[Freeciv-Dev] Magellans

[Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Per I Mathisen <per@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 May 2002, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> > Hi Per. I'm opposed to the change to Magellan. The current method is fine
> > as far as I am concerned.
> 
> But Magellan is extreme! Giving one civ permanent monopoly on supercharged
> ships is quite absurd. It is without doubt the single most powerful wonder
> in the game. Please reconsider.
> 
> And if you disagree, please explain why on freeciv-dev, so that others may
> voice their thoughts on the matter...

Ok. Wonders are all about game winning. If someone builds Magellans, he should
gain a great benefit. Same as with all other wonders. Usually, if I manage to
build Adam Smith and hold off the attacks of my jealous neighbours, they are
doomed unless they all ally against me.

I've never found the winner of the games I've played to be the owner of
Magellan. It's usually the owner of Hoover's, or Adam Smiths, or even the
Great Library, but almost never the owner of Magellans.And this opens a can
of worms. This would leave to Civ 3 style crap wonders. They would be of almost

no benefit. I like the way the game can turn depending on your wonder choice.
It keeps me from falling asleep. Wonder choice is one of the few unpredictable
parts of freeciv. If you take away Magellans, everyone will just stick
exclusively to the big 3, Adam Smiths, Hoovers and Great Library.

I like to see people build unexpected wonders. As is, Leonardo's is currently
worthless. If it was more powerful, games might be decided by it. Freeciv
wonders are weak, not too powerful. Is there anyone out there who has ever won
a game due to United Nations, Lighthouse, etc. Almost always it is the big 3
who win games for you. Magellan's is actually weak compared to any of the other
3 big wonders.

Aloha,
RK.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com