The main pronlem with Civ 4 is...

[Finarfin]

Shouldn't you be busy writing a book or something? What's your book about, how to win at a computer game when there are no variables involved?

[John-SJ]

I'm sorry, did you prove my argument wrong? What's that? No? Did you prove that my map was just as good as his? Ok. Why don't you shut up then until you actually can make a case? That might work better for you.

LOL!

It appears I was wrong earlier. "LOL!" is all SLD deserves.

He claims that I need to make a case, and yet he has not been able to disprove a single assertion I have made.

I am sure the reason is obvious.

[StarLightDeath]

I already have proved that your idea is flawed. You said yourself that in order for it to even out on a map like this you have to play a series of games. Obviously I have proven that this map is not for 1v1 play when you are trying for a 100% win ratio. I have proven that his land was in fact far beyond mine and I don't see how you can disprove that the main reason he was able to get so many wonders so fast was because of that. What more do I need to do?

[Maidel]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath
Obviously I have proven that this map is not for 1v1 play when you are trying for a 100% win ratio.

Sorry to say this - but why should anyone expect to have a 100% record in a game of chance - which, sorry to burst your bubble - this game is.

[John-SJ]

Originally posted by Maidel


Sorry to say this - but why should anyone expect to have a 100% record in a game of chance - which, sorry to burst your bubble - this game is.

Maidel,

It's even dumber than that! SLD can not EVER acheive a 100% win ratio because he already has not won every game. So, what he is trying for is forever beyond his grasp.

How is that for dumb? It's kind of like... , don't you think?

But let's not tell him, the image is just too entertaining.

[Maidel]

haha

I never thought about it that way...

[Arrian]

Well done, Krill.

VERY amusing. But yeah, SLD, you sure know the game sooo well, and it's the GAME's fault when you lose.

-Arrian

[StarLightDeath]

First of all, it's on a player by player basis number 1. Number 2, mirror has the possibility of winning 100% of the games, hub doesn't. I would think someone as smart as yourself would be able to figure this out, but now I see that you are grasping at straws as your main arguments have been thorougly thrashed.

Arrian, it's just simple numbers. Hills have 3 times the production of forests. Flood plains have 50% more food. Each flood plains square has 1 coin so he's practically negated the Financial bonus I have by using chinese, and that's not even counting the two gems he had in his capital. In addition, the production problem actually becomes worse with metal casting because he has more shields the amount of bonus production he will gain will be increased compared to mine. The numbers in this game are no different than the numbers in civ2. I made the same argument with 1x production in civ2 that it began to increase the importance of land. As you deal with smaller numbers the possibility for greater differentiation in percentages between players increases. The beauty of 2x was that it decreased the percentages. For example: If a guy had pheasant in 1x and I didn't, he had a 50% increase in production without hurting his food. If I tried to use forest to make up for that then he would then have DOUBLE the food production. With 2x I could use forests with only take a -1 food disadvantage in addition to his pheasant food bonus so the percentage difference was greatly decreased and he ended up growing maybe 1-2 turns faster in the beginning. Not enough to win a game on. On the other hand, when you have 3 times the production from 1 square with only a -1 food deficit then it is obvious that these numbers are impossible to overcome when spread over a game if land is not equal. Got it? Good.

[Finarfin]

The funniest part of all of this is his signature. Did we suddenly step back in time to the 1950s?

[Maidel]

Frankly I dont get it. I havent viewed your game as I dont intend to either.

The game isnt made to be a 1v1 short blast, so yes it wont be 100% balanced in that situation. Is that a problem? not as far as I can see - but if its a problem for you - then dont play...

simple as far as I can see.

[Arrian]

Whine & cry all you want, SLD. Doesn't make a lick 'o difference.

-Arrian

[John-SJ]

There are two kinds of people, those who look at a game result and spend a huge amount of energy explaining why they lost, and those who spend a similar effort figuring out how to do better next time.

There are those who say that some map types are not winnable 100% of the time, and for those who say this, it is perfectly true! Then there are those who determine beforehand that they will do their best, no matter what.

[John-SJ]

Originally posted by Arrian
Whine & cry all you want, SLD. Doesn't make a lick 'o difference.

-Arrian

I think maybe he has it in his mind that if he whines and cries enough he will go back to the final savegame to find that he actually did win.

Can you explain the huge effort he is putting into his "campaign" by anything else?

[StarLightDeath]

It is a problem if you are trying to play competitive games, which is my whole point and it is why Civ4 will always have a very small MP community. When luck negates any possibility of winning every game then people will move to other games where they can win every game. As I said before, some of us come on here to be competitive, not because we like playing the game for the sake of playing it. It's why warcraft has like 90,000 people playing it. Those types of games attract more people because there's more human interaction and because you can be dominate based on your skill. I have no doubt I would win on a mirror map because resources would be equal, and I have no doubt there won't be one person here who will play but they're all for playing on maps with uneven resources and maps that hinder player interaction. The fact is you guys aren't civ players, you're Sim City players.

[Maidel]

Hell I know if I played 1v1 I would have a 100% loosing record.

I play for fun - Im not sure I know any other way of playing a game.