Unreiable players

[rah]

I don't see how 1x or 2x makes any difference to continueing games. Someone is still gonna be far behind and rather start a new one. 1x just means you won't get as far in the first session. It's fine when you're playing the computer but with some of the slower people it's like watching grass grow.

[War4ever]

in x1 games that lead isn't as huge Rah......and continuing is a necessity...

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
I don't see how 1x or 2x makes any difference to continueing games. Someone is still gonna be far behind and rather start a new one. 1x just means you won't get as far in the first session. It's fine when you're playing the computer but with some of the slower people it's like watching grass grow.

makes a huge difference and 1x is a hell of a lot faster then 2x after democracy. 2x is sooooooo slow, and you don't do anything but mass produce units and build on unattackable terrain. In 1x you have to plan things carefully, and no matter how bad things look you always have a chance. 2x is just about who has the most cities, even on diety. I think most people who have played both settings agree that 1x games are a LOT better then 2x.

[Ming]

Most people... hmmm... Many of the people I know who have played both, prefer 2x. But I do think that has a lot to do with the fact that you usually can't get the same bunch together again, so it's usually a one night stand.

It's just a matter of opinion...

If you play a 1x game, and you don't find any grassland, you are totally screwed... at least in 2x games, you can build on anything, instead of wandering for grassland that you might not find for a while.

[rah]

Rivers are much more important in 1x games. Just another thing that unbalances the starts. (on top of Hut luck)

RAH

[War4ever]

roads and irrigation are important in x1 games.... the game is completely different depending on tthe settings you play....x2x2 is way different than x2x1 , which in turn is very different from x1x1

whatever works....no one is going to win the debate as to which is better civ.....but variety is the spice of life!!

step out on a limb...lets play x1x1

[markusf]

Originally posted by Ming
Most people... hmmm... Many of the people I know who have played both, prefer 2x. But I do think that has a lot to do with the fact that you usually can't get the same bunch together again, so it's usually a one night stand.

It's just a matter of opinion...

If you play a 1x game, and you don't find any grassland, you are totally screwed... at least in 2x games, you can build on anything, instead of wandering for grassland that you might not find for a while.

Put it this way, all the really good players perfer 1x.. Thats because 2x just gets to boring and repetitive after a while.. There is only one strat..

[Ming]

Originally posted by markusf
There is only one strat..

And this differs how from the 1x1x crank out settlers and race through the govs to republic single strategy...

[markusf]

Originally posted by Ming


And this differs how from the 1x1x crank out settlers and race through the govs to republic single strategy...

you don't understand... in diety you can't build more then 6-10 cities before 1000 bc or you will die. you have to build temples, marketplaces etc. In 2x you don't need to build a single improvement.. Your empire has to be ready for republic before you can switch. Some players like SF just play in monarchy...

[SmartFart]

Originally posted by markusf


Some players like SF just play in monarchy...

If I miss the Pyramids,I'll go to rep as well. Otherwise,there's no need for celebrating in x2x1.
In one session games I mean.