Return Of The King To Civ Gaming

[Dulaak]

What settings would mine be? And what tricks do I use?

[Beta]

Originally posted by Dulaak


You are the very definition of casual. In fact, you should be used as the perfect example of a guy who plays casually, thinks the game works great, and truely believes he\'s playing competitively. What a joke.

Absolutely amazing. So "non-casual" or "competitive" is someone who is supposedly good at 1 vs 1 MP? Ok - got that.

Just seems to me you are overlooking what is the most interesting way to play civ - where another layer of human interaction - called diplomacy (you might want to look it up in the dictionary if you are not sure what it means) is significant, and often more important aspect of the game. But from your posting here, I suspect you would be quite "un-competitive" in that form of game.

As to the game, it works as it does. Pure and simple. If I wanted the absolute 'perfect' game, I would play chess - now there is a good 1 on 1 forum.

[rah]

standard ics/horse rush combo. Get to me before I find you. One game you got enough huts and did it with ele's. I'll be the first to admit you're better at that than I was.

[Dulaak]

I don\'t use eles. YOu didn\'t say what settings I use. Me getting to you first just means you aren\'t good enough to compete on the same level so you never get past the first stage of the game. Horse rushing is just a basic standard strategy to get huts and explore the map. Also, ICS is a very broad and sweeping term. The fact is that no one expanded like I did and they still don\'t. You don\'t even know how I expanded.

Absolutely amazing. So \"non-casual\" or \"competitive\" is someone who is supposedly good at 1 vs 1 MP? Ok - got that.

Actually, I\'m referring to the fact that you yourself admitted you don\'t really play MP in your previous post. Also, you don\'t play on ladders, which is the real point I\'m making. If you don\'t play on ladders, you aren\'t going to be as good. It\'s that way in every single game in existence and there\'s absolutely no arguing this. The fact that you don\'t understand this just proves my point. Thank you.

[Beta]

And I was referring to your inability to grasp the complexities involved in a MP game that requires diplomacy. The fact that you don't understand this just proves my point. Thank you.

So, would I do well at 1 vs 1/Ladder games. Probably not. I have played only two - both civ3 - one versus Motown Dennis, and the other versus F-P. Lost both, but was competitive in both. Maybe if I had more practice I would do better - but I can't be bothered. The game played in that fashion lacks way too much 'depth' for my interest. Thanks very much.

[Pinchak]

The fact is that no one expanded like I did and they still don't. You don't even know how I expanded.

Hey Dulaak... I expand TWICE as fast as you, always have, always will.


PS: I have found an exploit in Civ4 that allows me to expand so fast your head would spin. If you and Eyes both send me $200 USD each I will share, then you two can relive the glory days of sitting in your mom's basement sweating profusely with Cheetos residue covering everything while you climb a ladder that really means nothing and stroke yourself while chanting in a hushed seductive voice "I am superior".

[MJW]

But do the fact that Civ4 is broken everyone would have the same empire in high-end MP. The only reason why it's playable is because weak players imblance the game. If it were not for that it would be unfun. The reason is simple. Games are balanced for SP. The AI wastes mass amounts of time in peace. In high-end MP humans don't waste time. Everything other than war does not have time to pay off. This makes war and rushing overpowered. The only reason why this does not happen to you is because your play group is weak.

[Dulaak]

They\'ll never understand MJW. They didn\'t back in Civ2 either. Basically Civ4 MP can be summed up as Slavery. It\'s that simple. You either use it and abuse it or you die. The guy who can slave the best usually has the best chance of winning. Nobody builds buildings in Civ4MP. In fact, you\'ll be called a newbie and kicked out of the game if you start building buildings. Therefore, the game is broken. Firaxis has yet to figure out that economy should fuel military, but instead they have opted for an incredibly simple and basic game with very little room for options. As MJW said, it\'s balanced for SP, not MP and Civ4 is probably the worst game in the Civ series in that regard.

[MJW]

Originally posted by Dulaak
They\'ll never understand MJW. They didn\'t back in Civ2 either. Basically Civ4 MP can be summed up as Slavery. It\'s that simple. You either use it and abuse it or you die. The guy who can slave the best usually has the best chance of winning. Nobody builds buildings in Civ4MP. In fact, you\'ll be called a newbie and kicked out of the game if you start building buildings. Therefore, the game is broken. Firaxis has yet to figure out that economy should fuel military, but instead they have opted for an incredibly simple and basic game with very little room for options. As MJW said, it\'s balanced for SP, not MP and Civ4 is probably the worst game in the Civ series in that regard.

[MJW]

I stand by everything I said in my post before the above one. My above post is the DL dance. I will make clear what I mean by 'weak'. Of course you guys understand the overpoweredness of the rush. But you police against those tactics by dogpilling on people who use them. (This would not work if a high-end players played together) This is the only that keeps Civ4 playable. It's a diplomacy game.

The thing you don't understand is that those things are not expoilts. There just cheap. Take ICS for example. In Civ2 there was supposed to be a balance bettween the advatages of tightness and loseness. However, the gamemakers messed up and the advatages of tightness won big time. ICS and slavery (pre-bts) are not expoilts. There just so overpowered that they look like expolits. Every single tatic that's good can be called an expoit. All this turns Civ4 into a subjective dipolmacy game and due to eyes actions well...

[Toni]

Hey Rah, i got a solution for you just invite Dulaak to your Sat games and let him meet MDave or Dominae, see if his game can back his big month. If you need me i can join u too

[rah]

He couldn't handle Deity Dude the last time he joined.

Of course though, that game, I must have taken stupid pills considering some of the dumb things i did. I let him rattle me, and I should know better.

[Dulaak]

Deity dude died in the first 15 turns in the first game to me. The second game I had 3 cities and was choking you rah before you even had a settler out. You\'ll have to forgive me if I lost a city to deity dude to the north and then lost 2 workers to barbarians as I gang raped you with units. Your skill that game was just too much for me and I had to resign. Clearly in a 1v1 situation you are the better player Rah. That\'s why I prefer MP games and diplomacy because then I can say that I have a skill that you lack and can pretend that I am better when in reality I just need others to help me so I don\'t die really fast.

[Krill]

1. Catapult spam could be beaten in Warlords 2.08, which was the worst it ever got. I never died to a cat stack in any game I played for example.
   
2. If you don't build any buildings you will lose the game, plain and simple. Granaries and barracks, libraries and markets, monuments, they all have uses and there are times when they have to be built. Claiming otherwise is stupidity.
   
3. 1v1 is not CIV MP. FFA is not CIV MP. CIV MP is everything, 1v1, teamers, FFA and CTONS. Claiming one type to be pure MP is naivety.
   
4. Espionage is broken. The ability to find out where an opponents units are by gaining city visibility is game breaking depending on stasrt (eg high commerce starts get better). Yes, Religion also did this, but there were fool proof ways to stop religion from spreading whereas now there isn't.
   
5. Catapults are actually overpowered now that they retreat so much. What used to be the suicide cat does more than enough damage to let a "real" unit gain odds and the cat doesn't always die (too much of the time it doesn't IMO). All that was needed from the Warlords 2.08 was to up the cost and change the charge promotion for the cat to be nerfed (the cat would get eaten alive by charge swords, nevermind chage eles).

RAH...would you say that you guys are the best at your game type, for MP?

[Dulaak]

You can only beat a catapult spam with catapults. You can use horse archers and ****, but you need catapults or you\'re going to die. It\'s that simple.

The only useful building is barracks, and in the rare instances where you can build them, granaries. If you build libraries and markets in a 1v1 you\'re going to die. Same with high level team games. Maybe some settings libraries and markets become viable, but against any decent slaver you\'ll be overrun with units very quickly. I don\'t consider monuments a building really.

I claim 1v1 as the main form of competitive MP play. It has always been that way in every single game online ever. WCG is all 1v1s. I don\'t know what your experience in other games is, but CCC is really a joke made by a middle aged net nanny and has no real competitive value. As one person put it, \"Put your kneepads and helmets on and clap your hands because this weekend everyone is a winner.\" That pretty much sums up Civ4players ladder and the mentality of CanuckSoldier.

I agree with you on espionage, and I think anyone sane person could see this coming.

As far as catapults being overpowered still, don\'t know. Haven\'t even played BTS yet and I can\'t really muster up the desire to do so at this point. It certainly wouldn\'t be surprising to me if they were still overpowered. The combat system in my opinion is beyond repair at this point and needs a total reworking that would only viable in a brand new game like Civ5.