comparison game for woodan and whom else

[brandonjm8]

I quit well before that point, at 1 ad actually. Waiting for someone else to put a comparison game up.

that kinda defeats the purpose of this comparison, first people were to play my game til the end (preferably the ottoman game since this time you are not alone with more civs and much more balanced resource wise continent) then we'd compare game saves and how we went going about winning the game if at all then we'd play wodan's (or yours) then do the same comparisons to have a fair overall comparison of two different styles/settings.

i only started this because wodan (and some others) wanted to compare themselves to me and i guess rate how good (or bad) of a civ player i am (or you are) and have some discussions and better understanding of one another and offer advice for all of us where someone might've done something a different way and learn kinda thing.

i cant guarantee when i start your game if i do if no ones taking my game seriously (the jap game was a "dud" which is why i posted the ottoman game since it came out alot better and simple fact your not on your own). dont take this personally, im just wondering why the people that want to compare themselves possibly with me arent playing my game through to the end. marathon games on my map sizes are longer games but they present their own unique challenges, one of which conquest is extremely hard to do, domination can and most of the time is very hard itself assuming a few of the AI's are huge and not far behind if not in the lead.

[Ming]

Maybe nobody is playing it to the end because the settings make it a total drag. The settings were pretty tough to take seriously. The game was rigged to the style you enjoy playing, but many people don't like that style. It's not really a fair comparison of anything. If you enjoy that kind of game... fine. It doesn't seem like anybody else really does.

[brandonjm8]

Maybe nobody is playing it to the end because the settings make it a total drag. The settings were pretty tough to take seriously. The game was rigged to the style you enjoy playing, but many people don't like that style. It's not really a fair comparison of anything. If you enjoy that kind of game... fine. It doesn't seem like anybody else really does.

to be honest since this thread has nothing to do with you, why are you here? trying to get this thread closed to?

AS FAR AS "FAIR COMPARISONS" GO, IF YOU WERE LISTENING AT ALL LIKE YOU USUALLY DONT, WODAN WANTED TO HAVE THIS COMPARISON GAME IN WHICH WE PLAY MY SETTINGS THEN HIS THEN WE COMPARE OURSELVES. ITS OBVIOUS AGAIN YOU WERE NOT PAYING ATTENTION AND GOT LOST IN THAT LITTLE WORLD OF YOURS AGAIN.

since you dont want to play huge maps with alotta AI's or your computer cant handle it you have little experience/knowledge giving any opinion on this matter. but since you dont like to listen and keep up with whats been said i will continue to attack any of your posts that hold no merit/value.

i dont know if this hasnt sunken into your head yet but anything you say wont change a thing, seriously. all your going to do is get threads closed and get attacked yourself since you like to attack others, you dont even pay attention most of the time, you talk outta your @$$ alot .

if you dont like what i have to say then keep your 2 cents to yourself otherwise every sarcastic/meaningless remark you post will just get attacked. just because you consider this forum to be your "home" and OMG you were a civ game tester doesnt make you special and warrant yourself special privileges. as einstein said "for every action there is an equal opposite reaction", meaning for every attempted degrading/belittling remark you make gives me another reason to call you what you are acting like which is a childish old man who appears to be acting like an idiot, take that however makes you sleep better at night. as i said on the other thread before it was closed, "AS LONG AS YOU ATTACK ME I'LL DO THE SAME".

[Brael]

that kinda defeats the purpose of this comparison, first people were to play my game til the end (preferably the ottoman game since this time you are not alone with more civs and much more balanced resource wise continent) then we'd compare game saves and how we went going about winning the game if at all then we'd play wodan's (or yours) then do the same comparisons to have a fair overall comparison of two different styles/settings.

A couple others have said they would play it, they just haven't put any saves up yet.

I think you would have a lot more takers with smaller map sizes. A huge map with 4 civs is the same thing except more people are able to run it and the game isn't as annoying. Large with 3 civs is also that same ratio. Most people would rather avoid 2x huge maps regardless of any other settings because they're well... not fun. Even huge maps tend to not get many players.

Really, I've played two of your games now and even posted saves but I can't stand to play them to the end because it's the same thing over and over. Essentially what you're doing is playing advanced start but with an added advantage since it's easy to outbuild a prince AI.

The strategic choices just aren't there because of the large size. The impact of individual units is reduced to virtually nothing, national wonders become almost worthless, city management is something to be left on auto, turn timers take awhile, people have trouble handling the maps, it gets very repetitive without random events and so on. Granted the Ottoman map is a little better than the Japanese one since there's resources and a civ who ranks 1/10 of one step above Ghandi on the competence scale but it still comes down to wiping an AI out easily (I actually went a bit past 1 ad just to wipe out the Khmer, but not to a 1ad mark) and then playing builder until Astronomy, then invading and making each civ become a combination of capitulated and colony vassals.

On the Ottoman map I had rifles before 1000 ad along with galleons. What's the challenge in that?

Finally, and this one probably makes others dubious about playing the game or even posting saves, as it did to me as well... you admit to using the world builder after the save is posted when we agreed to not using it. Actually, even using the WB before posting it is iffy as that gives you advance information the rest of us aren't getting such as resource locations, civ placement, and continent location/shapes. All of those come into play and can alter quite a few things.

A map like the one you posted that had say 3 continents with Alexander, Monty, Catherine, Napoleon, Shaka, Mansa, Joao, Mao, and Tokugawa with say Tokugawa and Alexander as your neighbors would be a significantly more interesting game. Instead in the ones you've posted we've had no neighbors and the Khmer which as I said, are really half a civ. From my experience he's one of the worst leaders there is for the AI.

One more criticism though I'm not sure anyone else has made it. In both maps you posted there was stone when you start. Stone is usually pretty rare, and happens to be a resource your strategy relies upon heavily. If you're adding in stone at the start just for your strategy, it's kind of lame in my opinion, and I don't take it personally.

Edit: One last point for you to consider with this style of game and how it gives you a huge advantage. The AI doesn't play a map like this properly, all AI's build a military the whole time reducing their building power and adding more expenses per turn. You on the otherhand know you won't need a military for awhile, and a small one initially when you do. That provides a significant advantage to you, worth the game actually being 1-2 difficulty levels easier than it's actually set at.

[Ming]

to be honest since this thread has nothing to do with you, why are you here? trying to get this thread closed to?

Your post asked a question, I answered it with my opinion. No insults, just an opinion. I'm sorry you don't like the opinion, but I think my response was true.

AS FAR AS "FAIR COMPARISONS" GO, IF YOU WERE LISTENING AT ALL LIKE YOU USUALLY DONT, WODAN WANTED TO HAVE THIS COMPARISON GAME IN WHICH WE PLAY MY SETTINGS THEN HIS THEN WE COMPARE OURSELVES. ITS OBVIOUS AGAIN YOU WERE NOT PAYING ATTENTION AND GOT LOST IN THAT LITTLE WORLD OF YOURS AGAIN.

You were the one that asked "im just wondering why the people that want to compare themselves possibly with me arent playing my game through to the end."... and I gave my opinion on the subject. So yes, I'm paying attention.

since you dont want to play huge maps with alotta AI's or your computer cant handle it you have little experience/knowledge giving any opinion on this matter. but since you dont like to listen and keep up with whats been said i will continue to attack any of your posts that hold no merit/value.

I'm welcome to state my opinion about game matters... And so are you...

i dont know if this hasnt sunken into your head yet but anything you say wont change a thing, seriously. all your going to do is get threads closed and get attacked yourself since you like to attack others, you dont even pay attention most of the time, you talk outta your @$$ alot .

You are the one that makes things personal... I talk the game, and all you want to do is make personal attacks, which are against the rules. If anything will get this thread closed, it will be your personal attacks, not statements of opinion about the game.

if you dont like what i have to say then keep your 2 cents to yourself

We are all welcome to state our opinions of the game here... so deal with it.

otherwise every sarcastic/meaningless remark you post will just get attacked.

Hmmm.. threats are against the rules too...

just because you consider this forum to be your "home" and OMG you were a civ game tester doesnt make you special and warrant yourself special privileges.

I'm not asking for special privileges... just following the rules of the site. You seem to be the one asking for special privileges... telling other people they can't state their opinions, using personal insults, making threats, all against the site rules.

as einstein said "for every action there is an equal opposite reaction", meaning for every attempted degrading/belittling remark you make gives me another reason to call you what you are acting like which is a childish old man who appears to be acting like an idiot, take that however makes you sleep better at night. as i said on the other thread before it was closed, "AS LONG AS YOU ATTACK ME I'LL DO THE SAME".

My attacks aren't personal... just opinions about your game and settings, not about you. Yet your attacks are almost all personal.... So your responses aren't equal opposite reactions. And again, it will be your attacks that get this thread closed... not mine.


So... back to answering the question YOU asked.

"im just wondering why the people that want to compare themselves possibly with me arent playing my game through to the end."

Some OPINIONS on why they aren't playing...
1) The map is rigged, you used WB to change stuff, and you know where everything is before the start of the first turn. Most people that do comparison games don't like it when one person has that advantage. Some may also not be big fans of the changes made.

2) The game you have set up may be considered to be boring by some... Many people don't like that kind of micro management or huge maps.

3) After playing the game for a while, they may loss interest because of the style of the game you have set up.

Now, there are no personal insults or attacks there. Just stating opinions in response to your question.

[Theben]

I already stated that I can't run a x2 huge map... and at marathon not sure I'd want to. I also have to work and don't have that much free time.

Also I agree with Brael's opinions, in that the human has too much of an advantage against the AI. Simply build 2 wonder whore cities and 1-2 'military' cities that build settlers/workers/garrisons as needed, and set the rest to Caste System/max scientists and switch in and out of building desired structures/'research' as I deem fit. So I'm running around with rifles while they are just getting longbows. Where's the challenge?

[Ming]

Granted, that's easy to do at the lower levels. But at emp and above, you won't be the same kind of wonder whore, and they will match you much better on the tech side. That's much more of a real challenge. At prince, the Human shouldn't have much of a challenge at all.

[Theben]

FWIW, the Deity+ and Barb Swarm involved going into the .txt files and inserting another name under the last entries. For the barbs there was only 1 more lvl you could enter (adding more resulted in no barbs) and leaders got you 200 gold... however you could be beset by 50-100 barbs very early in the game. Usually by the 2nd uprising. For Deity you could add 5 more. The result included more penalties for humans and greater bennies for the AI. The human had the particular problem that the 1st citizen in any city started angry, so that made it challenging for them to find ways of creating productive cities.

As for NONE partisans, aka democracy rush, what you had to do was build a bunch of them and then build a brand new city. Next turn you home ALL the partisans in that city and disband the city immediately. The game disbands the city before maintenance comes into effect, and all partisans that were homed there will be NONE units afterwards. No limit to the number, at least that I noticed.

[Theben]

Granted, that's easy to do at the lower levels. But at emp and above, you won't be the same kind of wonder whore, and they will match you much better on the tech side. That's much more of a real challenge. At prince, the Human shouldn't have much of a challenge at all.

That's what I meant, although I could still do the same at Monarch. Emperor means having issues keeping up with the tech leaders, for me.

[brandonjm8]

A couple others have said they would play it, they just haven't put any saves up yet.

i know.

I think you would have a lot more takers with smaller map sizes. A huge map with 4 civs is the same thing except more people are able to run it and the game isn't as annoying. Large with 3 civs is also that same ratio. Most people would rather avoid 2x huge maps regardless of any other settings because they're well... not fun. Even huge maps tend to not get many players.

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? you bring up ratios but ratios have nothing to do with this, with huge maps comes longer troop movement and with continents (not pangeas, i hate pangea maps its not realistic and never have us humans had any civilizations on "Pangea" never) makes you consider and plan (micro-manage) more and early conquest is outta the question. if people want to play games where they can just kill everyone early then my maps arent what they are looking for. what may be fun for you may not be fun for someone else and vice versa, 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.

Really, I've played two of your games now and even posted saves but I can't stand to play them to the end because it's the same thing over and over. Essentially what you're doing is playing advanced start but with an added advantage since it's easy to outbuild a prince AI.

i dont know where you get advanced starts from, we start at 4000 B.C. with no added "goodies". i will admit even i am finding prince level to be too easy, after my ottoman game im going back to monarch.

The strategic choices just aren't there because of the large size. The impact of individual units is reduced to virtually nothing, national wonders become almost worthless, city management is something to be left on auto, turn timers take awhile, people have trouble handling the maps, it gets very repetitive without random events and so on. Granted the Ottoman map is a little better than the Japanese one since there's resources and a civ who ranks 1/10 of one step above Ghandi on the competence scale but it still comes down to wiping an AI out easily (I actually went a bit past 1 ad just to wipe out the Khmer, but not to a 1ad mark) and then playing builder until Astronomy, then invading and making each civ become a combination of capitulated and colony vassals.

in the real world like today, our earth is made of continents large ones. conquering the world isnt easy, if it was easy that'd be a boring game. if you feel units lose their impact then conquer (not vassalize) the entire world, since there are more cities/units your units on average can and should be super strong thus making them individually more valuable. having 10 lvl 10 units will destroy countries, you dont need stacks of 80-100 throughout the game, maybe at first but then you will start getting super strong units led by your warlord, yeah it takes longer to win via conquest (if even possible) but to me that adds more enjoyment, the harder it is the longer it takes makes it more worthwhile instead of something that can be done fast on a regular basis, to me that isnt fun i dont mind the long games and i prefer my games to have length, quality before quantity. if you need random events on to have fun then more power to you, i dont need them on to have fun. i did not pick the AI that we shared our continent with, what you saw is what came out, i leave the AI's on auto i dont pick what AI's i play.

On the Ottoman map I had rifles before 1000 ad along with galleons. What's the challenge in that?

world domination by 1500 A.D., is that challenging enough for you. id like to know IF you can do it.

Finally, and this one probably makes others dubious about playing the game or even posting saves, as it did to me as well... you admit to using the world builder after the save is posted when we agreed to not using it. Actually, even using the WB before posting it is iffy as that gives you advance information the rest of us aren't getting such as resource locations, civ placement, and continent location/shapes. All of those come into play and can alter quite a few things.

actually if you were paying attention to when me and wodan were discussing this, i told him i change deserts to plains and tundra and ice, thats the agreement. i forgot about the ice in the ottoman game and told you all about it, if i was late by 3 hours, sorry. as far as info goes, i dont look to where the AI's are or who they are, i dont even remember where and what the continents look like. with 6 continents any direction you go you will find one, i also dont pay attention or look at the resources either. the only thing i did look for was crabs, sheep, and deer since those three were missing in the jap game. if you didnt like me making sure all resources were present then so be it, id do it all over again, i didnt want to play another map where somehow resources were missing. if you dont want to believe me when i say i didnt remember the map then glance at the WB prior to laying your first city down, if not then accept the fact that there are things i cant avoid when changing the deserts/tundra/ice ect ect ect, if i could change the code or programming for this mapscript i would, but ive yet to get a reply from the original builder of it at civfanatics.com.

A map like the one you posted that had say 3 continents with Alexander, Monty, Catherine, Napoleon, Shaka, Mansa, Joao, Mao, and Tokugawa with say Tokugawa and Alexander as your neighbors would be a significantly more interesting game. Instead in the ones you've posted we've had no neighbors and the Khmer which as I said, are really half a civ. From my experience he's one of the worst leaders there is for the AI.

i didnt and dont chose the AI's we play, i set those on auto. the only thing i made sure of is that we were not alone and all resources were present, as soon as i saw a crab and sheep and deer while changing the map i knew this was a good one and hurried to post it.

One more criticism though I'm not sure anyone else has made it. In both maps you posted there was stone when you start. Stone is usually pretty rare, and happens to be a resource your strategy relies upon heavily. If you're adding in stone at the start just for your strategy, it's kind of lame in my opinion, and I don't take it personally.

i posted that we start with stone?

stone's not rare on most of my games, for some games its far from your starting point but less than a handful of my games have had no stone. maybe since you dont play 2x huge maps often your not used to how many of each resource there is. as far as my placing "goodies", i really hope your not trying to accuse me of that. what you see is what came out. ive had many games where i was missing coal (no coal on the jap game), oil, uranium, or any other strategic resource, ive had games where i never had a horse, i had to trade for it and quite expensively i might add. sometimes you get nice resources close and others you dont, sometimes you get an awesome starting locale and sometimes you dont, sometimes you get an awesome cap to start with 6+ resources and sometimes you may only 1 or 2, i leave everything on auto, what you see is what came out, THE ONLY THING I CHANGE IS DESERTS/TUNDRA/ICE THATS IT.

Edit: One last point for you to consider with this style of game and how it gives you a huge advantage. The AI doesn't play a map like this properly, all AI's build a military the whole time reducing their building power and adding more expenses per turn. You on the otherhand know you won't need a military for awhile, and a small one initially when you do. That provides a significant advantage to you, worth the game actually being 1-2 difficulty levels easier than it's actually set at.

ive had games where i shared my continent with up to 4-5 other AI's, you shouldve played my saladin game i was talking about on the other thread. i started with pacal, tokugawa, justinian, and gao (portugese). alotta fighting throughout that game but chitty starting area (the peninsula i mentioned).

im going to monarch after this game, prince is rather easy for me, i'll give you that.

[brandonjm8]

Maybe nobody is playing it to the end because the settings make it a total drag. The settings were pretty tough to take seriously. The game was rigged to the style you enjoy playing, but many people don't like that style. It's not really a fair comparison of anything. If you enjoy that kind of game... fine. It doesn't seem like anybody else really does.

this is a personal attack of my settings thus myself.

using words like "total drag" or "rigged game" and the fact you have no idea why i started this thread will lead me to start attacking you again. you still assume what you want and have poor choice of words.

[QUOTE=Ming;5739997]Your post asked a question, I answered it with my opinion. No insults, just an opinion. I'm sorry you don't like the opinion, but I think my response was true.[QUOTE]

once again you are assuming, heres what i said to the letter:

im just wondering why the people that want to compare themselves possibly with me arent playing my game through to the end.

do you notice a ? mark at the end of this sentence? didnt think so, so it was not a question, it was an expressive statement nothing more.

You were the one that asked "im just wondering why the people that want to compare themselves possibly with me arent playing my game through to the end."... and I gave my opinion on the subject. So yes, I'm paying attention.

You are the one that makes things personal... I talk the game, and all you want to do is make personal attacks, which are against the rules. If anything will get this thread closed, it will be your personal attacks, not statements of opinion about the game.

you are the one using assumptions and inaccuracies then using poor choice of words, as long as you continue to do so i'll keep attacking your presumptuous inaccurate opinions.

We are all welcome to state our opinions of the game here... so deal with it.

you deal with it too, if you continue to be presumptuous and inaccurate i will continue to attack, deal with it.

Hmmm.. threats are against the rules too...

wow thats a threat , well if you dont want to change your ways then get used to it.

I'm not asking for special privileges... just following the rules of the site. You seem to be the one asking for special privileges... telling other people they can't state their opinions, using personal insults, making threats, all against the site rules.

yes you are, you believe your righteous in anything you do despite the fact ive proved how foolish and utterly inaccurate you are. if you were actually participating in what this thread is all about which is playing my maps then id welcome your opinion, but since your just looking to attack me i will attack you. your making insults in the assumptions that lead to your poor choice of words and inaccurate posts. keep stating the rules, thats all you want to do. ive already told you if you want me to stop then you stop talking to me, simple. but as already said if you continue to do what you obviously like to do then so will i.

Some OPINIONS on why they aren't playing...
1) The map is rigged, you used WB to change stuff, and you know where everything is before the start of the first turn. Most people that do comparison games don't like it when one person has that advantage. Some may also not be big fans of the changes made.

since i wasnt asking the question to which you are basing this off of, i will ignore this.

if you find my map boring then why are you here? if you are not going to participate then you have no business being here. your continuing to be here just shows how pathetic and childish you are.

oh and im not the only person here who changes deserts ect, and once again your assuming i look for everything when i change it. no one cares for your assumptions especially me, if you dont want to believe that i just change what i said then more power to you. like ive already said most of us by now know you need to assume whatever it is you want to support your claims, your the kinda person that is never wrong and even when proven wrong you write it off so you dont have to retract/apologize and look even more foolish and accept that you were, you have yet to take any "real" responsibility for you presumptuous nature and inaccurate statements and poor choice of words. until you do you dont deserve any benefit of the doubt and/or respect from me. when you stop i stop, not a second sooner. you wont win.

[brandonjm8]

I already stated that I can't run a x2 huge map... and at marathon not sure I'd want to. I also have to work and don't have that much free time.

Also I agree with Brael's opinions, in that the human has too much of an advantage against the AI. Simply build 2 wonder whore cities and 1-2 'military' cities that build settlers/workers/garrisons as needed, and set the rest to Caste System/max scientists and switch in and out of building desired structures/'research' as I deem fit. So I'm running around with rifles while they are just getting longbows. Where's the challenge?

instead of presuming actually try it out. but since you cant or wont, you have no knowledge/exp to base your opinion on. yes im raising the level after this game but its quite possible to be fighting against rifles with bow's yourself and not the other way around .

[brandonjm8]

FWIW, the Deity+ and Barb Swarm involved going into the .txt files and inserting another name under the last entries. For the barbs there was only 1 more lvl you could enter (adding more resulted in no barbs) and leaders got you 200 gold... however you could be beset by 50-100 barbs very early in the game. Usually by the 2nd uprising. For Deity you could add 5 more. The result included more penalties for humans and greater bennies for the AI. The human had the particular problem that the 1st citizen in any city started angry, so that made it challenging for them to find ways of creating productive cities.

As for NONE partisans, aka democracy rush, what you had to do was build a bunch of them and then build a brand new city. Next turn you home ALL the partisans in that city and disband the city immediately. The game disbands the city before maintenance comes into effect, and all partisans that were homed there will be NONE units afterwards. No limit to the number, at least that I noticed.

i did not know that, thx.

[Theben]

instead of presuming actually try it out. but since you cant or wont, you have no knowledge/exp to base your opinion on.

Can't, and yes I do. I have played huge marathon games at Monarch level and won.

I've also played isolation games where I had to research everything myself until Astronomy while the AIs got to trade away.

yes im raising the level after this game but its quite possible to be fighting against rifles with bow's yourself and not the other way around .

I could intentionally FUBAR the game, I suppose.

[brandonjm8]

Can't, and yes I do. I have played huge marathon games at Monarch level and won.

I've also played isolation games where I had to research everything myself until Astronomy while the AIs got to trade away.

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

i also play no tech/brokering so you must research your own, which makes you make more decisions that can have a positive or negative result adding to the experience of the game.

im sorry your computer doesnt allow you to play my size maps, 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. 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.

I could intentionally FUBAR the game, I suppose.

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. you yourself havent played 2x huge maps before thus you dont know anything about it. comparing huge to 2x huge isnt even a comparison, they are that much different. i could say you FUBAR your games since you play pangea and smaller maps which make it easier to get conquest/domination wins early and you allow tech trading/brokering which allows you to only research the bigger techs to only trade them for the ones you didnt go for , try playing no tech/brokering more often and play more continents and you may find yourself not doing as good as you normally would be. just because ive gotten good at no tech/brokering and bigger maps doesnt mean ive "rigged" the game, it just means i get better and better with each game on my way to deity .