[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Magellans

[Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 04:50:50AM -0700, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> 
> --- 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.

Magellan's is probably the most powerful wonder in the most popular
configuration: standard civserver.freeciv.org settings with generator 2.
But tweak some of the settings and the balance between wonders can shift
enormously.

> 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.

Hoover's?  Do you play on civserver.freeciv.org?

> I like to see people build unexpected wonders. As is, Leonardo's is currently
> worthless.

Not if you have the Great Library.

> 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.

The Lighthouse can be a game winner on big maps with low landmass.
United Nations is just too late in the game to make a difference.

-- 
Reinier (who has changed his favourite wonder at least 3 times)