The main pronlem with Civ 4 is...

[polarnomad]

Dumb Question: So how do I view SLD's turn from Krill's posted save?

[StarLightDeath]

Ok, I will give you the 2 seafood squares mainly because of the health and some extra population. I will admit that mistake. The others though aren't even remotely game changing and it doesn't change what he had in his early cities. Late cities are just that, late, and it's those first 3-5 cities that are worth the most. The two gems he had gave him a ton of GNP VERY early in the game which allowed him to get tech faster and then wonders faster. He had HG built 2 turns after I got construction. I can't keep up with that kind of a start not without being able to harass his economy. It's just not possible on that kind of a map to do anything about lopsided land. The early wonders and early production+GNP is what won him the game, not because he outexpanded me or was just a smarter player. The numbers simply weren't overcomeable. He didn't even optimize his cities really which is sad because his land kicked ass. Then again this is a pointless discussion because I said this was going to happen and he refused to play on Mirror for that very reason. A few specialists in my capital weren't going to change the game even remotely. I skipped Metal casting because I was trying to get construction for HG and then I tried to get civil service to try and make some feeble attempt at connecting farms. While I was trying to grow hamlets and villages he was already making at least 1 coin off his rivers and the other gems and **** he had. Again, I just can't keep up with those kinds of numbers without doing something to hurt his economy.

[Senethro]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath
whinewhine When I lose its not my fault whinewhinesob

Summarised.

[SSBLoveU]

Originally posted by Senethro


I don't think you understand what this thread is about.

Hmmm . . . We are writing about the main problems of Civ IV.

http://felixthecat.com/friends-poindexter.htm

[John-SJ]

Good summary, Senethro!

Something else that I believe is likely true: If SLD is pulled away from the (one?) map that he seems to be comfortable with, the duel/mirror map, his competence level plummets! It seems apparent to me that SLD is not a player with balance or strategic depth. Though he may have learned to do one thing very well, it is perhaps the only thing he can do well.

Heh! If my schedule allowed me more time, I might even challenge him myself!

[StarLightDeath]

What is the difference between mirror map and hub map except for that on mirror map you can actually attack someone, and we both get same land and resources. Apparently that's not fair to you? Apparently there should be no war in this game? Nice.

[John-SJ]

LOL!

[StarLightDeath]

Well? Is there a problem with us having equal land? Is there a problem with allowing war in the game? Not much of a response from you I see.

[Finarfin]

Oh will you stop your infernal whining, you little bastard.

[John-SJ]

Okay, I will respond further, I suppose even you deserve more than my first response.

Okay, in case you haven't noticed, CIV is much more than simply a game of conquest, and yet, you seem to have elevated the conquest game to a position of supreme importance. At the same time, the importance of CIV's other elements seem to be devalued in your mind.

So, you claim to be a good CIV player, but I'll wager that is not true at all. You may be as good as you say playing the Mirror map 1 on 1, but that doesn't make you a good CIV player, that only makes you a good CIV mirror map player.

Face it, on ANY map, you will win 50% of the time if matched against an equal opponent. If you are actually better than they (better at CIV, not better at CIV mirror map conquest) then your average will be higher than 50%. How much higher? That depends on how much better you are, doesn't it?

Addmittedly, a sample of one game doesn't prove anything one way or the other. But the simple fact is, from anything I can tell from these forums (and these forums are where you have been making your claims to greatness) your current record is 100% loss, 0% win.

Surely you can do better than that, can't you?

[StarLightDeath]

You say I'm elevating war over everything else, but hub map eliminates it completely. Mirror map has just as much need for economy than hub map does, and in fact it requires more since you have no choice but to build an army while at the same time trying to grow and expand. You talk about being 1 dimensional, but hub map on tiny is as 1 dimensional as it gets. Not only is there no war, but you completely took out part of the scoring system which is land because most the map is water and water doesn't count for land points. Which means that games will come down to population, tech, and wonders...all land quality dependent. You didn't address the fact that the big difference between maps is how equal the land is. Now either you don't feel equal land is important, in which case there is no point continuing this, or you don't understand how hub and mirror maps work. On a map like hub, land is the biggest issue because you have taken most the options out of the game. Your own argument is working against you because your main cause is that I'm 1 dimensional. Better rethink your argument.

[John-SJ]

What you say is true, IF!, and only if, you intend to play a single game with an individual or group and hang your reputation on that single game.

In a setting where you are bound to play multiple games then random distributions and even random map types will all even out. It is then that the skill of the player is evident.

The only thing wrong with my argument is that it doesn't seem to be compelling enough to convince you.

I might have better luck trying to convince a rock though as you seem to be unable to grasp what has been repeated here in this thread multiple times.

edit: spelling

[StarLightDeath]

What you say is true, IF!, and only if, you intend to play a single game with an individual or group and hang your reputation on that single game.

In a setting where you are bound to play multiple games then random distributions and even random map types will all even out. It is then that the skill of the player is evident.

The only thing wrong with my argument is that it doesn't seem to be compelling enough to convince you.

I might have better luck trying to convince a rock though as you seem to be unable to grasp what has been repeated here in this thread multiple times.

Nope, I understand just fine. You just admitted that luck plays a factor in these maps and that in order to get it to even out you have to play a series of games. Therefore my point still stands that the most skilled map is mirror and that it is the most fair map for competitive play. Thanks, have a nice day.

[John-SJ]

The most skilled for ONE style of play. But CIV is not a single playstyle game.

I will grant, you may even be as uber as you say in that single, limited , playstyle.

I also state without fear of refutation that being good at a single playstyle in a game that supports as many as CIV does, does NOT make you a good CIV player.

You have a nice day too.

[Maidel]

Surely the entire point of the game is that it is called civilization... not conquest.

Some civilizations have it easy some dont, call it luck or whatever you want but thats the way the world is.

I hate it when I dont have any coal or iron, but thats how it was - thats the reason why the egyptians couldnt compete with the romans (no iron, only copper) did they ***** and whine about it?