The Creativity of 2 x 2

[rah]

My most common mistake in 2x movement is not patrolling. I'll put the units out there, but then I get bored having to move them every turn and get lazy. The endless patrolling adds to turn length. In 1x movement I may only have at most 3 units that are on patrol duty and if I don't do it every turn it's no biggie, in 2x, it's usually about 10. Turns are long enough, so regardless of all the other issues related to 2x movement, I don't like it because of the extra time per turn.

[Ming]

I'm not a big fan of cats, cannons, and artilary moving and firing on the same turn. It just isn't right

[ColdWizard]

it's nice when you're on the offensive though

but 4 move dips with city bribe allowed :shudder:

[Ming]

What about spies... :shudder:

And exploreres are just plain rediculous...

[ColdWizard]

few of my 2x2x games got that far, and in those we were beating on each other with nukes and howies

[Ming]

You can get espo a lot sooner than nukes or howies.

The last game we played like that, it pretty much ended when the first nukes started to fly. I hate nukes

[ColdWizard]

fortunately the people in those games weren't bribe-minded. only a few nukes flew too, we were mostly building howies and a few mech inf in a feeble attempt to hold what we took.

[HappySunShine]

In other words you can't handle the difficulty of defending on 2x2x. City bribing isn't that big a deal if you rookies would learn how to play. Mass units will always beat a briber. Nobody can win on diplomats alone. And 2 move catapults is a hell of alot more realistic than 1 move. Catapults should have 2 range but they don't so they must compensate by having 2 moves.

[ColdWizard]

Learning how to play takes years and years, who has that kind of time?

[rah]

I never said I couldn't defend, sunshine. I said I got bored of patrolling and it added to the turn lengths. But since it wasn't what you wanted to hear, you didn't.

And range of two and movement of two are TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS. Range of two means they would still have to expose themselves prior to firing. Much different then getting off a boat and firing on the same turn. YEAH< that's realistic. So shut the heck up.

[War4ever]

hehe....i don't think cats should fire coming off a boat...but i do see moving on plains/grass and then firiing as realistic.. but were not talking realism here are we....

units win out against a briber b/c the briber will run out of money.....pure and simple....

but city bribe is still crazy, who wants to trade techs and cities each turn... city cost is ridiculously low...it ususally cost more to bribe a settler than it does cities .... how is that realistic?

lets do the math....i walk into boston and ask the mayor how much its going to cost to "own" the town.

he replies 570 gold....i think to myself, thats cheap for a population of size 5

i trot off to the settler working in the nearby fields....ask him how much it would cost for him to join my team.....633gold he replies......

i am sitting there going WTF?????

city bribe is as unrealistic as it is underpriced........ not good programming by mircoprose

[rah]

I wish the cats had a range of two (since it would make more sense), but moving, setting up, aiming etc. takes time, so I don't see them firing on the same turn. When they were being set up, they were exposed to already positioned cats (usually in fixed positions so the defenders already knew the range). Historically in battle, cats were screened by troops and took time to move into position etc before they could fire.

And yes bribing cities would be more palatable if the cost was a bit more realistic. The ability to unload the diplo from a boat makes it tougher to defend against also.

[Ming]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
In other words you can't handle the difficulty of defending on 2x2x.

That's would be like saying you can't handle Deity since you WHINE about how you don't play it because it isn't a real game.



Maybe you're the rookie...

[StrategicKingMi]

No offense intended, ming, well maybe a little, but that was a dumb point. It doesnt take any effort at all to leave a catapult in a city and attack any unit that moves next to the city. It s a mindless, easy way to play civ. Now, defend your city when I can drop off settlers, build a city, then build a road right to that city and attack it with catapults. Thats what I call difficult and takes much creativity to defend against. This was the entire point of this post.
In 2 x 2 , you MUST be on the offensive the entire game. You MUST mass a ton of units and defend away from your citys. If I have access to your citys, I will take out thoose citys when needed or I'll attack your economy by delivering 400-600 gold caravans in mass.
The reason players play 1 x 1 . is simply, and been proven many times, they suck at 2 x 2.
Nobody sucks at 1 x 1. The difference between skill of players is limited. throw in deity, and you make everyone even, or close to it.
Its like making tests so hard, that everyone fails. Its like taxing the wealthy by 80% so they make just a little more then the poor.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
No offense intended, ming, well maybe a little, but that was a dumb point. It doesnt take any effort at all to leave a catapult in a city and attack any unit that moves next to the city.

So you have to actually plan attacks instead of mindlessly massing units you can use to waltz into a city halfway across the world. Yeah planning is dumb.......bring on the mindless massing.

*dribbles*