Stop me from cheating

[Solomwi]

Not really, since a new start is just a new game. Of course, there's a difference between reloading because you're on a one tile island and reloading until you have two luxuries, three cows and a wheat surrounding your settler.

[1889]

I used to quit a game if the AI took a city and often reload if I forgot to fix a riot. I too was disgusted by this lack of spine, afterall these people have put thier faith in me to build a civilization to last the test of time or something.

First thing I did was shut off the auto save, second thing is to scroll all the way through F1 real fast before the end of a turn. Finally I played a PBEM game. The next thing I did was find out that I wasn't as good of a player as I thought.

[PGM]

I've played hundreds of Civ3 games, so now, each time I play, I try to get a high score or at least an entry in the hall of fame. I can't do that unless I have a good first city. So, I reload as many times as I have to in order to get a good start.

I refuse to sit for 40+ hours playing a weak map. That's not fun. That's a job.

[psumbody]

LOL PGM that's how I look at it also.. Why waste 40 + hours only to lose the game... However part of me realizes that I will never improve as a player. Once I find a winning strategy I stick with it because when the going gets tough I get reloading.

I really tried hard to convince myself to accept setbacks but as soon as AI captures one of my cities or crushes my offensive push I reload in an instant. I guess I'm not looking for challenging gameplay. Instead, beating the pants off a stupid AI is where I derive my pleasure and enjoyment.

-- confessions of a weak willed CIV-III loser.

[TheArsenal]

I generally play with what is handed me at the start, within reason. But every once in blue moon I’ll create a map in the editor that is so ridiculously stacked in my favor it’s not even funny. Then I go on rampaging campaigns across the globe just to get it out of my system before going back to a “fair” game.

But most of the time, a game that unfolds in an interesting way is far more important than winning big.

[Solomwi]

I created such a map early in my civ days, and based it on the following principles:

1. I want at least three of every resource, in case one runs out.

2. I want the landmass to myself, so all the other civs have to fight over the scarce resources I was too lazy to pull off the other continent and none of them can beat me to any of my resources.

3. I want my first 4 cities producing an ungodly number of shields at full maturation.

4. I want plenty of food bonuses.

5. I want all the traits.

I played one game of that and had my fill of Ultimae Ultimate-Power. In fact, I think that map was in response to getting absolutely drubbed in my first ever game, as Russia on Warlord. I couldn't agree more now that an intriguing game is much better than a big win. Of course, if you can pull something off and turn an interesting game into a big win, all the better.