Do you think you'll win your first game?

[SpencerH]

I suppose it's possible to lose. Its just highly unlikely.

[Zoid]

Like Doneagal I always start a new game on lowest difficulty, so I´m pretty sure I´ll win

[Spiffor]

I'll start my first game on the second easiest difficulty setting, and I think I'll win. However I'm not sure, if my first Civ3 game (warlord difficulty) is anything to go buy.

[Dis]

yes, I'll be playing on either the lowest level, or the second lowest level.

[Sabre2th]

I'll start on a low level to get a feel for all the new stuff in the game. I'll probably win if I get all the way through it. I'll more than likely restart before I get to the industrial age though

[Dis]

now that I think of it, maybe I'll do something different.

I've always heard advice that it's best to start on diety level and learn from your mistakes, and not get into bad playing styles that you would have on chieftan level. Because I sometimes do develop bad playing styles. Though I won't start on diety. I can't even beat diety in civ2, so there's no way I'll start on that. Perhaps I'll start on a middle level instead of the second to lowest level.

[marcuspeddle]

That's an interesting idea. Perhaps I will try it as well.

[Zoid]

Yeah, Diss might be on to something here. If you get a serious asskicking by the AI you might learn something from it...

[binTravkin]

I would start on the above average level like monarch and I think I would win in the end.

You always learn very fast when you get into trouble - that's human nature.

[Zoid]

I would say just the opposite. You could try, as in "if you´re falling off a cliff you might as well try to fly". But eventually, if you´re unprepared you will lose.

[Sabre2th]

There may be some merit in trying a high level early, but as Zoidberg says, it might just lead to continuous butt-kicking. I'm not sure about you guys, but if I never win a game, I might get a bit frustrated

If you only play one game at a low level, how many bad habits can you really develop and how hard can it really be to break them?

[Shark Fin 101]

I'm pessimistic ( spelling ?) by nature so I don't think I'll win if the past is any indicator ( took me a month to win civ2 without cheats and the trird game was a winner in civ3 ). However i fully agree about the bad habits ( in civ2 I made that mistake with cheats ) so I'll start at medium -high level.

Shark Fin 101

[yin26]

First, being in the 1% group rocks!

If I end up playing Civ 4 at all (Poly will be my guide unless Markos can ship me that game he promised ), I'd play the highest level at which the computer gets no bonuses. It will be a 1v1 on a land map with average resources. If I crush the game, I'll never play it again (unless out of morbid curiosity to dissect the dead). My prediction, however, is that after seeing the computer pull a few new tricks in the early game that makes me *want* to panic at the glorious beating I might be in for, I'll start to pay real attention, survive the initial setbacks, and end up pulling a strong victory. Typical graph we've all seen: slight computer advantage early on. Neck-and-neck for a majority of the graph, then a huge spike at the end for the human player.

From that point forward, it will be the patch and mod watch.

[GAZ082]

I never 'win' because i play just for the joy of rulling a nation, and when i get bored because the lags, i quit.

So bananas always win.

[Xorbon]

I've always started with a 'Chieftain' game in every version of Civ I've played (which is all of 'em ). So, I plan on winning!

I start with Chieftain, play Warlord for the second and third games, and move up level-by-level from there.