Which title do you bear ?

[M. le Comte]

Having the release of Civilization IV in view, it would be interesting to know what level we reached in Civ III.

1) Did we manage to beat the game ?
2) To what point ?

So let's see which level of difficulty we can beat. As for me, I managed to exterminate all my opponents as an Emperor (so did I in Civ 1 and Civ 2). On the contrary, I cannot survive until the birth of Christ in Demi-God. Can you ?

[Shogun Gunner]

interesting substitution of the banana with a "cucumber"

very cute.

I have only beat CivIII on Emperor -- never higher. At some point you need to micromanage and be an accountant to squeeze out a little extra to beat those AI civs on higher levels

[Jethro83]

I never go any higher than Monarch, since its just no fun to me when it gets past that point.

[Modo44]

I can beat Demigod. I could try Deity with a good start, but it would be too much micromanagement, or too big a change of playing style to bear. I can beat some scenarios on Sid. Voted Demigod, as that was my highest SP epic game win.

[vmxa1]

I guess if you only have to have beaten a level then Sid it is. If you have to be able to beat the level consistently with any reasonable map or civ, I would have to drop to Deity or even Demi.

I still have not beat Sid at Pangea and have a number of loses at Deity as well. Demi is the highest level that I really feel is not a problem.

I would say that MM is not really the issue in those levels. It is more about starts and recognition. You need to have a solid knowledge of what the AI will do in most circumstance.

You also need understand that a hole is not the same as a grave. IOW you need to realize that you can grind it out.

You may have to use tactics such as gifting a city that is doomed to a far away civ, that is hopefully weaker than the current attacker. Then go to war to get it back after the attacker is pacified.

Avoid the dog pile, but join them when you can or cause them. Be judicious in your trades and broker as often as you can.

Be more inclined to build troops than culture. IMO culture is a lost cause at the top levels so skip that temple, a horse is better.

[M. le Comte]

hmm interesting. i should try again demigod. Just a question of translation for the Frenchman I am: what is a "dog pile" ? An alliance or something ?

[Modo44]

Vmxa, I really find the only things I could do better to beat Deity is a change of playing style (towards more conquest-driven games) or better MM. My general diplomacy was already good on Monarch, because this is the part of the game I enjoy the most. I know how strong my military needs to be to keep the AI at bay (be it by war or to prevent attacks). The cities go about as close as possible and efficient (CxC mixed with CxxC). The one difference between Emperor and Demigod (other than focusing more on MM) was forcing myself to give in to some demands early on, so I could build as I please. I doubt there is room for improvement anywhere else...

Originally posted by M. le Comte
what is a "dog pile" ? An alliance or something ?

Yes, sort of. More like the mother of all alliances. The whole world against one civ. Really hard to survive when you are on the receiving end.

[Terra Nullius]

personally i beat the computer at every level

the ai plays to win. i don't.

i play to pass the time and have some fun. fortunately, i can do that at all levels above warlord (anything less than regent does send me to sleep). every level is different and requires a different kind of play, but hey, all of them are fun. just depends what i'm in the mood for at the time.

far too many players seem to get tunnel vision about the difficulty levels
"ok, i beat level x, gotta get to level y..."
fair enough. if that's what they want. but i tend to think people develop their skills better and have more fun when they stop trying desperately to claw their way up the civ ladder.

but hey, what would i know, i still think culture is fun!

as far i titles, i recall being quite chuffed when my loyal sujets elected me queen joan, the lion-hearted.

dog-pile: se faire ch!er dessus par tous les autres chiens. tendence des ia's a s'allier contre n'importe quel civ qui soit le plus faible

[vmxa1]

Modo44 I know some play quite peacefully at deity, but it is not my style. It can be done though. I focus on troops as soon as I either get horses or know I won't.

lebensraum I would think all that are still playing are playing for the fun. At some point emperor is just not a challenge without some variant or bad starts. You then have to move up.

Me, I just played some demi and some deity and figured if I have to work hard, I may as well see what sid is like. I found I enjoyed the massive fights during invasions.

I cranked off a demi a few games back, but after the struggle of the AA, you get moving and it is a lock. The time to get moving is much shorter at demi.

Anyway I suspect to play a builder only type of game will take a lot more skill and work than a semi warmonger or total one. I know you would have to do better than I care to do with relationships. One of the things I like is they are all soon furious with me and I can treat them as such.

[Harovan]

I have yet to beat Chieftain. So I guess, my title is cucumber.

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by Modo44
I can beat Demigod. I could try Deity with a good start, but it would be too much micromanagement, or too big a change of playing style to bear. I can beat some scenarios on Sid. Voted Demigod, as that was my highest SP epic game win.

Same for me.

[Krill]

I can beat Demigod. I could try Deity with a good start, but it would be too much micromanagement, or too big a change of playing style to bear. I can beat some scenarios on Sid. Voted Demigod, as that was my highest SP epic game win.

Sums me up aswell, but I also get bored as soon as I the game is a "Lock", as vmxa1 put it. I find it more fun getting out of the hole and shoving the AI down one.

---

However, has anyone compared SP to MP? I find PBEM to be more fun than SP, because while you don't start in a hole, you have to work to stop yourself falling down one.

[Modo44]

Hey, stop using my lines, dammit!

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
I have yet to beat Chieftain. So I guess, my title is cucumber.

Originally posted by lebensraum
far too many players seem to get tunnel vision about the difficulty levels
"ok, i beat level x, gotta get to level y..."
fair enough. if that's what they want.

It is. A big part of the fun of getting up to Demigod was, well, the getting there.

Originally posted by lebensraum
but i tend to think people develop their skills better and have more fun when they stop trying desperately to claw their way up the civ ladder.

I disagree. The higher difficulty levels force you to become a more efficient manager/killer/cultural leader/whatever. If it was not for them, your basic game skills development would come to a stop. You can win Monarch with OCN spacing and no Granaries, but you will lose at Demigod. If you stay "low" (whatever that means for you personally), you will never need to develop more efficient approaches, hence you will suck. To put it nicely, your skills will not develop well unless you try to beat ever higher difficulty levels.

If you do not believe me, try playing SMAC. You can win it rather easy on the highest difficulty level against the AI, but still get slaughtered against humans. All this because the most the game can come up with is at about Emperor level when compared to Civ3. You do not get the final polish of basic skills the Civ3 AI can provide.

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by vmxa1
At some point emperor is just not a challenge without some variant or bad starts. You then have to move up.

no, no, no ,no, no, no...

i'm not suggesting people should go on playing cheiftain forever more. in fact, i don't even disagree with running this sort of survey now and then - it's already turned up some worthwhile insights. i for one was not previously aware that sir ralph is a cousin of the great pumpkin.

learn to trust your feelings you must

i sometimes get bored playing regent, monarch, emperoror,.. sid. the point is, all the levels are different, they each have something to offer.
and yes, if a level is getting dull, you should try something different. i'm sure if they added a level above sid, some of us would not rest until we felt able to beat it. that's just human nature.

the other day, i had a random emperor start - riverside grassland with wheat, ag civ, 3 riverside bg tiles, 2 lux within reach, closest ai not 'too close for comfort'. ie. automatic settler pump, and i started with alpha. within half an hour i lost interest.
next start - non-ag civ. only 3 workable tiles, wines but no fresh water, surrounded by about eight tiles of hills and jungle in every direction. iroq/maya/inca for nieghbours (yeah, big surprise). now that's a start worth playing. if i get whipped, fair enough.

i guess my basic point is
1) 'level' of play is deceptive and covers a multitude of sins.
2) those who are still finding their way should not be in too much of a hurry to rush their way through to the 'space invader' levels.

i understand your point of view. i'm not telling you to stop cheating with sid and get back to playing an honest, random demi start. but for those who still struggle at one level and are impatient to reach the next one, i say ".., oh why bother, you'll never listen to me anyway."

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by Modo44
I disagree.

sh!t. surprise me!!!

If you stay "low" you will suck.

ok, so i suck. you got a problem with that?!!

To put it nicely

yeah, right. that'd be a first.

your skills will not develop well unless you try to beat ever higher difficulty levels.

meh, even if you try to stay at a given level, eventually you will master it in all it's various forms. you will then be ready to try a different level.

there's really no need to rush the process