Choosing Between Two Wonders in Three Player

[Patrick of the Isles]

All of these have been sanctioned by the publisher/game designer.

I am not entirely sure of the point of your comments. Most variants don't originate with the publisher or designer, they originate with expert players. But yes, we're all aware that if a publisher disagreed with using a variant on BGA it would not be implemented under current practices. The reason I created this thread is that before going to the step of requesting implementation, which would obviously involve the publisher not objecting, surveying general interest among the player base seems sensible. As I mentioned, the player base is where most balancing variants originate, including several that I have requested and have gone on to be implemented here on BGA. In any case, back to the original purpose of this thread: I'm interested in other players' feelings on the suggested three-player setup variant

[RicardoRix]

.

[Patrick of the Isles]

You definitely seemed to not understand that and directly responded to me to judge/object/argue against it. You've now edited your original comments to cover your tracks and make it look like it's me not understanding.
Pretty lame. Take a red-thumb for deception.

I edit my comments for clarity quite often, but using language like "cover your tracks" makes this sound like some kind of crime thriller novel. I started this thread to get feedback from players about a concept. Your initial comment about variants needing to be sanctioned was frankly not particularly responsive and derailed the thread a bit, but I was happy to respond out of courtesy. Now this latest comment seems needlessly grumpy. I would recommend moving past all that and returning to the original topic of the post, which is whether or not players would enjoy additional choice in the manner suggested.

[6element]

I wouldn't play with the proposed variant in the base game, because it'll reduce variety of the tables for no good reason, making the game slightly less fun. Classical edition side B wonders are balanced well enough, so there is no problem which requires fixing.

On the other hand I see some value in the proposed variant when expansions are used - for example I don't like Byzantium so much, that I'd replace it with whatever. But my experience with expansions is very limited, I'm nowhere close to an expert there.

PS: When playing with your friends in RL you can do whatever with the rules (without asking author's permission) and this variant (in case of Cities + Leaders) is definitely worth trying.