My first ever win at Multipalyer

[agharta_id]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by War4ever on 02-17-2001 09:31 PM</font>
ah agharta you did say i sucked..... i think my icq chat log can verify this if i were to pull it up... i believe i asked you if you said this to sean or not....which you admitted to saying in some sort of round about way
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

the following conversation is the explanation of why i called war4ever a sucky player. read carefully:

AGH: hey, care to play civ?

WAR: with me.... the ****ty player..... no i cannot .... i have a diplo game right now

AGH: hehehe ...

AGH: i didnt say you were ****ty, i said you sucked ....

WAR: better than you

AGH: possibly ... i might be ****ty (which is worse than sucking, becasue one can suck on quite pleasurable objects; for example, a straw inserted into a can of pepsi), but we have not played often enough .. i was just testing sean to see whether he would spread my words around ... guess so

WAR: lol, eyes can be counted on for that aspect LOL........ i take no offense... i know how good i am and where my weaknesses lie

AGH: yeah, that is why i dont depend for other for information as to how good i am, or how good the players i play are ...

AGH: so, nay on possible play?

WAR: so true..... sean is a great player though.......

AGH: so he says ...

WAR: after my diplo game maybe ..... it goes until around 430 or 5pm pst

AGH: how many more hours?

WAR: 3 31/2

AGH: hmmmmm, that is too late ... oh well ...

WAR: soryy

AGH: anyways. have fun ...

WAR: cheers you too

AGH: cheers, mate.

[Rasputin]

I for one wouldnt take on sean at "his" settings. he is very good at them and if he continues to paly apolytoners at "our" settings he may well learn a new strategy to beat us. unfortunatly he is forever tarnished by his cheating antics in the past and even if he wins properly, some may not beleive he didnt cheat.
Of course we all know sean doesnt care about whether we think he cheats or not, I personally always suspect everyone I play for the first time, as you never know who the other person is . I save every turn and check these saves form any obvious changes in growth, population,city sizes, unit numbers, I also check for Riot factor as opened on my machine under my rules.txt compared to the other hosts, I also check the starting position of the other player(s) and compare to my own.. I hate to paly on premade worlds where host has set his start zone as good and everyone elses as bad.
I also look to se eif its obvious that the other player seems to know where to send his units(2nd computer)..

All this checking still doesnt mean I will detect a cheat, and it reaaly is ruining my playing time.. I have gone back to just playing solo play recently as
A) I havent a regular time slot to play consitently
B) too many damn cheats
C) I struggle to play well from bad starts.
D) I upset all my "friends" online with my banter in kings chat !!!

[agharta_id]

you see, i would never CONSIDER playing sean on his setting, cause i consider his settings inferior and unrealistic ... *shrug* i am sure he is great on king level (which is a level for mediocre players), i simply do not care ... what can i say that i have not already said?

[agharta_id]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by agharta_id on 02-17-2001 10:24 PM</font>
you see, i would never CONSIDER playing sean on his setting, cause i consider his settings inferior and unrealistic ... *shrug* i am sure he is great on king level (which is a level for mediocre players), i simply do not care ... what can i say that i have not already said?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

everyone has to play on standardized settings before individuals can start claiming he or she is better than another ...

[Rasputin]

is a grass court tennis player the best or a clay court tennis palyer...


Is it better to serve and volley, be a baseline player ? or always play at net ??

I think the player who can win on all type of courst agaisnt al ltype of players

The analogy here of course is that to be best means being able to paly at all settings and agaisnt all strategys ...

I know sean wont agree and neither will agharta!!
its like is a duel better more real than mulitplay, or is AI involvment REAL !!! who cares as long as you can find people to play against a dn of course have fun ...


Remeber it is only a game , however real it amy feel

[agharta_id]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Rasputin on 02-17-2001 10:58 PM</font>

"is a grass court tennis player the best or a clay court tennis palyer..." This would be revelant if their were two civilation games of interest. unfortunately, there is only one (ptah, CTP blows)

"Is it better to serve and volley, be a baseline player ? or always play at net ??" You are confusing the type of game with the strategy witin a type of game. For instance: within deity level there are many different strategies: trade, war, tech, alliance, etc. playing any one of these strategies is like playing the net instead of serving and volleying. (i am stretching here, since i do not know much about tennis)

"I think the player who can win on all type of courst agaisnt al ltype of players" again, i do not have time for that ... you might, i dont. period, end.

"The analogy here of course is that to be best means being able to paly at all settings and agaisnt all strategys ..." again, i am a mortal and not a god ... i am only striving to become a god, and that does not guarentee that i will become one ... I dont have the freaking time to be good on all levels!

"I know sean wont agree and neither will agharta!!
its like is a duel better more real than mulitplay, or is AI involvment REAL !!! who cares as long as you can find people to play against a dn of course have fun ..." yup, i dont agree, but unlike you, i back myself up with reason ... you flutter about with covering your foe with egalitarian bull****, while claiming it is only for fun ...

well, true, it is only for fun; but where does the fun lay? civ is simulation of real civ, thus, the fun lies in simulation, not in lazy button pushing and happy, happy, joy, joy.

"Remeber it is only a game , however real it amy feel
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>" yeah, remember that, but also remember what type of game you are playing.

[Rasputin]

civ is the same game on all settings just as tennis is same game on different surfaces... but you have to play differently... Thats why Sean struggles so far playing at deity raging hordes as he has learned a great startegy for only lower levels..

As for rembering what type of game, i recall that it is a civ building game... if it was a simulation game it would be more realistic, very unrealsitic game is civ 2 when compared to real life..

In previous posting you wanted the player to be compared to god. If so this is not a simul game of civ building but a religous game.. And in real life very few people obey god anyway so this game not realistic enough.

Also the game assumes that because you build a temple people wil lbe happy. seeing that a lot of wars have been fought over religion , why does this make people happy .

You build a road and it takes 1/3 movement cost, you build a railway and you can move troops around the world ad infinitum...

I can trade in goods that my people have not discovered yet. I can research breakthroughs without necessarily having the raw materials.

I can send a caravan of wine to a city and they use it build a wonder !!!


and for more unrealsitic aspects of game go see civ 3 suggestion page. I cant beleive you keep going on about how REAL this game is with all these UNREAL components, tjhis is not a simulation its a game !!!

I use simulators at work all the time and you cnat tell the difference between the simulation and the real thing...

you are quite entittled to enjoy palying the game at your settings , but dont belittle and call "less real" or whatever other peoples level of enjoyment. if you dont like their settings then dont play them, you will find yourself limited to player numbers that way.
I have my personal preferences i nsettings but I have rarley played them as i just love the game and cant wait around to get enough palyers to play my way. So i opt to paly others at their settings, and its fun all the different ways, and i have learnt to be a better palyer that way, palying on small maps, duels, diplo games, alliance games etc etc...


Please join us all i na game soon , and try to enjoy it even if not your settings ...

[Wezil]

Congrats on your first MP win Raz.

Why does anyone desire to play a known and notorious cheater though? There are many players more deserving of the time.


------------------
"These were giants [The ‘Hellfire’ Club]. They had standards - not like these whimpering mashers who keep fouling our headlines today."

Free the D**d Threads!!

[agharta_id]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Rasputin on 02-18-2001 02:45 AM</font>

"civ is the same game on all settings just as tennis is same game on different surfaces... but you have to play differently... Thats why Sean struggles so far playing at deity raging hordes as he has learned a great startegy for only lower levels.." If the games are the same, why do you have to play differently? dumb ass.

"As for rembering what type of game, i recall that it is a civ building game... if it was a simulation game it would be more realistic, very unrealsitic game is civ 2 when compared to real life.." This is true. The game is very unrealistic when compared with real life. Alas! You still do not understand my arugment. I am arguing that we ought to play settings that are the most realistic. I am NOT arguing that civ is a perfect simulation, only that it is a simulation. Hell, i am not even arguing that it is a good simulation, in 2001, that is. In 96, however, it was a great simulation, for the resources available.

"In previous posting you wanted the player to be compared to god. If so this is not a simul game of civ building but a religous game.. And in real life very few people obey god anyway so this game not realistic enough." I, will, slow, right, down, on, this, one, for, yer, little, brain. When a god controls its creations it does not wait for them to obey, it just controls them. simple, to the point, i am sure the others will understand.

"Also the game assumes that because you build a temple people wil lbe happy. seeing that a lot of wars have been fought over religion , why does this make people happy ." Temples are used even when their is not a holy war, tough guy. Again, limited resouces result in a limited game. The events of modernity are centered around british colonialism and american pseudo-colonialism, but this reality is not in the game ... why? limited resources.

"You build a road and it takes 1/3 movement cost, you build a railway and you can move troops around the world ad infinitum..." Yeah, and do you know why this is? Each turn represents a year (at least in late game play, when railroads are "discovered"). Thus troops can move around AD INFINITUM.

"I can trade in goods that my people have not discovered yet. I can research breakthroughs without necessarily having the raw materials." When a city is built there are certain resources in the vicinity. The citizens know that the resourses are there, it is just that some are are more useful, at some points in the game, than others. As everyone knows, as the a city grows the resources it demands and supplies changes. Thus one does not "discover" resources (with uranium being the exception), they are always there. Sid did good here.

"I can send a caravan of wine to a city and they use it build a wonder !!!" This aspect of the game is more symbolic that real. Caravans represent the FIRST traders. They set up a trade route and give a boost in revenue and science. As for the "help build wonder" aspect, i think it is far too powerful. It should be halved (50 to 25). Yes, when a trader comes through, new tech is traded and learnt, but no the effect on a wonder is not THAT great. I cut it in half because, who knows!, maybe a caravan arrived in giza and provided the egyptian rulers with information vital to building the pyramids.

"and for more unrealsitic aspects of game go see civ 3 suggestion page. I cant beleive you keep going on about how REAL this game is with all these UNREAL components, tjhis is not a simulation its a game !!!" You are a confused fool, it a simulation game.

"I use simulators at work all the time and you cnat tell the difference between the simulation and the real thing..." You are confusing the concepts "simulation" with the word "virtual simulation" ... A simulation is nothing more than imitation, a virtual simulation is a simulation that is exactly like what it is simulating.

"you are quite entittled to enjoy palying the game at your settings , but dont belittle and call "less real" or whatever other peoples level of enjoyment. if you dont like their settings then dont play them, you will find yourself limited to player numbers that way.
I have my personal preferences i nsettings but I have rarley played them as i just love the game and cant wait around to get enough palyers to play my way. So i opt to paly others at their settings, and its fun all the different ways, and i have learnt to be a better palyer that way, palying on small maps, duels, diplo games, alliance games etc etc..." what is the point of playing many players if you do not finish the damn games? p-unk. again, my point of departure is not entertainment, but realism. i am entertained by the realism of game, which is proper for a game that is a simulation.

Please join us all i na game soon , and try to enjoy it even if not your settings ...
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

[EvilProphet]

You said I couldn't play single movement/production and I proved you wrong. You said I can't play raging hordes and I proved you wrong. You said I could not play on any map larger than a small map and I proved you wrong. Sorry, but I can only prove you wrong so many times in a year. Maybe if I find it important enough I'll show you what I can REALLY do on deity. Contrary to what you all think, civilization is really quite simple on all levels. The sad thing is that I don't see many of you trying to disprove what I said about using demographics or trying to criicize the strategy. I can only conclude that you can't comprehend what I'm saying so therefore you can't attack it. Agharta you're from Canada, your incompetence is excused. And yes some styles of tennis are inferior to other styles. Don't try to compare a computer game to Tennis. I used to play tournaments and was ranked in the nation for a short time. You can't compare the two.

[agharta_id]

you are an idiot. read my posts before you reply to them.

[EvilProphet]

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware I was responding to you Agharta. In fact the only reference I made to you was to excuse your incompetence. I got through half your posts and concluded you were legally retarded and hence I did not read them all.

[agharta_id]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by EvilProphet on 02-18-2001 11:03 PM</font>
You said I couldn't play single movement/production and I proved you wrong. You said I can't play raging hordes and I proved you wrong. You said I could not play on any map larger than a small map and I proved you wrong. Sorry, but I can only prove you wrong so many times in a year. Maybe if I find it important enough I'll show you what I can REALLY do on deity. Contrary to what you all think, civilization is really quite simple on all levels. The sad thing is that I don't see many of you trying to disprove what I said about using demographics or trying to criicize the strategy. I can only conclude that you can't comprehend what I'm saying so therefore you can't attack it. Agharta you're from Canada, your incompetence is excused. And yes some styles of tennis are inferior to other styles. Don't try to compare a computer game to Tennis. I used to play tournaments and was ranked in the nation for a short time. You can't compare the two.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

you not only do not know what i wrote, you also do not know what you yourself wrote.

idiot.

[EvilProphet]

Good now go back and look at what Rasputin wrote about tennis. It was in response to him not you.

[agharta_id]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by EvilProphet on 02-19-2001 02:30 PM</font>
Good now go back and look at what Rasputin wrote about tennis. It was in response to him not you.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

If both of us were rambling on about tennis and civilization, which we were, you were responding to both of us.