Ics

[The Andy-Man]

i forgot to mention. i can fairly easily get a production of 55 in most cities once i get factories.....

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
... and its more fun this way in my opinion.

This is the crux of the matter. This is a game that we play for fun. You like building laundrettes, I prefer laser rifles - the wonderful thing about Civ is that we both get to enjoy the same game in our own (rather different) ways ...

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits

This is the crux of the matter. This is a game that we play for fun. You like building laundrettes, I prefer laser rifles - the wonderful thing about Civ is that we both get to enjoy the same game in our own (rather different) ways ...

that is the point! ICS ruins the game... and that is the reason it should not be the best winning (preferably not even good) tactic in Civ III as it was in civ II.

[kcbob]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave


that is the point! ICS ruins the game... and that is the reason it should not be the best winning (preferably not even good) tactic in Civ III as it was in civ II.

Au contraire, mon frere! The point is that ICS is simply another way to enjoy the game. I choose that way, you choose the road less travelled. And I've gotta tell you, without ICS, my winning percentage (and hence my enjoyment) would be abyssmal.

[Jaguar]

ICS cities are easier to bribe...

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
that is the point! ICS ruins the game... and that is the reason it should not be the best winning (preferably not even good) tactic in Civ III as it was in civ II.

It sounds to me that you have just had a visit from 120 vet Crusaders and found that even city walls and Alpine troops cannot stand against such a tide ...
I suspect that if you had found your adversary 500 years earlier you could have sent a couple of knights through the whole unwholesome mess - or perhaps you did find them and dismissed them as unworthy of your concern
Each style of play has its strengths and weaknesses and almost as a concomitant its windows of opportunity. From the ICSers point of view their strongest time is in the middle game where most representative governments are going through the doldrums of having to rush improvements in order to support their growth spurt - inevitably leaving them weak militarily - this is when the ICSer must strike - or else the economic power of a mature Democracy will oftimes prove too powerful. From the point of view of a perfectionist - ICS spawn should be found and punished early whilst they have little or no defense and absolutely no economic base. If this proves impossible the growth phase should be delayed whilst substantial defenses preferably at choke points are established to cover that period of weakness that is about to occur. Once the mature economy has been established race ahead in tech and send your armour pouring through their wattle walls.

Contrary to your comment - it is generally agreed on these boards that ICS is NOT the most powerful or most successful manner of play - a well managed representative government will normally defeat ICS - so why do you accuse us of 'ruining the game' just because we get our rocks off in a different way to you?
This sounds somewhat ICSist to me ...

[Akron]

I just finished an easy deity ics conquer the world game (I'm usually a perfectionist). But it was simply too much micromanagement, just not my style. I was moving some 50 dragoons per turn and mindlessly attacking cities.

IMO, it just wasn't as fun as having 10 supercities.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Well OK, in MP human can beat an ICSer if there is not enough room for the ICS'er to expand, or ICSer gets attacked early... every strategy has its weaknesses, but the point is that ICS is just a tactic that abuses the game weakneses. To me it is more like cheating, going trough walls in CS etc...

You can say why... the game lets you do it, not that you alter the code. Still having cities next to each other, taking away planning, city management, and having the only focus to build as many settlers, or units as possible. Improving only one city in the empire... it is not much fun to me.

But the main point about civ III is if you can defeat the AI straight on deity in SP with ICS, that sucks, just takes away from all the potential that the game has. (if your goal is to win) I would prefer some more interesting way of winning the game, that is sure.

[DaveV]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
... the point is that ICS is just a tactic that abuses the game weakneses.

As opposed to We Love days, ship chaining caravans across the map for outrageous delivery bonuses, robbing the AIs blind on the diplomacy screen, etc., etc., etc.?

The game is set up to give the AIs lots of advantages at deity; I would go so far as to say that every successful strategy has an abusive element in it.

[Smash]

No I wouldn't say its cheating or anything sinister.It just uses what is available.

I would agree with DaveV on that.Like my caravan/freight re-homing in "Laugh at SG"...which then boarded a nice shipchain to sail halfway round the world and deliver on the same turn they are built
...or moving defenders out of size 2s when the Gardens and riot factor start acting up.
or storing up caravans for 1 turn wonders
or the bomber stack
or airbases for food
on and on it can go...
The mood of the manual(for what its worth) is quite encouraging with their "save often and reload if you don't like it" strategy.They seem to say if it benefits your civ then it is good.

As far as MP goes..well that is what it is all about.A clash of good strategies and techniques.It would be rather pointless if we all played like the AI.

[Father Beast]

I just started my first try at this. I read DaveV's guide from the GL, and started a game on deity.

Man, I have never had anyone pay me tribute on deity before! by 1 AD I had 16 cities, and 4 more settlers making their way on to new sites. the riot factor is really getting to me, though. does it get easier when you switch to communism?

it's a feat of micromanagement. some cities at size 2 have a red face and a black face, and some have two black hairs. he ones with 2 black hairs need one warrior, while the ones with one red, one black need two.

I'ma a little lax about the tribute, too. I forget to demand a lot of turns

[Messer Niccolò]

Civilized!

mmmh...
definitely if I want to win I prefer to use ICS.
However moving on 120 vet crusaders is not my favourite way to win.

... Civilization winner shouldn't be Civilized?

(even you can ask what's the meaning of the word Civilized... )

[DaveV]

Originally posted by Father Beast
the riot factor is really getting to me, though. does it get easier when you switch to communism?

Like you wouldn't believe. Under communism, the first citizen is content no matter how many cities you have, and you'll never see a black hat. Plus, martial law makes two citizens content.

Communism really puts the "infinite" in ICS!

[Akron]

Fundamentalism is even better! 8 free units supported, no unhappiness, thites, much less corruption than earlier gov'ts, and all you need to do is build the Statue of Liberty or capture it and the game is over!

[Father Beast]

I was thinking of doing a ICS-OCC mixed game. ICS at start, but find a good OCC spot to build your capitol. then treat you capitol like an OCC city, and disband any cities actually in it's radius, while all your other cities ICS till doomsday. Build Ming Gardens, and then Collossus of Rah, Ribannah's Observ., and Shakespeare, taking a break in there to build Oedo. outer cities fight wars, inner cities build camels. I predict early AC

For blowing up the city with WLT*D's just switch to republic while it's going on, and let your other cities riot.