The Creativity of 2 x 2

[jes]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
Jes I am EyesOfNight. We have played many times. I'm not going to waste my time on a deity game.

ok, your Eyes, greetings from geramany! yea, we played several times, all 2x2x. so if you dont want to play 1x1x diety its ok, but please dont talk about it, cause i think, you dont know many of the secrets belonging to that kind of game. strategies have developed, and i think its years ago you played your last serious diety game.

its a pitty you played oedo in that game where he overestimated himself. no, its not only running to hg, but to give you all happy-wonders as a present is a bit too much.

so lets give peace, maybe your the king of 2x2x, i like to play 1x1x diety, and im sure, you would be astonished how a fine game it could be.

[StrategicKingMi]

EXACTLY! Finally a voice of reason around here, Unfortunately its from Sean.
What is so good about me getting a barb from a hut that kills the unit that opened the hut and you getting a city? Thats a double penalty for me and just another way a game is prevented from being a skillfull batlle between human intelect.
This game has been proven to be flawed and it is these flaws that prevent Civ from being the greatest game ever.
1) starting with tech......everyone restarts when tech is giving at start of the game. So why hasnt some patch been created to remove this.. another flaw in the game
2) limited options for next tech....again a real stupid flaw and so fixable, can absouloutely ruin a game.
3) starting positions...do this excersize. set up games , reveal board and see if both sides have a chance to win. most of the time it will be lobsided start. we have all seen this many times.
4) how about starting 12 squares from other player on a med board due, thats just stupid.

I can go on and on... but the point is simple Ming...
Do you really want the computer to control even more aspects of this game with its extremely poor record on random events?????

[ColdWizard]

sure, being able to adapt to adverse random events requires no skill at all. that's why i'm such a studly and beastly MPer.

[StrategicKingMi]

Reacting to adversity??? Thats dumb...
You walk out of your home this morning like you do every day and some one unseen across the street shots you dead, how can you react to that adversity....
YOULL BE DEAD...
RANDOM LUCK ELEMENTS ARE THE GREATEST REASON WHY CIV GAMES ARE WON AND LOST..... Not the skill of the players... I make the settings, weather they be land options, barb settings or difficulty level to allow the human players to create the adversity for one to react to.
Try it some time, you ,might like it....

[ColdWizard]

your analogy is dumb

[StrategicKingMi]

Care to play a game and Ill show you how dumb I really am.....159997386 is my ICQ number..or go to the msn zone-civ2 I am at both right now

[ColdWizard]

[DrSpike]

Sure there is luck in civ.........and although I empathise with some attempts to level the field you can't remove the luck element entirely Strat. The whole combat model is probabilistic; you can make perfect decisions and still lose, that is the game. If you don't like it play chess, go, reversi or another deterministic game.

[Ming]

If you get a bunch of free units or settlers, and the other person gets bad techs, the same problem still exists...

To remove barbs goes against the design of the game. There is supposed to be a risk factor in opening them. What you are saying is that you don't want any risk.
All you want is your one trick pony strategy of horsey rushes to work. All you are doing is turning it into a hunt for who can open the most huts. Gee, a lot of strategy there.

No matter what you do, there will still be elements of luck in the game that you can't change. It all balances out in the end anyway.

It's too bad your strategy is designed not to be able to handle it.

The same goes with Raging hordes vs Villages. You want to not have to defend your cities. All you want to do is send a bunch of horses out. If that floats your boat, fine. I think most of us would like more variables in the game and use our skills and knowledge to deal with them. If you don't have the skill, then I can understand your point of view

As somebody suggested, if you want a perfectly even game, play chess. Granted, one person does get to move first, but otherwise... Civ isn't that type of game and was never meant to be.

[StrategicKingMi]

I have played more Civ games in my life then anyone else on this forum. I like the game, dont get me wrong, but I can level the playing field with simple changes in settings. Sure there is still luck and there should be, but it should not be a devestating change that effects the game, it should be something YOU can react to .
Ming you keep saying I play this horse race game like Eyes. Let me remind you Sir, once again, I am nothing like Eyes. I play games in which the game is decided by clads, cannons, better trading tactics and strategy and the combination of wonders having a devastating effect.
In small board, large land games, the winner is determined long before any government change or wonder is completed.
I put this challange to any one here...play me best of 5 on my settings, beat me 3 of 5 and It will be the last you hear of the Strate man.....

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
*removed blah* and the combination of wonders having a devastating effect.

I put this challange to any one here...play me best of 5 on my settings, beat me 3 of 5 and It will be the last you hear of the Strate man.....

IIRC last time your challenge was concerned with all the wonders being useless.

[War4ever]

its not a race to HG...in fact in most of our games, HG isn't usually the first wonder built especially since i whined about

one doesn't need a happy wonder to be successful, and its ok to build a warrior or two for martial law early, thats what warriors are for.

all you guys want to do with your x2x2king games with no barbs, is churn out troops and sets.....

the weakness to your strategy is you can be attacked from the rear or sides when you leave cities undefended.... how is this a viable strategy....

but of course there is always the "i don't lose" , "i don't play anymore" excuse

i agree this game is about taking chances, but leaving cities undefended doesn't work on a small rock

now, if you play on islands/med worlds where there is no contact for ages :yawn: then i guess a settler spit out is what the doctor ordered.....

every setting has different options....the fact that you enjoy the double movement is fine, the fact you like king level and no barbs is fine......

if you want to remove randomness out of the game that is fine too.....

if you want to play on premade maps all the time that is fine too....

seems to me were talking about two completely differnt games tho, why not just add the simul moves to it and call it RTS?

[Ming]

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
I have played more Civ games in my life then anyone else on this forum.

Just an opinion on your part, not a fact. I seriously doubt you have played more games then some of us.

play me best of 5 on my settings, beat me 3 of 5 and It will be the last you hear of the Strate man.....

Again, you don't seem to get it. We want to hear more from you. We want your insights into the game.

What we don't want is your continual crap that your settings are the only ones that involve strategy and everybody else that doesn't play them really don't know how to play.

Most of us have settings that we like to play. But we don't sit there and tell people it's the only way to play, or that you are morons if you don't play our way, or that our way is the only version that has any strategy.

Each setting changes how the game is played. Each setting makes you use different strategies... No way is better than another. It's all a matter of personal preference.

[StrategicKingMi]

Developing your Civ, growing your citys, amassing a large army and navy, and building wonders, setting up trade routes, is boring warforever? What the hell do you want out of Civ if not this...This is a med map island game, you know, like what earth looks like, different conts. And by the by, you will fight more often, in less actual time then you ever would playing 1 x 1 deity.
I dont make the boast lightly that I have played more civ then anyone else here. Its true, its true.
I have played Civ since its creation in the board game form 24 years ago. I have played all forms of civ from the old days of civ 1, to civ net to civ 2 and civ2 multiplayer. Also played alpha centuri and test of time and civ 3. I have been here since its inception. You build a civnet game with 300,000,000 people. It took me 200 hours of play to get that large in the days before cheat option or rules.txt. (every square of a large earth board had a worker working that spot and I was on 100 th +advanced tech) and a great movie at the end of the game.
I have played every time of civ 2 game imaginable, including a game on a 350x 350 board using the no limit download.
I have played 4 x 4, 4 x 1, 4 x 2, 2 x 2, 1x1 and every version you could ever imagine. I played games with every tech at start of the game, multiple settlers, scenerios, all difficulty levels. Huts no huts.
I have expierenced all that civ has to offer and now can say what the best settings are from expierence.
Continuelly on this forum, it is my way of play that is called illgitamite and infurior to 1 x 1 deity. Maybe you people should look at yourself and say maybe I am wrong, maybe 2 x 2 king, med world, islands has a lot to offer.
As far as my offer to play a game on my settings, still no takers.
I expect none cause the result of the 5 game series is obvious, you lose I win. Prove me wrong and , god forbid, lose or win, you might enjoy playing it, and I wont even post the results, I leave that up to you...
Can anyone step to the plate and defend Apoltoners , or are you all a bunch of sisy talker girls who are a step lower then newbie zoners in talent?

[Ben Kenobi]

Can anyone step to the plate and defend Apoltoners , or are you all a bunch of sisy talker girls who are a step lower then newbie zoners in talent?

*munches popcorn*

Who needs television? This site has everything!