Alexandria and Olympia

[BlackBearPower1]

Does anyone actually like either Alexandria or Olympia? I really don't like them and can not seem to win with them consistently. Anyone?

[robinzig]

Does anyone actually like either Alexandria or Olympia? I really don't like them and can not seem to win with them consistently. Anyone?

I'm certainly not an expert player, but as a casual player (mostly of the physical game more than on BGA) I win reasonably often among my group and Alexandria is by some way by favourite wonder to play. (Giza is second.) The extra "free" resources mean you don't need to invest that much in brown and grey in the early rounds and then by round 3 you can afford more or less any card you might want.

[laggercat]

Read this, an analysis of 18,000 results:

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/269712 ... unbalanced

Oly is the worst wonder in the game, with neither A nor B sides good. Babylon A is awful but the B side is decent. Alex is also in the lower tier.

Hali B is way ahead as the best wonder - its simply poor game design.

[cowboy_dan]

Hali B is way ahead as the best wonder - its simply poor game design

Poor game design is pretty harsh. Yes, it’s a good wonder, it makes a science strategy hard to beat. But a 2-5 point advantage in a game with 18 card plays is pretty small. I’d say it’s amazing game design, that the wonders are so close, when there is so much randomness involved (due to the card drafting). I like to play to win too, but let’s acknowledge that 7 wonders was designed to be a light and accessible game and is wildly popular because of its excellent design.

/rant

[ElThoesen]

I finally cracked the top 100 list so I feel like I'm allowed to chime in now. Jan Zalewski (aka Wonderful Plays) made some good counterpoints already in the linked thread. But to your credit, I'd agree that the game design itself is wonderful with a few caveats.

"2-5 point advantage in a game with 18 card plays is pretty small"

This is true. This is also important when considering that wonder assignment is random. Which means if everyone plays 1000 games, stochastically they're going to have a similar number of games with each wonder. Which means an individual game may give you a disadvantage, but seasonally and on all-time ranking, its totally fair.

Now that said, it's pretty universally regarded among good players that Hali B is way over-powered and Olympia is nearly painful to play. I recently just had this happen. Took a horrible last place in 5P with Olympia and somehow squeaked to 2nd place with an absolutely botched Hali B game. But it happens to everyone so... what strategies will you come up with to compensate? That, and the sheer magnitude of combination/permutation due to drafting is where the fun of 7 Wonders is. Your strategy can, and should, be adjusted with every move in the game.

For example, in a 5P, look at the neighbors you're not touching. Can you encourage them to go towards more reds by denying them their main strategy, say splashing green?

To the original point of the post:

-Alexandria can do resource denial, but that's super hard in 5P because there's 2x greys and double browns in age 2. It's a resource fest. I've had some luck with trying to build the first two wonder stages super early and playing mostly blue-red strategy; I'll splash green if not next to hali to nudge them into reds
-Olympia... that's a tough nut to crack. I can't say what's "good" statistically, but I've noticed almost all positive Olympia outcomes have me coming out of the gate with STRONG red. As in, "don't even think about it". The Ludus addition in 5P means if you grab a lot of reds early you're looking at an 8 pt card in age 3 that most people pass. Also you MUST build stage 1 of your wonder in age 1. The difficulty with Olympia is you can't really generate your own "luck". The wonder stage is useless. If you're posted next to Rhodes, that's gonna be a bad game in a lot of circumstances. If you draw bad resource order and don't get one of the "wild card" resources in age 1, you're gonna have a hard time.

I think more than any other wonder, Olympia is very dependent on the order of cards received and their neighbors for whether they can succeed or not. That's what makes playing it so hard and not fun.

[frogstar_A]

Alexandria is OK. Olympia is bad.

[Lumin_S]

Hali B is way ahead as the best wonder - its simply poor game design

Poor game design is pretty harsh. Yes, it’s a good wonder, it makes a science strategy hard to beat. But a 2-5 point advantage in a game with 18 card plays is pretty small. I’d say it’s amazing game design, that the wonders are so close, when there is so much randomness involved (due to the card drafting). I like to play to win too, but let’s acknowledge that 7 wonders was designed to be a light and accessible game and is wildly popular because of its excellent design.

/rant

If there wasn't a 1st edition of the game, I'd agree with the sentiment that "poor game design" is harsh. But the 1st edition has better balance (smaller gap between weakest and best wonders.) If the 2nd edition of anything has worse balance, I count that as poor game design.

[laggercat]

Hali B is way ahead as the best wonder - its simply poor game design

Poor game design is pretty harsh. Yes, it’s a good wonder, it makes a science strategy hard to beat. But a 2-5 point advantage in a game with 18 card plays is pretty small. I’d say it’s amazing game design, that the wonders are so close, when there is so much randomness involved (due to the card drafting). I like to play to win too, but let’s acknowledge that 7 wonders was designed to be a light and accessible game and is wildly popular because of its excellent design.

/rant

In a four player game, with Hali B you win nearly 40% of the time, while Olympia B wins 11% of the time. You are nearly four times more likely to win with Hali B. That sounds like awful game design to me, especially given this is the second edition and Hali B's advantage was already obvious in the first edition.

[6element]

IMHO wonder balance in classic edition is indeed better and allows for more flexible play styles. For example classical Hali B was blockable (triple clay) and while green-inclined, can still be played with seriously blocked science. Hali B from the new edition is pretty much "forced into science by design" and harder to block. Not a good change for sure.

[shreyuz]

Alexandria, olympia and Babylon all need very good play, and luck to do well
What usually works for me ?
Alexandria -
1. Build only as many resource cards as needed, and skip grey cards. I usually skip stone in most games.
2. You must keep an eye on the blue cards in the 2nd Age
3. I usually feel the need to have some coins at the end of age 2 and beginning of age 3. You must try to have upwards of 15 points at the end of Age 1. Most other wonders will try to be closer to 20, but Alexandria has an advantage in age 3. If you have to build 3rd stage wonder to reach 15+ do so, but then you need to have more luck on your side in age 3.
4. Hopefully you get lucky with guilds.This is pretty crucial for Alexandria
5. If you can win atleast 1 military, it gives you the best chance to win. It is possible to go for science, but it's dangerous with Babylon and halli.

Olympia- General goals
1. You have to win atleast 1 side military.
2. You need to reduce cost of trading resources ,grey or brown. Decide based on the neghbhours. If you get the age 2 Cav, you will have a much better game
3. Try to catch Baths, Aquaduct
4. Your best chance of victory are when you are next to Hali, Gizah or a slightly inexperienced Babylon, as they usually don't go for an all out war once you take the lead in shields, and their wonders have better synergy with guilds.
5.If you are next to an experienced Rhodos, the game becomes very hard
6. Enjoy olympia..its actually the only wonder without any pressure on you to win. If you win ,the satisfaction is much more..if you lose you don't feel that bad. I actually might enjoy it more than Hali ( everyone out of screw you) and Babylon