquered...oops was i thinking out loud again

anyways..... pyramids works fine, but generally there are "other" wonders i want and then by the time i get around to it, its gone.....

ramses II. · February 18, 2003, 02:09

I prefer the HG, then switching to republic - your cities grow faster with celebration days than with pyramids.
In deity mode, there are much more important wonders to build.
I always try to build MP and and the Colossus and the LH and the GL (only to prevent the AI from getting it - normally I'm leading in tech development).
Sure, it's hard to get them all - but in my some games I manage to build them all.
In my last game, Rome was founded on desert - but two wheat and two iron mountains and some hills and grassland and two little lakes made it a good site.

-Jrabbit · February 18, 2003, 15:22

Haven't built Pyramids in ages. I think of it as a great way for the AI to spend its production.

Lighthouse is great if there's significant water. Colossus is a fave if I've got a good beaker town.
But lately, I've been consistently running to Monotheism / Mike's Chapel, often with Sun Tzu.

HG works great, but I tend to forget when it's about to expire. Sad to admit, but I still haven't really mastered the HG-run to Republic strat. I've done it, but only once or twice.

Guess I've been having too much fun kicking tail with those vet crucs...

Caesar the Great · February 19, 2003, 23:20

if i miss HG + Col + Sun Tzu's + GW + GL then i'll go for pyramids, otherwise i'd rather not deal with the unhappiness

Scouse Gits · February 20, 2003, 03:06

CtG - you rate the Library above the Pyramids? Pray tell...

SG[1]

-Jrabbit · February 20, 2003, 09:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Caesar the Great
if i miss HG + Col + Sun Tzu's + GW + GL then i'll go for pyramids, otherwise i'd rather not deal with the unhappiness

In my games, it's a virtual certainty that the Pyramids will be the first WOW built by the AI, followed by HG and Colossus. I often won't even start a WOW until the AI does, knowing we won't be in conflict.

Deity/7/raging/MGE/Mac

ottok · February 20, 2003, 09:30

Inm my opinion. TAKE CIV2HACK!

Six Thousand Year Old Man · February 20, 2003, 18:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
CtG - you rate the Library above the Pyramids? Pray tell...

SG[1]

For MP, perhaps?

I've never built GW - when is that ever needed against the AI? I haven't built GL for a long, long time. But in MP GL could be quite handy.

I seldom build Sun Tzu - but then, I tend to play on big maps. On small maps, it's quite worthwhile - conquer the world with Crusaders - but on gigamaps, you often can't even find all the AIs before it expires.

ottok · February 21, 2003, 08:54

tarot rules... what?

War4ever · February 21, 2003, 10:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man

For MP, perhaps?

I've never built GW - when is that ever needed against the AI? I haven't built GL for a long, long time. But in MP GL could be quite handy.

I seldom build Sun Tzu - but then, I tend to play on big maps. On small maps, it's quite worthwhile - conquer the world with Crusaders - but on gigamaps, you often can't even find all the AIs before it expires.

boats my friend

Six Thousand Year Old Man · February 21, 2003, 13:48

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever

boats my friend

250x120 square maps... 6 move boats... = 20 turns to go halfway around the map, even in a straight line. There's a lot of territory to discover. I'm still looking for the French and Indians in my current game - and even with 9 move Destroyers, no luck yet

On the other hand, I trampled over the Aztecs nicely and am busily doing the same to the Russians and Carthagines.