2 newb questions about conquest

[steven8r]

Originally posted by techbota
I try to follow the forums but alot of times there talking in terms and abreviations and as a newb its pretty hard to follow.... God its frustrating.

I sincerely feel your pain.

The amount of abbreviations and acronyms can seem daunting at times. The best solution is just what Rhothaerill suggests: Post a save and ask.

Don't be afraid to ask questions--any questions (even if you think they might be stupid.) When in doubt, just start a thread. Someone will answer your question.

I've found the folks here at 'Poly are a very understanding lot. I don't think any of us were born knowing much about Civ. We too, (each and every one) were all new to the game and/or Forum at one point. I can't speak for others, but I sure remember what it was like to be a 'newbie' (in fact, I'm not sure that I don't still consider myself one--There's always someone that (at least to appearances) knows more than I about things.)

The vast amount of what I know about the game has come from the Forums, the second (and far less) amount comes from actually playing.

Keep your chin up and soldier on!

Steven

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by techbota
Another thing that is BUGGIN me is that I did better on almost every thing in that game the only thing I came in second place was I had a slightly smaller area of owned land mass. And I still get the loser screen! God that screen pisses me off.

Listen to this. Before I said I was at like
me 1107
Russia 1411
score wise

Well last night the russians asked for a war against the germans. I went over there and captured 10 cities like in 3 turns. THe russians destroyed one and took the last one.

The score barely budged on both sides

Then I got into it with the Ottomans and took out over half there civ. (like 8 cities) shortly after the 2050 mark hits. I lose!!!!! The score being something like
me 1217
Russia 1604

Now if the name of the game is conquest, then when you conquer cities why dont you get points??? This to me is very important because I am not good enough yet to win by other means!!!!

Look at it as a baseball season. If you had a good day and went 3 for 5 and your avg was 295 with 650 at bats, the day would have little effect.

If you had 50 at bats, then it would have a big effect. To see an impact on the score it will take either a lot of time with small increases or a massive increase.

So if you are looking at 2030 and are down 200 points, you have a problem. The culture from all the cities will be hard to offest in so short of time as it must be avg over the whole game.

If Russia was in front, you would have been better off to take cities from them. Raze or capture wonder cities and core cities with 1000 year old temples. That would slow their score.

[vmxa1]

techbota your game sounds a lot better than a few that have come through here, so I would say you can do it.

I did a run, well a few, with Msade and she finally won. She would email her game directly to me, so if you would want to do that it is no problem.

Send me a PM and will reply with my address. I would suggest sending a 4000bc with no move taken. Play forward to some point and send that one. I would think no more than 50 turns to start.

This will not be a case of making maximum out of civ, just an attempt to use reasonable tactics. IOW we will not do micromanaging to the nth degree, but enough to beat the game at Monarch or lower.


Rhothaerill thanks for support and I will get that check right away.

[vmxa1]

Rhothaerill, Ducki and Mountain Sage used personal threads in the strat forum to document their games and get feedback from lot of players and moved up to high levels of play and skill.

So that as was mentioned is another good way to approach learning. Just create a new thread and post a save and maybe a screen shot. Actually you can search back to see some of those games and maybe glean all you need.

Anyway I just like to see people get something out of the game.

[Theseus]

techbota, you sound like you have a better handle on the game than many.

Come to the Strat forum, my friend, and we will make you a champ.

[Xorbon]

Techbota:

Nobody else has mentioned it, so I will. (I don't know if you already know this or not, but...) Unlike earlier versions of Civilization, points are accumulated throughout the game. That is, each turn a small number of points is added to your total based on your civ's level at that particular time. You get points for size of your empire, population, and happiness, among other factors. Because points are added each turn, the longer you have a civ which generates a lot of points, the more points you'll get added to your total. What this means is if you have a huge, happy empire for a large part of the early game, but then lose half of your cities, you still get credit for the accumulated points you've already gotten. On the other hand, if you wait too long to conquer half the world, you won't get as many points as you would if you had done that earlier.

Like I said, I don't know if you already knew this. If you did, then I just wasted wear and tear on my fingers & keyboard.

[Plotinus]

What Xorbon said. I was about to say exactly that but he beat me to it. Taking cities etc from other civilisations won't reduce their score, it will simply hamper their ability to increase it further.

I think it's a good system - it cuts out the old "whack up the luxury slider to maximum just before conquering the world" tactic I used in Civ1 to maximise my score (happy citizens counted extra, and it only looked at how many you had on the final turn).

Incidentally, I hate all acronyms and strive not to use them. How long does it take to type something in full, after all? Fight text-speak in all its manifestations! Grrrrr!

[YC4B4U]

I love this:

Originally posted by vmxa1


Look at it as a baseball season. If you had a good day and went 3 for 5 and your avg was 295 with 650 at bats, the day would have little effect.

If you had 50 at bats, then it would have a big effect. To see an impact on the score it will take either a lot of time with small increases or a massive increase.

For those of us that don't know baseball could you convert this to another "better" sport - say Cricket.

[SirOsis]

Originally posted by YC4B4U
For those of us that don't know baseball could you convert this to another "better" sport - say Cricket.

Watching either sport will result in so go play civ instead.

[YC4B4U]

Originally posted by SirOsis


Watching either sport will result in so go play civ instead.

Not instead - at the same time!

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by YC4B4U
I love this:



For those of us that don't know baseball could you convert this to another "better" sport - say Cricket.

Ummm.... haven't a clue how baseball works, but I HAVE been learning American Football.

Now to cricket:

Let's say in a one-dayer NZ's run rate average after their innings was on (a standard for NZ ) 5.4 per over. Now if Oz is at 4 per over in the last 3 overs and then hits out for 50 runs in the last 3 it is outstanding, but not enough to win by.

However if you look at the ICC rankings you then realise that this is a bit of an abberration and nothing to worry about. Will this do?

Furthermore, with score in Civ3 it makes little difference unless you happen to not win by one of the other ways, and if you are consistently having the game decided on points alone you should look at changing things.

[vmxa1]

YC4B4U

I don't think you need to know anything about baseball. The point is an average is made with addding up all of the previous totals and dividing it by something. The larger the incidents being add the harder it is to affect the average.

So in Civ the turn score is added each turn. The longer the game goes the less impact the score of a given day will have. That is why grabbing a dozen cities with no culture is not going to do much. If they get some culture it will increase the turn total by a bit, but with 540 turns by year 2050, well you get the picture.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Alright, how about this then -


Daniel Vettori's batting average was until very recently 16.09 in tests. Then for some of the latest tests he got a 55, a 60, a 48no and a 137no. These are great scores, but increases his average to only 20.47. If he had been making scores a little lower than the lowest of these great tallies his whole pro career and had made none of these outstanding runs then he would be better off with his average and total scores.

But then he'd be solid, and solidly dull. The rush at the end is massive fun, but it won't do much for your score no matter WHAT you accomplish.

[steven8r]

techbota,

I'm not trying to 'toot my own horn', but Here's a game I just posted and I've already gotten lots of good suggestions/help in just a very short time.
Edit: In just over an hour, I got-back 6 useful posts. /Edit
(Again, I wish to emphasize the responses--specific suggestions on a specific game, not my post--it's just the most recent one I could think of)

Or, for some more generalized info, check-out Ducki's Thread in the Strat Forum, "Ducki Does C3C at Emperor"

The Forum is an awesome tool. Don't be afraid to use it!


Steven

[techbota]

Ok I started a game last night. I have a zip folder that is around 1 mb that has about 7 saves throughout. Please take a look and tell me what you think. and what I should do. I will also post it in strategy.

www.utinsomniac.com/civ/civsaves.zip