Whose got game??

[StrategicKing2]

To rule over peasents that have a hard time tying thier shoe let alone playing civ (an accurate description of game league participants currently) is of no great achievement. I could take from you your championship at any time I desired. My perfected trade route strategy will destroy any who ignore thier use as EVERYONE currently playing game league civ games does. But boredom would set in not being challenged and quite frankly have much more important things to do with my time.

(oh and by the way, I dont need a second computer to do it)

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Too bad CIV II is not some kind of olympic event Eyes. Than you could be on the Today show and late night talk shows. If you're really as good as you say you are maybe you would make the cover of Time holding your CIV II gold medal. But, as always, you wake up and have the same sad realization that CIV is just game and no one cares. What a world it could have been for you. I mean, even if being good paid a little something... you know, anything. even burger king wages would be better than what you get now. Of course if it was that important you would have to pass a drug test (kinda like a rules.txt test). You might pop positive on that. That would also make the headlines and possibly cut you're career short. god, than what would you do. For sure being as good with AOE wouldnt pay as much. It would be difficult having to rely in a AOE income knowing you're really the King of CIV II. But, you got to do what you got to do.

[Eyes_Of_Night]

I see absolute no point in that inane display of babbling you just presented. Therefore I am not going to award you with a response beyond this.

[Zylka]

Life's too short for truth.

Ok Kuja, I'll call off my dogs.

Will you still be my zonefriend?

[Bird]

Originally posted by StrategicKing2
To rule over peasents that have a hard time tying thier shoe let alone playing civ (an accurate description of game league participants currently) is of no great achievement. I could take from you your championship at any time I desired. My perfected trade route strategy will destroy any who ignore thier use as EVERYONE currently playing game league civ games does. But boredom would set in not being challenged and quite frankly have much more important things to do with my time.

Definitely confusing around here with all the strategicdunces. There's the one above, who can't possibly be the one war4 was talking about:

"strat leaves after his second settler is killed by barbs, good bye eight time gameleague champ *snicker* whined about his land which turned out to be awesome, though he was my neighbor"

Or could it?

[StrategicKing2]

Ok ass hole. I am not going to struggle against another civ that has built 2 citys and got another from a hut when my second settler is killed and the hut gave me a barb. End of the fun of the game. Never complained, just said the barbs got me and promptly retired never to play restricive settings again cause it introduces so much luck into the game and does not allow me to be as good as i am.

[Ming]

Originally posted by StrategicKing2
Ok ass hole. I am not going to struggle against another civ that has built 2 citys and got another from a hut when my second settler is killed and the hut gave me a barb. End of the fun of the game. Never complained, just said the barbs got me and promptly retired never to play restricive settings again cause it introduces so much luck into the game and does not allow me to be as good as i am.

Huh... you mean you get a little bad luck at the beginning and you just quit? And you call yourself a champion.

First, you can always come back in a game. I've had similar if not worse bad luck early, only to make up for it later. But more importantly, it kind of screws things up when you just quit.
It's not fair to the people you are playing. Using your approach, the minute something goes bad, you quit... THIS HAPPENS TO SOMEBODY IN EVERY GAME... that's part of the game. The great players use skill to overcome the bad luck... Luck is a factor of civ... deal with it.

And restrictive settings.... HUH? All settings have their strengths and weaknesses.... Great players could care less about the settings, they just use the right strategy for each different type of settings.

So, if you are going to call yourself a champion... why don't you act like one
Oh, and I have to ask again... do you count that as a loss, or just say you were screwed

[drake]

Never complained, just said the barbs got me and promptly retired never to play restricive settings again cause it introduces so much luck into the game and does not allow me to be as good as i am.

Ahhahahahahhahahahah ! Oh man, that is funny!

Dude, how can anyone take you seriously when you make statements like that?

[rah]

Gee, most of us rarely open a hut with our second settler once our capital is down because we don't want to risk getting a barb and losing our second settler. Early on most of us will build a city in range of the hut and send out a warrior to open it safely.

But I guess I'll stop doing that and just open the hut and quit when the result aren't to my liking.

RAH
You can decide which is the better strategy. Some of us take a little of the luck out of it.

[Kuja]

Just to clarify

lol, HE calls himself a champion, NOBODY ELSE DOES!! lmao.... he's the type of player who thinks he is all great when the huts are going his way, but the second they go bad then "civ2 sucks, it's just a game of luck, i'm going to go break my CD in half now". lol, you are so pathetic, even the apolytoners can see through you

[Bird]

lol, I'm starting to catch on now. Let's see...

I, Bird, am the undefeated and unbeatable champion of Civ II. Not one of the illustrious group that has had the privilege of playing with me has been able to conquer me. Any contrary results or evidence are the result of (1) sheer luck enjoyed by the other players, (2) awful luck visited upon my superb self, either through bad hut results, poor terrain, or battle losses that won't happen again in a million years, (3) alcohol impaired playing (this covers a lot of territory), (4) slips of the hand, (5) bad net connections, or (6) cheating by others.

When War4 nuked me, it was only b/c I accidently hit the wrong technology to work on; otherwise I would have had plenty of SDI's and he would have had to change his name to Surrender4Ever.

When rah has 26 cities to my 16, it's only b/c he gets lucky with techs and is able to build HG and Mike's.

The rest of you guys (and ladies) who have, on rare occasions, managed to be ahead of me on the powergraph, well, you were just lucky, and I suspect you each know that.

I have developed a zen-like understanding of trade, expansion, city growth, city improvement, warfare (both offensive and defensive), huts, barbs, technology, wonders, diplomacy and game quirks.

Frankly, I'm not sure why I bother with this game, having mastered it beyond all hope of recognition on your parts.



P.S. I'm still working on my excuse for our duel the other night, War. Haven't quite got that one figured out yet.

[rah]

rotflmao

You did everything great except the insults part.
You got the boasting, excuses, and avoidance down pat.
So like your civ game, you still need a little improvement

Please work on your insults.

Rich

[Hydey]

Thanks Guys

I am home sick today. I feel like crap and just popped in to see what horse wrote about our zone game last night.
Having read this thread I now feel a lot better, laughter is a very good medicine. Thanks guys and I too have never been beaten when I have the perfect land, perfect start, advanced tribes from every hut and every time my opponents build a second city barbs crush it no matter how it is defended.

I seem to forget any other games.

[Bird]

rah, you pathetic ferret-smelling chieftain wannabe, quit cluttering this place with your prattling. You deprive others of the opportunity to inhale my wisdom and achieve a higher plane of existence.

Better?

[Ming]

Originally posted by Bird
Better?

Yeah... I think that does it