comparison game for woodan and whom else

[trev]

Load fails on that save of yours, so i cannot view it. It was my first and only attempt, mainly on that spot as best combo of resources and hills for mining, so if I got going well, it would end up a good productive hammer city.

[trev]

I have began playing Braels 2nd game for comparison, going very well so far, founded Buddhism and built shrine, took risk at start of game and built stonehenge first, then GW, then pyramids. Almost died before GW built, but got the Prophet for shrine out of it.
Built about 7 cities, then built units and captured 2 of Ghandis cities so far, Delhi first with 2 religions, but no shrines, then another, will move to complete conquest of Ghandi next session.
Currently top in GDP Hammers etc, so looking very good.
Game at 560AD http://www.mediafire.com/file/dglqmn...eyondSwordSave
Got Masonry from hut right at start of game, helped with my tactics, built on stone for surety in building wonders.

[wodan11]

ive done SE's w/o angkor wat, i dont always get AW . ive done it w/o AW, ive done it specializing on alotta scientists and others merchants, ive done it alotta times.

Well, without Angkor, running scientists or whatever, how do you support your claim of "great gold output/great beakers/great production/great GP rate"?

as far as gold/turn you can take a look at my jap game, im running 100% science making 200 gold/turn with 2700 beakers and that with only having 30% of my cities with univ/obv/mark/groc/banks! and not one of those cities are building research/wealth.

I've said before, and you agreed, that numbers mean nothing because one number which is superb in one game could be totally inadequate in another game.

Furthermore, running 100% science in a SE really says little. In fact, in some types of SE that's actually a negative because it means you're wasting resources.

ever had a city with 12 priests and 4 scientists and 4 merchants? ever had size 38 cities? do you know how productive huge cities are with "fat crosses"? biology is killer if you planned for huge cities like i do, i usually get at least a couple 30+ cities if not more. my biggest was a 39 for civ4, 42 size for civ2 like 30+ million people .

Unh, what's the saying? You're trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

And, you didn't answer the question. An anecdote is not an answer. (Actually, an anecdote is an answer, but it is pretty indicting if that's what you're basing things off of, so you may want to add some facts or actual hypothesis for discussion.)

Here's the question again: Upon what do you base this opinion? (Which was in response to your statement: "CE has its advantages mainly early game, just my opinion.")

i switch up constantly, some games i cant even run rep gov't late game for the simple fact i need police state for wars and making units faster, ive had many different combo's. what i stated was just for what i like to do in peace time, come war time you gotta do what ya gotta do .

You're proving my point. Which is not being derogatory to you... you're free to play however you like. But certainly I, and I daresay most people, play different game strategies (not game tactics) by intent and on a frequent basis. Again, that's not derogatory, but to be clear that your experience is not typical and in fact is not what most people find "fun."

I'm pretty sure that it was you yourself who said that in the late game a CE ends up being more valuable because the effect from GP are lessened and you get fewer due to the increasing costs of obtaining each one. I would call that a better alternative at that time.

Don't remember that but if I said that I think it was in the context of "tends to" or "more" not in absolutes. There aren't really any absolutes. We can't point at just one thing and say, "there, see? This one factor overwhelms all other factors and makes it better in all cases."

Without a doubt, a CE gets stronger over the game. We've got things civic bonuses and maturing cottages. Meanwhile, a SE gets weaker because GPP progression gets much harder over time. However, a SE also gets stronger because of Biology and increased happy/health limits meaning more specialists can be run, and other things. So Biology etc in some respects compensates for the decreased GP.

So, in an individual game, when do we draw the line and say "a CE is now better"? Hard to say, because to a great extent we are comparing to what "might have been". Yes, we can replay the game but even then it's not exactly the same. And, furthermore, we have to account for accumulated benefit up to that point. i.e., if a SE is better early, getting more research better (which allows techs earlier, with buildings and benefits from those techs earlier, which snowballs), we have to account for that and figure out when the added CE bonuses finally do compensate for the accumulated lead the SE has. The game might even have been won by that point, meaning in that game the CE was never a better alternative.

It would depend on your food resources and the amount of grassland you have. Plus remember, the amount you can run is going to be constrained more by your happy/healthy resources than your maximum food growth. Two +6 food resources and 8 grassland gives you 20 food. That's an extra 10 people, but you would need to support a size 20 city to work those 10 tiles and have 10 specialists. It really depends on how late in the game you want to go with this, and how many resources you want the hypothetical civ to have.

Sure. But that argument diminishes the relative value of Caste System.

I totally agree CS is a strong SE strategy. But there are other SE strategies which I feel are just as strong, when we take all factors into account.

Besides, for variety, if nothing else, they're a good idea.

True for some buildings, less true for others. Banks and Universities come to mind, those only add multipliers and not specialists.

Univ's yes, but you need X banks for Wall Street.

They also happen to be somewhat expensive (though cheap for the benefit). Observatories are questionable. I realize Libraries can be built everywhere earlier on, but do you really want to do that to an observatory if the city is providing low or no science?

Of course not. But in that city you wouldn't be running a lot of scientists if you had Caste System available, either, so it's a moot point.

Some OPINIONS on why they aren't playing...

Even though nobody's asked for the record I've been gone on a business trip all week. And, last weekend, I found that I'm one of the people who hadn't had 3.19 successfully patch so I had to uninstall and then found I don't know where my discs are. I've got a huge stack in my closet I have to dig through to find them. I'll try to do it this week.

if i change my map sizes then that in essence changes my settings then we would no longer be comparing my settings to anothers, it'd be comparing settings of the same person and no fair comparison could be made since none of the games were played with my settings, get my point?

I actually agree with you here. But I don't think it's as much as you make of it. A huge map with 4-6 AIs would have ~95% congruency with your settings.

basically if you dont finish someones game simply cuz it isnt fun then you cant expect or think the other would finish the other game either.

Compare/contrast this statement from my cat: "If you don't finish my anchovy ice cream because you don't like it, then you can't expect or think I would finish your chocolate ice cream."

in the real world like today, our earth is made of continents large ones. conquering the world isnt easy

Actually, Cortez and others found it pretty darn easy.

And, as we've discussed "taking a long time" is not equivalent with "difficult".

if it was easy that'd be a boring game

I agree with that. But I think length of time or minutae involved has nothing to do with enjoyment. The movie Avatar was really really long but I enjoyed it a lot.

the harder it is the longer it takes

Length of time may have a correlation to higher difficulty but does not imply it. Likewise, high difficulty does not imply longer time.

you are just an idiot

since you want to act like a child im gonna start treating you as such from now on.

simply put, MING'S INTELLECTUALLY CHALLENGED

Brandon, quit the personal attacks please. There is no possible justification for them.

And you shouldn't put stone on a grassland hill when using WB. It just shows that you are indeed rigging the game to your style of play.

Some mapscripts do that, Ming.

[wodan11]

poor poor little itty bitty ming, your not getting your way are ya? <--- hey another question mark .

everything you are has led you to accuse anyone of anything to bring them down to your level. now people will see you've reverted to accusing me of anything you can think of since im making a fool outta you. all the facts i have provided have been quotes letter for letter and are not opinions . in your opinion only are you righteous .

poor poor ming

I'm not sure what's more appropriate.



I guess I'll be the bad guy and start reporting personal attacks.

[brandonjm8]

I'm not sure what's more appropriate.



I guess I'll be the bad guy and start reporting personal attacks.

well what do you expect after having to hear all of mings assumptions, presumptuous nature towards me, condescending attitude towards me, and patronizing me and now his last ditch effort accusing me of well fraud. i can only take so much before i feel the need to speak my mind. i know you've noticed this too, i dont talk to ming, he talks/attacks me THEN i reply, not the other way around. you know hes doing this on purpose right , ive tried to squash this many times, he doesnt want to. furthermore he takes no responsibility for his actions, ive already apologized before, im not doing it again, he doesnt deserve it and i think you can agree. you can only ignore a fly for so long before wanting to swat at it .

[brandonjm8]

Well, without Angkor, running scientists or whatever, how do you support your claim of "great gold output/great beakers/great production/great GP rate"?

id run priest with or w/o AW, thats +1 gold per, +3 beakers per, +3 GP per, they tend to be great for me since i tend to have alot of big cities and an awful lot of specialists, i also tend to get multiple religions which further adds to them. i have alot of specialists .

Here's the question again: Upon what do you base this opinion? (Which was in response to your statement: "CE has its advantages mainly early game, just my opinion.")

sorry i didnt tape all the games ive played to share all of my exp's with you. the only thing i can say is that "in my opinion and exp's" SE's do me more good than CE's, my best games have been with SE's not CE's. not to take anything away from CE's but my SE's have been that much better.

Again, that's not derogatory, but to be clear that your experience is not typical and in fact is not what most people find "fun."

i do what i find fun, not what others do. if we disagree sorry but oh well.

basically if you dont finish someones game simply cuz it isnt fun then you cant expect or think the other would finish the other game either.

Compare/contrast this statement from my cat: "If you don't finish my anchovy ice cream because you don't like it, then you can't expect or think I would finish your chocolate ice cream."

well in your opinion my games are like anchovy ice cream but in my opinion your games are like anchovy ice cream. we are gonna have to agree to disagree here.

in the real world like today, our earth is made of continents large ones. conquering the world isnt easy

Actually, Cortez and others found it pretty darn easy.

wow, they conquered all 7 continents? no one ever has thus the bigger the map the bigger the potential of not being able to conquer it. it is not easy conquering a 2x huge map and most of the time even isnt plausible.

Some mapscripts do that, Ming.

i tried telling him that but he refuses to listen.

[wodan11]

well what do you expect after having to hear all of mings assumptions, presumptuous nature towards me, condescending attitude towards me, and patronizing me and now his last ditch effort accusing me of well fraud.

I expect you to behave like a grownup.

If you feel someone is behaving in a poor manner toward you, in no way does that license you to behave in a juvenile manner toward them.

This has nothing to do with forum rules. That's simply civilized, polite behavior.

I've said all this before, so I don't get why we're still having this discussion.

i can only take so much before i feel the need to speak my mind. i know you've noticed this too, i dont talk to ming, he talks/attacks me THEN i reply, not the other way around. you know hes doing this on purpose right , ive tried to squash this many times, he doesnt want to. furthermore he takes no responsibility for his actions, ive already apologized before, im not doing it again, he doesnt deserve it and i think you can agree. you can only ignore a fly for so long before wanting to swat at it .

What part of "no matter what someone does, it doesn't justify what you do" wasn't clear? You're responsible for your own behavior.

Seriously, if you keep on with this "well he started it", it's going to get you in real trouble in life.

[wodan11]

id run priest with or w/o AW, thats +1 gold per, +3 beakers per, +3 GP per

And your priest is -1 (vs Engineer), -3 (vs Scientist), break even on GPP, etc. So your claim doesn't hold up.

sorry i didnt tape all the games ive played to share all of my exp's with you. the only thing i can say is that "in my opinion and exp's" SE's do me more good than CE's, my best games have been with SE's not CE's. not to take anything away from CE's but my SE's have been that much better.

That's a better, more fair statement.

i do what i find fun, not what others do. if we disagree sorry but oh well.

Sure, and that's entirely fair. But don't make flat claims which read as if you are saying they apply to all kinds of things beyond your Angkor/SE strategy.

well in your opinion my games are like anchovy ice cream but in my opinion your games are like anchovy ice cream. we are gonna have to agree to disagree here.

Maybe it was a poor analogy. You've admitted you play one main strategy because that's "what I find fun" and you've admitted that there are many other strategies (such as CE). So a better analogy might be a specific thing and a more general category, such as "one kind of food" / "all kinds of food".

wow, they conquered all 7 continents? no one ever has thus the bigger the map the bigger the potential of not being able to conquer it. it is not easy conquering a 2x huge map and most of the time even isnt plausible.

In real life tech trading is not off, Brandon.

[brandonjm8]

I expect you to behave like a grownup.

If you feel someone is behaving in a poor manner toward you, in no way does that license you to behave in a juvenile manner toward them.

This has nothing to do with forum rules. That's simply civilized, polite behavior.

I've said all this before, so I don't get why we're still having this discussion.


What part of "no matter what someone does, it doesn't justify what you do" wasn't clear? You're responsible for your own behavior.

Seriously, if you keep on with this "well he started it", it's going to get you in real trouble in life.

i treat others how they treat me, simple. and everyone starts with my respect its only lost, simple.

as far as trouble and life, bring it on

[brandonjm8]

And your priest is -1 (vs Engineer), -3 (vs Scientist), break even on GPP, etc. So your claim doesn't hold up.

yes it does, early to mid game you can only have ONE engineer while i can easily get 12+ priests per city .

Sure, and that's entirely fair. But don't make flat claims which read as if you are saying they apply to all kinds of things beyond your Angkor/SE strategy.

people will perceive what they read/hear however they want, how they do that is their business. making assumptions only leads to chaos.

wow, they conquered all 7 continents? no one ever has thus the bigger the map the bigger the potential of not being able to conquer it. it is not easy conquering a 2x huge map and most of the time even isnt plausible.

In real life tech trading is not off, Brandon.[/QUOTE]

even with that they still never conquered all 7 continents . not even three, most was by genghis, he had asia and parts of europe and thats the largest empire to ever exist .

[wodan11]

i treat others how they treat me, simple.

Like I said, no matter what someone else does, you're accountable for yourself. If you commit a crime, you'll be tried for that crime and put in jail. It doesn't matter what anyone else did first.

and everyone starts with my respect its only lost, simple.

Nothing I said has anything to do with the respect you do (or don't) give someone else.

as far as trouble and life, bring it on

Here is where we ask how old you are. You'll learn.

[wodan11]

yes it does, early to mid game you can only have ONE engineer while i can easily get 12+ priests per city .

Other types of SE can have 12+ priests too. So that's moot.

people will perceive what they read/hear however they want, how they do that is their business. making assumptions only leads to chaos.

There's a difference between making an assumption and reading exactly what is said.

You have admitted that you don't always say what you're thinking.

So, if you state something that isn't what you're thinking, and other people take your statement at face value, it is NOT fair of you to blame them for "making assumptions".

[q=Wodan]In real life tech trading is not off, Brandon.

even with that they still never conquered all 7 continents . not even three, most was by genghis, he had asia and parts of europe and thats the largest empire to ever exist .[/Q]
And if tech trading was off, it would be different in real life. For example, the Mongols would have had no siege engines (which tech they took from the Chinese).

[Senethro]

I've managed to complete 3 singleplayer FPSs and 2 games of Solium Infernum since this thread started. Are you guys done with your bad long games yet and ready to include those of us who think marathon is a waste of time?

[Brael]

Marathon owns (I think), but this game doesn't. If you want to put up a different style comparison game post it.

Oh, I was going to post the 1500 save but this one (1478 or something) is much more decisive so it goes up instead. I decided Mansa needed neutered so I sent out 4 brave galleons filled with suicidal units. Espionage revealed Mansa was for some reason slacking on his holy city defense. There were a mere two catapults in the city (makes no sense to me, but... whatever). His holy city also happened to be about 150 gold per turn unmodified by my estimate (22% spread vs my cities 8% spread which has 54/turn income) so the suicidal guys went sailing on a quest to burn the city to the ground, forget holding it this is cheaper and equally effective.

It succeeds with no casualties so they load up and sail away the next turn before there's any repercussions. On the way back I notice his capital is accessible by sea (well, after landing on his gold) and that it only has 2 longbows and a swordsman for it's defenders. My units make one more quick stop and face "strong" resistance in the form of those city defenders and 2 knights with the nerve to sit on the tile I wanted to land on. I made short work of them, even with an evasion force of a mere 4 macemen, 4 pikemen, and 4 crossbows. The final pikeman (who only happened to be at ~2 str btw thanks to not healing from the holy city) got the winning attack in. Then the capital was burned too.

All three surviving units are promptly disbanded so Mansa can't get the GG points for killing them, and I sail away with empty ships. Seeing as how my army sucks I'll either need to actually start building units now or rely on the AP to shield me. Either way I plan to use it to get peace. The upside of units is obvious, but the upside of having this small military is I can continue to laugh at Survaryman when he does his little sneak attack wars and I manage to fight him off.

You know, this is the first or maybe second time I've ever burned a holy city. Seeing as how there's a special holy city razing diplomacy hit, I'm kind of surprised it's just -2 with civs. You would think it would be a -20 with Isabella. Oh well, I guess I can just make 10 arrogant demands to her in a row if I want a -20.

I might do that just for fun... right after I find the Buddhist holy city. No one but me deserves holy cities.

Well, here's the game http://www.mediafire.com/?mk4dmd2u51y

My science was a lot better, then I went and lost 500 beakers/turn from scientific method. Gotta love that.

[Theben]

huge is not the same as 2x huge or bigger that i play so therefore you have no exp in this particular area, sorry.

In that case, I expect you to give us the same due and not comment about any game that doesn't include x2 huge, WB-altered, no tech brokering, continents, marathon settings. Since you have no experience in those.

you dont understand/know how big of a difference a much bigger map makes. some victory types are just not possible, warring mid to late game can be more difficult too.

Which makes the game easier for the human. The AI doesn't know ahead of time which victories are possible but I do. I know I'll be isolated and can prioritize research well above military. I know I'll be able to place a new city just about anywhere and have it be viable with no tundra/ice/desert. And after setting up several cities I can set half to research & the other half build needed improvements, then switch them, expand again, switch, etc. Finally send in the cannons/artillery and wipe out the longbows when I do make contact- no need to attack any high tech civs (if any). Conquer/vassalize the weak and get domination victory. At Prince level, no worries. Monarch maybe some challenger will appear but unlikely. Above that I'll worry.

you'd be surprised how many AI's have gotten so advanced as i and how huge they get and how well they play, it doesnt happen every game but at least 1 or 2 AI's can give me a challenge.

Right, and I can simply defend against any incursion from them while conquering weak targets.

if you are trying to say i "rig" the game so i win all the time then its painfully obvious your extent of knowledge of my games.

I'm saying I can lose if I intentionally do so. Read it again.

Btw, Ming may be trolling you but he's also right. You've hurled insults and he has not, he's offered critiques on your game that you've rejected in quite the defensive fashion. YOU need to stop.