Noble to Prince - unbearable

[brandonjm8]

Ever since it was added I've played with no tech brokering, I've never done no tech trading however because I like having it available for a diplomatic option. That said, I'm completely aware of what it does and how it gives you more room to manipulate the other civs. See my example, it ensured a civ I was going after would be unable to make units that could oppose me since I was the only one with the tech. The AI actually used it against me at one point too because I wasn't thinking... I accepted a tech that had three turns left to complete which I had intended to use as trade fodder. That was a costly mistake.

you should try out no tech trading/brokering, it can be and often is more difficult (by means of planning that is). and the AI cant trade to other AI's either making keeping in pace alittle easier if you are good at building up your cities/economies. on vanilla i did the same thing, trading my high priced techs for the multiple lower ones i couldnt gotten, but only when i got half-way through the wonders it provided or built enough of the units my tech gave. as far as messing up tech trading we all have done it at least once, chit happens

The crossover scoring method eliminates the strategy portion of the game. The turn number you get a crossover when pursuing different types of victories varies by your strategy, not to mention it doesn't the way you get the victory into play. It's simply an alternative scoring mechanism and how inaccurate the scoring in civ 4 (and all civ games really) is has already been covered.

well i know quite a few here go for the early rush conquest strategy on pangea maps, for me thats impossible since i play continents on huge/gigantic maps. if you find yourself crossing over faster and keeping a steady low turn ratio you are getting better for the most part. most of my victory plans are still being thought of during the early-mid part of the game, unless i get the sistine then i will push for a CV, but often the AI gets it more than me so then its on to domination then diplo or space.

From your description of your games so far, it sounds like you take a generic approach to all games, you basically expand, research, build up, and fight. If you conquer enough you get a diplomatic victory, if the AI resists enough you get cultural or space.

i do leave my options open til the time has come to commit to a victory path. if im in the tech lead i look to overpower, if they are keeping up i look to outvote for a diplo win. more often than thus far i am able to get the domination win, its been a few games since i had to win the space or diplo.

I make those sorts of units almost every game, usually one as I hadn't thought of making an entire army based around a small number of them. In my current game thanks to Alexanders non stop sneak attacks I've gotten 4 of them. I then transported those 4 to his continent and burned half his cities to the ground. Even in vanilla I was making those units (pre warlords), I once made a navy seal that had 200+ exp and he was capable of taking down civilizations on his own. On the attack a unit with 80% retreat that's always getting >99.9% victory chances is going to lose less than 1 in 5000 battles. High exp units are absolutely insane.

thanks for the insight, i shouldve made my first GG a warlord my current game and made one of those super ubber units and made conquest on my own landmass easier as it is now. i will remember this trick, for the most part i put my GG's in my HE/WP city to make lvl 4+ units to do the conquering. right now my HE/WP city has 4 GG's in it and my cannons coming outta it start with 75% city attack . would a macemen early game be a good warlord prospect? and yes ubber super units would just make my laugh outta my seat seeing them take apart 100+ units and 30+ cities by themselves .

There's 8 or 9 leaders with Imperialistic, of those Augustus/Julius for praets or Cyrus for Immortals and faster promotions look to be the best ones to pull it off with. Maybe Joao too, he doesn't need to wait until astronomy to cross oceans with units.

I would go Cyrus personally, then again I play Cyrus pretty well and am biased. About the only reason I don't feel Immortals are more broken than Praetorians is that it's always a gamble if you get horses or not. Played right, if you get horses you're handed the game before your second city is even founded.

i havent played all the leaders yet so im not familiar with all the new leaders UU's yet. for mid game russias cossacks are awesome having innate bonuses against gunpowder and mounted units. ealry game there are alot but i saw that holy roman empire UU, bonuses for both melee and mounted WOW. a nice prospect for ubber'ness . i dont have a fav yet since i havent played them all yet, good info tho, thx.

[brandonjm8]

More people have voiced their opinions about your "supposed" pro opinions. You will find it hard to find people that actually agree with you. But again, you live in your own little fantasy world, ignoring what you want.

If you bothered to actually take the time to read what people are you saying, you might actually learn something.
But all you will continue to do is brag about how you can trash the AI at low levels. Well, most beginners can.

Let us know when you actually try a challenge... and not rig the world that plays toward your style of play. And yeah, let us know when you kick the crap out of the AI on a real level. And I'm sure your response will be that you are working you way up to it... and that you are sure it won't be a problem. Well, if it won't be a problem, why don't you just do it instead of boring people with your stories on how you win at beginner levels.

Or why don't you try some MP. But no, you will just crow about how good you are, and do nothing that actually proves it.

Enjoy.

its kinda funny you purposely avoided the fact that other people dont like you . you still havent grown up yet. was that the wind or did ming's BS meter just go through the roof? oh and if you dont like my stories then dont read them, noones forcing you to read them

[Brael]

you should try out no tech trading/brokering, it can be and often is more difficult (by means of planning that is). and the AI cant trade to other AI's either making keeping in pace alittle easier if you are good at building up your cities/economies. on vanilla i did the same thing, trading my high priced techs for the multiple lower ones i couldnt gotten, but only when i got half-way through the wonders it provided or built enough of the units my tech gave. as far as messing up tech trading we all have done it at least once, chit happens

After a certain point it becomes impossible to out tech the AI without tech trading. On Deity it's entirely possible for an AI like Mansa to be building a spaceship before you even know what gunpowder is. The only chance you have of catching up is teching deep and then trading that tech (at a huge loss) to several other civs to get their stuff.

I know you can counter that using espionage to steal tech, but that seems really unfair since I don't think the AI does it in return.

well i know quite a few here go for the early rush conquest strategy on pangea maps, for me thats impossible since i play continents on huge/gigantic maps. if you find yourself crossing over faster and keeping a steady low turn ratio you are getting better for the most part. most of my victory plans are still being thought of during the early-mid part of the game, unless i get the sistine then i will push for a CV, but often the AI gets it more than me so then its on to domination then diplo or space.

Resource and civ placement is changing, but always using the same civ and settings like that means you're just playing the same game over and over and over. You're getting better at it through repetition, but to get better at civ overall you need to vary things, that way you can more easily recognize the best way to deal with any particular situation.

i do leave my options open til the time has come to commit to a victory path. if im in the tech lead i look to overpower, if they are keeping up i look to outvote for a diplo win. more often than thus far i am able to get the domination win, its been a few games since i had to win the space or diplo.

The time to commit on marathon comes by turn 100. That gives you plenty of time to see your surrounding land and neighbors to make a plan.

i havent played all the leaders yet so im not familiar with all the new leaders UU's yet. for mid game russias cossacks are awesome having innate bonuses against gunpowder and mounted units. ealry game there are alot but i saw that holy roman empire UU, bonuses for both melee and mounted WOW. a nice prospect for ubber'ness . i dont have a fav yet since i havent played them all yet, good info tho, thx.

I'm actually not a fan of the Landkerschnit. Sure, it has 12 strength against mounted and melee, but the base is 6. It gets less from combat, shock, formation, and so on than the mounted/melee units do. On top of that, longbows to say nothing of crossbows absolutely tear them apart. Really, they're just a pikeman that splatters slightly less against anything but a mounted unit.

[Brael]

Oh, on the subject of the research penalty... it's a handicap on the players side. The handicap.xml file has all the info, but each tech has a base cost then there's a difficulty based modifier to get the beaker cost. The modifiers are
Settler=60
Chieftan=75
Warlord=90
Noble=100
Prince=110
Monarch=115
Emperor=120
Immortal=125
Deity=130

Then there's higher costs so that it's more difficult to run research as high. For example, there's a free unit cap of 2 on immortal and 6 on prince, a distance maintence of 100% for immortal and 85% for prince, and so on. All things considered due to multiplicative effects it takes about twice as long to research between those difficulty levels (if not longer) so without trades it's really easy to fall behind.

[brandonjm8]

After a certain point it becomes impossible to out tech the AI without tech trading. On Deity it's entirely possible for an AI like Mansa to be building a spaceship before you even know what gunpowder is. The only chance you have of catching up is teching deep and then trading that tech (at a huge loss) to several other civs to get their stuff.

I know you can counter that using espionage to steal tech, but that seems really unfair since I don't think the AI does it in return.

i havent played deity yet so i'll take your word on that, i got my work cut out for me, will see.

well if they are out-teching you that much then using great spys is practical if you want to win and a must it looks like.

Resource and civ placement is changing, but always using the same civ and settings like that means you're just playing the same game over and over and over. You're getting better at it through repetition, but to get better at civ overall you need to vary things, that way you can more easily recognize the best way to deal with any particular situation.

i use different civs and leaders each and every game. my fav thus far is roosevelt for making big empires with awesome economies from all the wonder whoring i usually am able to do. navy seals are also quite good but their UB aint the greatest. and since i change civs and leaders and map settings no game is ever the same. for instance this game i was behind and had to do alot to get to where i am now. on other games im the early leader and never relinquish it, furthermore on some of those i lose it and other scenarios ect ect ect.

The time to commit on marathon comes by turn 100. That gives you plenty of time to see your surrounding land and neighbors to make a plan.

turn 300(100)? nope, not with my map settings and sizes, sometimes you dont even meet everyone til astronomy. i often times commit to a strategy prior to meeting everyone. but those change if situations change such is normal or expected dependent on events/situations ect.

I'm actually not a fan of the Landkerschnit. Sure, it has 12 strength against mounted and melee, but the base is 6. It gets less from combat, shock, formation, and so on than the mounted/melee units do. On top of that, longbows to say nothing of crossbows absolutely tear them apart. Really, they're just a pikeman that splatters slightly less against anything but a mounted unit.

well if you gave it cover and drill 4 with CR3 and flanking2(if poss.), those bows dont stand a chance. but ive yet to experiment with all UU's thus far so im still undecided on that issue, i just saw that unit on the civlo and was impressed.

[brandonjm8]

Oh, on the subject of the research penalty... it's a handicap on the players side. The handicap.xml file has all the info, but each tech has a base cost then there's a difficulty based modifier to get the beaker cost. The modifiers are
Settler=60
Chieftan=75
Warlord=90
Noble=100
Prince=110
Monarch=115
Emperor=120
Immortal=125
Deity=130

Then there's higher costs so that it's more difficult to run research as high. For example, there's a free unit cap of 2 on immortal and 6 on prince, a distance maintence of 100% for immortal and 85% for prince, and so on. All things considered due to multiplicative effects it takes about twice as long to research between those difficulty levels (if not longer) so without trades it's really easy to fall behind.

i can see if you are blessed with great land and resources and huts you should be able to keep up with the AI, it is possible. i speak not knowing but ive had some awesome economies, but as i dont know i can only guess and speculate, will find out for myself sooner or later tho.

[brandonjm8]

hey brael,

goto civfanatics.com and pick up the map_generator_0_68 map script, if you have a high-end'ish machine you can have bigger than huge maps and its very customizable. thats the map i use which is why you cant always do things a certain way you did once before, the maps can get huge GIGANTIC even, the biggest is bout 4x bigger than huge, my current game the map is 2x bigger than huge i think.

[Brael]

i havent played deity yet so i'll take your word on that, i got my work cut out for me, will see.

well if they are out-teching you that much then using great spys is practical if you want to win and a must it looks like.

It's impossible to straight up out tech a deity (or Immortal, maybe Emperor) AI. The modifiers become too much to counter unless you have an absolutely huge empire and it's mostly devoted to research. Lots of people that just enjoy the building aspect don't really go past Prince or so because the building penalties make it too difficult if not impossible in some cases to keep up.

Using the spies, I mean only with no tech trading. I think that's kind of unfair to turn off tech trading, and then divert your coin to spies to steal techs. It's still paying to get your technology from others, but if the AI isn't doing it in return it's just a huge advantage and a way to gimp the system.

turn 300(100)? nope, not with my map settings and sizes, sometimes you dont even meet everyone til astronomy. i often times commit to a strategy prior to meeting everyone. but those change if situations change such is normal or expected dependent on events/situations ect.

No, actual 100. It's around the same regardless of speed I think (though map size would change it). The reason is because the number of turns needed to scout your territory and find your neighbors doesn't change with difficulty. Once you see your territory and know who's around you, you can make decisions about military vs peaceful paths.

well if you gave it cover and drill 4 with CR3 and flanking2(if poss.), those bows dont stand a chance. but ive yet to experiment with all UU's thus far so im still undecided on that issue, i just saw that unit on the civlo and was impressed.

It can't have flanking or drill. Flanking is mounted units only, drill goes to archery and gunpowder. I've seen others say they're a nice unit too but when I tried it out in practice I was amazed at how useless it was. It was basically an escort for my real city attackers. And remember, with that lower base it's getting less from CR3 than other units. A maceman with it's 8 strength ends up at 12.4 with CR2 (yes 2, that's not a typo, 8*1.55) while a Landkerschnet with it's 6 strength ends up at 10.8 with CR3 (6*1.8). That lower base really hurts once you come up against city defenders.

hey brael,

goto civfanatics.com and pick up the map_generator_0_68 map script, if you have a high-end'ish machine you can have bigger than huge maps and its very customizable. thats the map i use which is why you cant always do things a certain way you did once before, the maps can get huge GIGANTIC even, the biggest is bout 4x bigger than huge, my current game the map is 2x bigger than huge i think.

I find bigger than huge maps to be too big (actually, I find huge to be too large but large to be too small). My computer can handle them although turns get slow and things start to lag, but my issue is once you have a certain size, it just gets to be too much effort to manage the empire. I enjoy the thinking aspect of things rather than the tedious management of every city, though early on I do like to micromanage the cities... I give that up once I have a few though, it's just not fun to me.

[wodan11]

i usually dont get the sistine since i go for angkor wat and philosophy takes a bit early game sometimes. i have on occasion gotten both and did make an effort for the CV in my wonder whoring cities but alas i win before i get too 300k.

::deep breath::

There are several ways to go for a CV. In brief:
1) Found or allow to spread to you as many religions as possible, build at least 9 cities, spread all religions, build temples, build cathedrals in your chosen 3.
2) Build many cottages in your chosen 3.
3) OR build many farms in your chosen 3 and run all artists.
4) OR build many hammer improvements and many wonders in your chosen 3.
5) Speed to a specific tech, often Riflng + Biology. Sometimes go get Media but not necessary.
6) If you did cottages or wonders, crank the culture slider to 100%. You often will also do a GM farm which produces artists. This farm could be one of your big 3 or it could be separate. In this type of push, each of your big 3 should be generating ~1000 culture per turn (or more if Espionage is turned off).
7) Great Artists generated early game should be settled in one of the big 3. Mid to late game, save them until the end and then do a great work in whichever is the least advanced in culture.
8) If you're running all farms and artists in all 3 of your big 3 you can sometimes not mess with the culture slider.
9) If you have Espionage turned off there are a lot of other dynamics. You'll want Intelligence Bureau etc.
10) Using Corps is somewhat different and can be decided quite late, though you can also supplement the above with Corps. I won't talk about this option now. It's pretty powerful though and can generate huge amounts of culture.

if im smallish as a nation late game going for the CV might look alot better doing since other wins might not be possible. but im usually not small and i either take the diplo or domination win relatively early for a marathon game (around turn 750 (250 when compared to normal) and with the size of my maps and AI's that is pretty quick and the fact i play with no tech/brokering every game, you have to learn all your techs and balance what you go for wise too).

As mentioned going for a CV is best decided very early in the game. It doesn't fit so well as a spur of the moment decision (except sometimes if using Corps). Better to go for Space in those cases.

wouldnt it be less confusing if you asked for more clarification of a post/quote prior to making one of your own so that as to not be confused/confusing?

Why should I ask for clarification if I wasn't confused?

I simply don't want to continue the confusion and for the benefit of others, do my best to make my OWN post more easy to understand.

see then your picking what you want to reply at instead of the whole which is the point, some of us like me use more words and examples and ect to make a good point. could i use less words? sure, but thats not me. could you not pick quotes apart? sure, but you dont like to.

im replying to your posts in sequence, it aint that hard, scroll up and down.

Well, you didn't respond to BOTH of the points that I made. So, aren't YOU being selective? Just the fact of quoting both of my points, and then only replying to one, seems worse to me. (Worse than what I might do, which is not quote the stuff that I'm not replying to.)

As you say: it's not that hard... if you want to go back, just scroll up and down to see the original post.

well we both know im not on settler

That was an example to prove the point. You're not on Settler, but you're not on Immortal or Deity either.

on prince and above if you can adapt to whatever's thrown at you and yet still win you are pretty good, your a "pro" cuz your in the top half of civ players. to me being a pro is just being better than average and thus a possible challenge for any other above average player.

I'd say there's as much difference, if not *more*, between Prince and Immortal as between Settler and Prince.

dont presume to know my logic, dont assume anything, assuming leads to chaos/confusion. if i thought that you are better than me then i wouldve said "woodan your better than me", but i didnt say that. to be honest i dont know if your better than me or not, weve never played each other and talk is cheap. and replying to your flat out response: if you need to be told by others who and what you are woodan then fine by me, i dont need approval and/or support for my claims. you either accept the fact i may not be full of it or you assume i am.

I don't have anything else to add than what I said previously. Other than to state what is generally accepted in polite society:

A dialogue consists of people saying something, others seeking to understand, and stating their understanding or stating their reply based upon their understanding. If one person thinks others misinterpreted something that was said, that person should politely clarify, and, if warranted, apologize for inadvertently giving offense or for stating things in a misleading manner.

for discussion purposes, if you dont want to be grilled under the microscope then when you discuss pros n cons and strats do it like this "i did this and this happened, i changed this by doing it this way and this happened", not "your not good at your own strategy, your predictable all the time no matter what you do cuz by your own admission which I (woodan) assume means your not good at others, ect ect ect", you could too yourself use better words when giving your advice.

Agreed, and I apologize for saying it in that fashion. However, please understand that the above was not during discussion of the strategy, it was afterwards after you had gotten defensive. When the alternative strategies were originally mentioned, it was quite polite, I believe. Both from myself, as well as Ming and others.

think of it like this, dont try to change people (it'll never work)

Someone whose parents didn't teach them how to act can certainly reform themselves. Saying it'll never work is saying that blue collar can never aspire to white collar. It's up to each of us to decide what kind of person we want to be, and then to use the example of others to be that person.

[wodan11]

i never said the other strategies ive used but havent posted im not good at, ive constantly said ive had to switch it up many times throughout games, try paying more attention please to my words and how i use them (if you dont know what i mean ASK). you have no idea how to play me cuz youve never played me, you think you know but in reality you dont. dont assume with me , im as unpredictable as they come .

you guys are funny, i will agree on something, that you guys better not play me .

Well there we have it... the only recourse is to fire up multiplayer with you, me, Ming, and others.

When is a good time? How about next Saturday?

[brandonjm8]

It's impossible to straight up out tech a deity (or Immortal, maybe Emperor) AI. The modifiers become too much to counter unless you have an absolutely huge empire and it's mostly devoted to research. Lots of people that just enjoy the building aspect don't really go past Prince or so because the building penalties make it too difficult if not impossible in some cases to keep up.

i wont be one of those people that wont go up levels and this coming from a builder(me) , i am more of a builder than a conquerer not to take anything away from my ability to dominate games militarily. on average i get at least 50 cities provided i have the room and played things correctly, thus my economy with me being the "builder" type MIGHT be able to compete with the disadvantages of higher levels. i will be on monarch soon so i should have a better view of if its possible for me. til then i'll continue to tweak my strategies to give me the best possible chance of success.

Using the spies, I mean only with no tech trading. I think that's kind of unfair to turn off tech trading, and then divert your coin to spies to steal techs. It's still paying to get your technology from others, but if the AI isn't doing it in return it's just a huge advantage and a way to gimp the system.

it is a loop hole but if deity is that impossible, exploiting those loop holes sounds like a necessary evil to have consistent victories. but i understand not wanting too, its like cheating, your not as proud of success if you think it was because of such cheats/loop holes.

No, actual 100. It's around the same regardless of speed I think (though map size would change it). The reason is because the number of turns needed to scout your territory and find your neighbors doesn't change with difficulty. Once you see your territory and know who's around you, you can make decisions about military vs peaceful paths.

with my size maps it takes alot longer to find all AI's than normal huge maps. and i know the number of turns and level of difficulty have nothing to do with map exploration but size of map does as you stated .

i agree with the last sentence completely, if you have an aggressive AI next to you start building your units and prepare for battle.

It can't have flanking or drill. Flanking is mounted units only, drill goes to archery and gunpowder. I've seen others say they're a nice unit too but when I tried it out in practice I was amazed at how useless it was. It was basically an escort for my real city attackers. And remember, with that lower base it's getting less from CR3 than other units. A maceman with it's 8 strength ends up at 12.4 with CR2 (yes 2, that's not a typo, 8*1.55) while a Landkerschnet with it's 6 strength ends up at 10.8 with CR3 (6*1.8). That lower base really hurts once you come up against city defenders.

you are right. i'll have more of an opinion with more experience with the units ive yet to use.

I find bigger than huge maps to be too big (actually, I find huge to be too large but large to be too small). My computer can handle them although turns get slow and things start to lag, but my issue is once you have a certain size, it just gets to be too much effort to manage the empire. I enjoy the thinking aspect of things rather than the tedious management of every city, though early on I do like to micromanage the cities... I give that up once I have a few though, it's just not fun to me.

im a micromanager, i am. im a perfectionist by nature.

[brandonjm8]

::deep breath::

There are several ways to go for a CV. In brief:
1) Found or allow to spread to you as many religions as possible, build at least 9 cities, spread all religions, build temples, build cathedrals in your chosen 3.
2) Build many cottages in your chosen 3.
3) OR build many farms in your chosen 3 and run all artists.
4) OR build many hammer improvements and many wonders in your chosen 3.
5) Speed to a specific tech, often Riflng + Biology. Sometimes go get Media but not necessary.
6) If you did cottages or wonders, crank the culture slider to 100%. You often will also do a GM farm which produces artists. This farm could be one of your big 3 or it could be separate. In this type of push, each of your big 3 should be generating ~1000 culture per turn (or more if Espionage is turned off).
7) Great Artists generated early game should be settled in one of the big 3. Mid to late game, save them until the end and then do a great work in whichever is the least advanced in culture.
8) If you're running all farms and artists in all 3 of your big 3 you can sometimes not mess with the culture slider.
9) If you have Espionage turned off there are a lot of other dynamics. You'll want Intelligence Bureau etc.
10) Using Corps is somewhat different and can be decided quite late, though you can also supplement the above with Corps. I won't talk about this option now. It's pretty powerful though and can generate huge amounts of culture.

no need for big breathes. i knew you were well versed in the CV scheme as i am not. i knew some of what you said, others i did not, will remember this info, thx.

Why should I ask for clarification if I wasn't confused?

I simply don't want to continue the confusion and for the benefit of others, do my best to make my OWN post more easy to understand.

but sometimes your clarification could be misleading and/or inaccurate. im just saying, misunderstandings are a common occurrence.

I'd say there's as much difference, if not *more*, between Prince and Immortal as between Settler and Prince.

i dont know yet for deity, but by going by brael figures mentioned above you would be wrong. theres 20% difference between prince and deity but 50% difference between prince and settler, going by the numbers. i know thats only for units/buildings and there are others like maint and unit support but if the those numbers are lower for prince to deity then the others probably follow suit as well, a pretty good assumption i believe.

I don't have anything else to add than what I said previously. Other than to state what is generally accepted in polite society:

A dialogue consists of people saying something, others seeking to understand, and stating their understanding or stating their reply based upon their understanding. If one person thinks others misinterpreted something that was said, that person should politely clarify, and, if warranted, apologize for inadvertently giving offense or for stating things in a misleading manner.

i try my best.

Agreed, and I apologize for saying it in that fashion. However, please understand that the above was not during discussion of the strategy, it was afterwards after you had gotten defensive. When the alternative strategies were originally mentioned, it was quite polite, I believe. Both from myself, as well as Ming and others.

but when someones attacked and defenses are put up, the continuation of that attack will only keep those defenses erected. if you really want to you can look back at every post between myself and ming and see i was attacked first and the choice of words coupled with selection of what he wanted to reply too and assumptions made on his part led to this whole debacle. if you do this note the times and dates of posts on all threads as well as this one. now im assuming you wont, so if youd prefer we can just drop it since it might just be better to agree to disagree.

Someone whose parents didn't teach them how to act can certainly reform themselves. Saying it'll never work is saying that blue collar can never aspire to white collar. It's up to each of us to decide what kind of person we want to be, and then to use the example of others to be that person.

i really hope that parents comment wasnt for me.

as far as it'll never work quote, yes people change and some dont, sometimes alotta people dont change and sometimes vice versa. some people here sometimes fit the never change profile and others such as yourself make it incorrect. it was just more of an expression on my part.

[Krill]

Oh my. Another challenger?

What does everyone think?

[brandonjm8]

Well there we have it... the only recourse is to fire up multiplayer with you, me, Ming, and others.

When is a good time? How about next Saturday?

when i feel up to playing MP and done experimenting with the AI, i'll hold you to it. for right now i have little interest of MP, take that statement however you'd like, it really doesnt matter. when i do decide im done with the AI and have gotten up to higher levels i will need to switch up my settings and get used to the common MP ones, cuz i know alot of people here wouldnt play mine for MP.

[wodan11]

i didnt say i only specialize in one strategy, you assumed there woodan.

There's a difference between "assuming" and "logical deduction".

A = "i post what works best for me cuz thats what i specialize in"
B = your posts
C = A + B

i didnt know we were discussing football here .
but seriously since its been so long since you did "your" warlord strategy, you shouldnt be promoting it. you've yet to say how often and how much you used to do it, alls you said is you've done somewhat, thats not a confident stand point nor should you be promoting something you dont prefer enough to do alot, i wouldnt promote early "bull rushes" for example cuz i dont do them much. get my point?

I get your point but now it's here that you're assuming. It was, I think Fall 2007. As I often do, I take a strategy, either one that I've stumbled upon as an extrapolation of others, or something from others I've picked up in forums, and I really push that strategy and see how strong I can make it. I played, oh at least 10-12 games with different settings, all trying to push Warlords. Since then, I have played it maybe 2-3 times a year.

dont presume to think you know me nor try to make my own decisions on what i do or dont value. stop assuming, you are assuming right now.

Restating your own statements is not assuming. Are you saying you did NOT say the following? "ive yet to lose on bts and vanilla, i played many many games on monarch and prince for vanilla and won every time, ive won all noble games and the 3 prince games thus far for bts, to be honest ive only lost one game from the whole civ series, that was back on civ2 so apparently im good enough so i must be a pro, yes theres more for me to learn but the fact remains i have an insane winning %"

Please don't be so defensive in discussions! From the start, you've been acting very "put upon". Frankly, being defensive is as much as fault as the things being defensive about. Whether or not you're entitled to be defensive, I think being defensive just makes it worse.

i use it as a point that im smarter and better than your average bear, i'll continue to say til it sinks in or stops needing to be said.

You're honestly here seeking validation?!?

I blame the education establishment. Our schools are crap. Putting esteem and such above actual education. Heaven forbid the merits of someone's work and their actions is more important than how we and they feel about it.

im not better than anyone, we are all equals with equal potential, i mean that sincerely.

Nice egalitarian attitude. It's nonsense of course. People are not born with equal ability. (I'm talking in general, not about anyone in specific.)

true, but having alot of extras opens the window of error thus making it easier. accept the fact that your 25 warlord units could and will lose to well promo'd SoD's of 50+, even at 99% you can still lose. me personally id rather have a huge/balanced well promo'd force than a small elite special forces, if i could id have both .

Well, sure. I'd love to have the benefits of ALL strategies at the same time too, and none of the negatives. For example, would be nice to be able to run 10 scientists in all of my cities, plus 10 priests, with a free angkor, plus have all cottages on my flat terrain and all mines on my hills, plus a six-demon bag! But we can't have all those things at the same time so we have to play some games one way and other games other ways. This teaches how to maximize the pros and minimize the cons of each strategy, giving a well-rounded experience base.

as i said before, you have more exp with CV's than me thus you will be better at it than me. with my hybrid scheme i can either out-vote or crush my competition. as i go up levels im sure i will need to sharpen my CV skills and a few others.

Sure. But how we got here is I posted a description of another strategy, you replied saying how that strategy wouldn't do well on the settings you always play, and I repled saying some instances where that strategy would do well.

in order to get your GG's for you warlords you need to build an army whether mid to big size you need to build an army, or just build D units and start wars with the AI. itd be easier attacking an AI rather than defending them thus weaken your economy once your SoD is built then leaves to conquer.

None of the assumptions you posit are true.
1) To get GGs all you need is 1 unit. (Yes, that's an extreme. But the other extreme is what you posted: "a mid to big size army".) The reality can vary between those extremes and a skilled player could go toward the lower extreme if he wanted.
2) Are you defining "D units" as all units which fight within culture borders? And "attacking" as fighting in the enemy's borders? Personally, I would define an O unit as any unit which uses the attack game function versus allowing the enemy to attack. And, I would define "attack" as the attack game function (what happens when I move my unit onto an enemy's unit).

my biggest have been by far by far by far the best, my game alittle bit ago (the one where i had that "awesome D" built that ming loved so much ) i had 50 cities and 4400 beakers @ only 70% (over 5000 beakers if i went to 80%, +131 gold/turn) and +600 gold/turn, if i turned my science way down i could make +3000 gold/turn. so dont go saying bigger isnt better, if you know what you are doing it is. im a very good builder and planner as well as a dominator(so far) .

I guess I need to say this again: giving one example does not a trend make. This is what's called observational selection.

since im good at economics, unit costs have little effect on me.

I'd suggest you keep a chart (write on a piece of paper as you play your next game), going into F2 every turn and writing down unit and city maint costs. Type them in Excel for us and let's review them to see if we can jointly come to any conclusions based on hard data rather than conjecture and anecdotes. Fair enough?

dont get mad when someone calls you out for talking out yer @$$, you were wrong... (irrelevant text deleted)

1) I wasn't mad.
2) Whether not it's justified is moot, you're attacking the person
3) If you attack the person and not the argument, you are violating Poly forum rules. You can be banned for it.

nope, i like having to play big really big AI's. i scale it according to keeping that possible.

Exactly my point. This makes it a presumptive basis of anything you say. Particularly any anecdote you offer as proof of your theories.

they both go hand in hand.

In some respects, yes. That doesn't make strategy and tactics the same thing. For example, one could say cookbooks and cooking go hand in hand.

misunderstandings can easily be overcome if people would just ask questions prior to making up their minds.

Dude, I asked TONS of questions. Maybe you should go back and read the entire thread....