Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We love the 'X' day - a crutch for the weaker player?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    [/quote]I guess I don't see how it takes a whole lot of effort to pull off[/quote]

    Disagree. Try it without a Temple or Marketplace. Who hasn't had the frustrating experience of a celebrating city stuck at size 7 while you rush in settlers to irrigate more grass or plains? Who hasn't had the Vikings come knocking on your door with vet Knights while your cities are building Caravans and Libraries?

    quote:

    That extra trade is huge. In addition, I also believe the rate of corruption is lower under Republic, removed under Democracy, and all bribery is disallowed. I consider those huge advantages.


    Bribery is only eliminated under Democracy. Add that 80 shield Courthouse to the list of "must-haves" for a Republic to grow. In reality, you don't even get double the science rate out of Republic compared to ICS Monarchy due to the loss of trade to luxuries. And of course each science advance makes the next one come slower and slower. While you'll be ahead, pretty soon your science rate will not be much better off than under Monarchy.

    quote:

    ICS works best when the cities are kept minute. But - that usually precludes happiness improvements, preventing the move to Rep or Dem until much much later


    If you begin a journey, you must know your destination or else become lost with the first step, i.e. If your gonna play ICS, then go for it all the way. You must beat the AI before (IMO) they get Industrialization and Democracy. IMHO if you beat down the AI with war in the early and mid game, you should just finish them off since the game becomes just too easy after that.

    quote:

    I've not always found it so easy, depending on the opposition and my luck at the start


    YMMV of course. I find war with the AI laughably easy. But leave them alone and let them get into the modern era and find out what a real space race can be.

    quote:

    The Mongol cities don't stay at size 4. They will grow to become ridiculous size cities with 4 Mech Inf., 4 Cruise, and 4 Stealth.


    And the same thing happens to your cities. The game expects this and adjusts accordingly: science advances take more and more beakers. Units cost more and more. Improvement upkeep costs get more expensive. I mean really: just how are you supposed to build 320 shield Solar Plants or SS Modules in a size 11 city?

    quote:

    They can be immediate,


    Not unless you already have the infrastructure.

    quote:

    But the enemy loses all the value. Sorry, no trade for the enemy. I can pull in 500+


    You can get 1500+ science and gold by trading with the AI - and only you get the bonus. I understand your position but consider this: If you have, say, 15 cities that each have 3 trade routes with the same AI city, you'll get the trade from 45 routes each turn while the AI will only get trade from 3 of them. Each of those routes will be worth double what they would be if you traded with yourself. Best of all, you can keep reestablishing the trade routes to get the bonus over and over. This makes it worthwhile to build Superhighways which increase the value of the routes and the bonus yet again. Give it a try!

    quote:

    But man, if I peg those luxuries, once the basic infrastructure is in, I could clean house.


    But you must wait for a new city to become size 3 before anything happens. Also, you can only build one thing in a new city per turn and you must wait for you Engineers to transform, irrigate, road, etc. It's still quite a bit to do.

    quote:

    The city is grown progressively,


    Actually, the city grows painfully slow late in the game. Some of this is the effect of how long turns take late in the game vs. early in the game.

    Comment


    • #77
      Well, Venger, since my attempt at humor and sarcasm was lost on you, I'll try again.

      You brought up this thread *knowing* that it could result in flames. You admit that you b*itch-slapped Crustacian in a post. Yet you pretend to be affronted when others respond in kind. You appear to be one of those people who can dish it out, but can't take it.

      You have repeatedly ignored those who have pointed out, again and again, the enormous amount of preparation necessary to make WLT_Ds work -- and the ongoing management it requires to pull this off as a long-term strategy.

      You have denigrated those who suggested that you try a new way to play, and have insulted those who suggest that you either decline to use WLT_D, or use it and learn its strengths and weaknesses.

      You have implied through successive posts that your way of playing is the only legitimate way to play Civ2, and that any other way of playing is inferior.

      Finally, you have resorted to personal attacks on those who dare to meet your chest-beating pompousness with tongue-in-cheek, relatively gentle flaming.

      WLT_D is a legitimate strategy. You are not the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable in Civ2 play. End of discussion.


      ------------------
      JERandall
      JERandall

      Comment


      • #78
        quote:

        Originally posted by JERandall on 05-11-2000 01:21 PM
        Well, Venger, since my attempt at humor and sarcasm was lost on you, I'll try again.


        Searching your post I found the sarcasm but found no humor...

        quote:

        You brought up this thread *knowing* that it could result in flames.


        Sure did. Anytime you challenge how someone wins the game you are going to get something of a heated response.

        quote:

        You admit that you b*itch-slapped Crustacian in a post.


        The magically disappearing post...

        quote:

        Yet you pretend to be affronted when others respond in kind. You appear to be one of those people who can dish it out, but can't take it.


        I'd like to find where I've precipitated any such remarks.

        quote:

        You have repeatedly ignored those who have pointed out, again and again, the enormous amount of preparation necessary to make WLT_Ds work -- and the ongoing management it requires to pull this off as a long-term strategy.


        I fail to see how the WLTYYYD prep work is any different than the work needed just to make a successful democracy or republic. Temples, aqueducts, banks, courthouses, are all required to make a succesful dem/rep growing them the old fashioned way. WLTYYYD simply removes time as a factor and allows for your city to bloat overnight.

        quote:

        You have denigrated those who suggested that you try a new way to play, and have insulted those who suggest that you either decline to use WLT_D, or use it and learn its strengths and weaknesses.


        Quotes please. Find the denigrating posts. Crustacean? As explained, anytime someone tells you to go read the manual, they can take a flying leap.

        quote:

        You have implied through successive posts that your way of playing is the only legitimate way to play Civ2, and that any other way of playing is inferior.


        What? I think WLTYYYD is bogus. So? What is so freaking threatining about that? I have nowhere said that "if you don't do it this way, you aren't playing it correctly". I've stated I don't use some governments. That's a far cry from saying you shouldn't use them, or they are the inferior form of playing the game.

        quote:

        Finally, you have resorted to personal attacks on those who dare to meet your chest-beating pompousness with tongue-in-cheek, relatively gentle flaming.


        Find the personal attack. Find it. Let's watch the thread develop and see where all the BS starts.

        quote:

        WLT_D is a legitimate strategy. You are not the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable in Civ2 play. End of discussion.


        Talk about chest-beating pompousness. Curiously, have you actually addressed any of the issues? Looking back through the thread...uh, no. Now, you and Sieve Too both apparently fall on the same side of the argument. But, he actually had a point, whereas you seem to post simply for the joy of seeing your name in HTML. God knows nothing you've written has had to do with the topic itself.

        Venger

        Comment


        • #79
          quote:

          Originally posted by Scouse Gits on 05-11-2000 05:29 AM
          If this thread has anything vaguely to do with Civ Strategy the connection defeats me. Could it please be moved to OT where it (and Venger) belong?



          I would swear that by now, 7 days and 70 posts into this thread, you've seen it before. So you know what it's about. So why don't you SKIP IT if it ain't your cup of tea?

          Venger

          Comment


          • #80
            quote:

            Originally posted by Crustacian on 05-11-2000 12:50 AM
            WLPD is as valid of a strategy as any ones you use. End of story.


            Huh? The question is whether the WLTYYYD population growth is a crutch to overcome other gameplay or planning deficiencies, or rather just a quick way to gain an advantage; that is, unreasonable or otherwise just plain hokey. I maintain it is. Some don't. Valid strategy is another question, personally I don't gve a rat's ass how anyone plays their own game. Anyone can screw the rules.txt enough to get a 1500% score every time they play. Big whoop. The question is, are WLTYYYD's population increases something that should not be abused, if that's the word.

            quote:

            It has well been shown by those commenting here that it is not a crutch for the weak so I think the "question" on your post was answered.


            How? Please recap - I've seen people defend it as requiring planning, and that it is part of the game, and that the game planners even desired for it to occur over and over in every city for turn after turn. But I still think it's best avoided for truly challenging and meaningful gameplay.

            quote:

            And this I do not agree with:
            "I still maintain it is a strategy leading to a quick and easy win. No I don't need to peg my luxuries to figure this out...

            It is not necissarily an easy win. Many things have to be balanced to pull off a win with other compitant players. You risk being overly vulnerable for the chance of very quick growth if you choose. There are many things to balance and yet try to remain flexable to deal with unpredictable things your opponants come up with.


            I consider those risks concommitant with the forms of government, not with WLTYYYD.

            quote:

            You would have to do more than peg your luxuries to do it right.


            Not if you've developed an infrastructure to support a powerful rep/dem. WLTYYYD is all frosting, no cake.

            quote:

            The point about experience is that if you were familiar with the strategy more, you would not claim it as an easy win.


            That makes no sense. Except maybe that if I depended on the strategy, and couldn't win without it, I'd make such a claim.

            quote:

            If all you think is involved is uping the lux setting, then no wonder you see it as simplistic.


            In a well developed rep/dem, that's all it takes. Want the save game file to prove it?

            quote:

            I am not sure why you associate my words with Yoda's I wonder whos words would you have associated Yoda's with when you first heard his?


            Disjointed sentences with the action leading the subject. "Show you I will"...

            quote:

            I was teasing you back cuz of what you said about "took Crustacian's head off and slapping me or whatever that was all about. I got a kick out of that in view of how you said you could take dissagreement.


            Disagreement is one thing, being smarmy is another. I made a very nasty reply to your post, but it disappeared off of the board...

            quote:

            Did you really get your comments nuked?


            Ming says not, but...

            quote:

            Anyways to each their own, but that means to EACH--yours & others their own.


            I've never stated it should be any other way. You know, people have referenced another thread on allowing players to build on mountains. Listen to the phrase - allow players. My phrase was "is it a crutch". Nothing about being allowed. To each his own was never in question. Rather, to discuss whether the effects of WLTYYYD disbalance a game.

            quote:

            I don't like the cheat bug things either but if thats how others want to play who cares so long as if they play a game with me we all use the same rules.


            I don't think that really is in question.

            quote:

            I don't like 2x2x setting either but see it as just fine for those who like it.


            Well that's a gamestyle that is a universal change affecting all players. WLTYYYD affects only Dem/Rep and for my purposes only when it occurs by design to grow cities, which the I have never seen the AI do. Although it should, cause it's dumb as a stump post fence.

            quote:

            So will you cough it up and admit that you may have underestimated the comlexity of using WLPD?


            No, because I never offered otherwise. You cannot simply take a Monarchy, revolution to republic and WLTYYYD whore the next turn. What I'm referring to is not the creation of growth infrastructure, but rather the setting of the luxuries rate to put your cities into WLTYYYD for turn after turn after turn. Substituting luxuries rate for time to obtain growth seems cheap to me.

            quote:

            And even tho you don't like it for your expressed and valid reasons, you won't think those you end up playing with are weak players cus they like to use it?


            I don't MP, so it doesn't really matter. It's just a point for discussion, as having seen a number of posts where city growth is designed around WLTYYYD, rather than WLTYYYD results from wise development.

            quote:

            When you see that END sequence as someone takes your last city you might then.


            Never happens (bloodlust). I do however fail to conquer other races by the determined time. If I play an additional 200 turns, I might make it, but alas, the tech tree has normally petered out (original Civ2) and 200 more turns of the same thing with no hope for glory kinda bites...

            quote:

            Otherwise you will be left with a fairly weak thing to say like "well dang! I would have won those games IFFFFF they would have played me "fair" and not used WLPD, or built that Shakespeares Theater to where that city never needed to worry about happyness......."


            I'd rather lose with diginity than win without it.

            quote:

            So I am not at all against playing a game where there is a luxury setting limit of say 20 or 30% tops instead of the 100% possible that the game designers built in as an option for us.


            You know, the % luxuries thing in my opinion is an act of ommission rather than commission. I don't think they set out to make sure you couldn't pursue x% luxuries. I can't imagine they thought anyone would want to! I think they were rather limiting the amount of science and taxes, rather than limiting luxuries.

            quote:

            I have enjoyed playing no wonders and no ai games for some of the same reasons you use regarding WLPD.
            But there will allways be nothing like a good ol 1x1x raging, deity, full comp civs, and mutually agreed set of rules to play by.


            I couldn't agree more with the latter part. I just find WLTYYYD is a part best left out, or at least not utilized to the extent some advocate.

            quote:

            Great times, funny chat, and time consuming but cheap intertainment


            Mmm, yes, entertaining this is...

            Venger

            Comment


            • #81
              quote:

              I guess I don't see how it takes a whole lot of effort to pull off

              Disagree. Try it without a Temple or Marketplace.


              In the mid to late game you can't even get to size 3 without disorder without a Temple if you have a fair to large number of cities.

              quote:

              Who hasn't had the frustrating experience of a celebrating city stuck at size 7 while you rush in settlers to irrigate more grass or plains?


              Heh, well, I haven't. But by the time size 7 rolls around, 2 settlers have been calved and one has worked the surrounding lands to enhance trade and growth.

              quote:

              Who hasn't had the Vikings come knocking on your door with vet Knights while your cities are building Caravans and Libraries?


              Those bastards. You don't need to WLTYYYD to hate when those Mongol elephants dump off next to your size 3 city with only an archer to defend them...

              quote:

              Bribery is only eliminated under Democracy. Add that 80 shield Courthouse to the list of "must-haves" for a Republic to grow. In reality, you don't even get double the science rate out of Republic compared to ICS Monarchy due to the loss of trade to luxuries.


              I know the bribery dem rule, I worded it somewhat awkwardly. No, you don't get double the science rate. But you are able to increase science, tax, and usually for medium sized cities, put that one entertainer back to productive use in a forest region, for a couple shields. That's huge.

              quote:

              And of course each science advance makes the next one come slower and slower.


              Not enough for my taste actually, the tech avalanche late in the game is something I'm trying to reduce in my ruleset...

              quote:

              While you'll be ahead, pretty soon your science rate will not be much better off than under Monarchy.


              I gotta disagree on that, my Civs hit a wall in Monarchy.

              quote:

              If your gonna play ICS, then go for it all the way. You must beat the AI before (IMO) they get Industrialization and Democracy.


              I don't ICS, but I see too many weaknesses with it to really feel it is a good long term strategy.

              quote:

              IMHO if you beat down the AI with war in the early and mid game, you should just finish them off since the game becomes just too easy after that.


              The big map helps here, I tend to not even see the enemy till well into the game, unless I get squatted next to one...

              quote:

              YMMV of course. I find war with the AI laughably easy. But leave them alone and let them get into the modern era and find out what a real space race can be.


              If you get to the late era when they get stealth, it can become a real slugfest, especially on a large maps with the right Civs...
              quote:

              And the same thing happens to your cities. The game expects this and adjusts accordingly: science advances take more and more beakers. Units cost more and more. Improvement upkeep costs get more expensive. I mean really: just how are you supposed to build 320 shield Solar Plants or SS Modules in a size 11 city?


              Actually, I have a current game with a city (4 buffalo, hills out the wazoo) scoring 106 freaking production a turn at size 13. Unreal.

              quote:

              Not unless you already have the infrastructure.


              Well certainly, but if you've got the infrastructure, you don't need WLTYYYD to grow, it'll happen over time. But apparently it's easier to peg the rate for 10 turns and bloat. Anyone bulding a successful dem/rep is going to have to build infrastructure regardless of WLTYYYD...

              quote:

              You can get 1500+ science and gold by trading with the AI - and only you get the bonus. I understand your position but consider this: If you have, say, 15 cities that each have 3 trade routes with the same AI city, you'll get the trade from 45 routes each turn while the AI will only get trade from 3 of them. Each of those routes will be worth double what they would be if you traded with yourself. Best of all, you can keep reestablishing the trade routes to get the bonus over and over. This makes it worthwhile to build Superhighways which increase the value of the routes and the bonus yet again. Give it a try!


              I build Superhighways anyways. I know you can send all caravans to one city to avoid having the enemy obtain alot of trade arrows. But I can get trade in two cities while only producing a caravan in one, which often can mean an extra worker in the fields. I'm sure optimally your way produces more true trade though...

              quote:

              But you must wait for a new city to become size 3 before anything happens. Also, you can only build one thing in a new city per turn and you must wait for you Engineers to transform, irrigate, road, etc. It's still quite a bit to do.


              I would consider this par for the course, not something special to be done.

              quote:

              Actually, the city grows painfully slow late in the game. Some of this is the effect of how long turns take late in the game vs. early in the game.


              I've found quite the opposite. Other than increased unhappiness (despite Bach, Mike, Temple, 30% luxuries a size 3 city goes into disorder!), the late game cities seem to boom. I'm flush with cash for improvements, and alot of Engineers have nothing to do but clean up the occassional pollution...

              Venger
              [This message has been edited by Venger (edited May 11, 2000).]

              Comment


              • #82

                BoyakaSha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                Yep, i have nothing useful to contribute. So i have to make strange comments to get attention!!!!
                "There are not more than 5 musical notes..." - Sun Tzu
                ...and we build an Academy for this guy... :confused:

                Comment


                • #83
                  Eh? Someone said I should post in this thread.

                  Happy now Hydey?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    You're welcom to your opinion Venger
                    , which is obviously not shared by others.

                    But 4 posts in a row? We know Who really likes seeing his name?

                    RAH
                    This thread got boring.
                    It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
                    RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I've been following this thread with much interest so far (Altough is becoming a bit boring ). I'm not an experienced player as you sure noticed from the Settler attribute in my profile? so, for me WLT*D was an event that occured more or less unexpectedly and whose affect I was not very much aware.

                      Being that I'm not that good a player myself, and since Venger declares it is a cruch i thought: so let's try it, I sure am a good subject.

                      Soo let's see: I am playing ToT Fantasy Game as a human, prince level with raging hordes in a normal sized world. I built three cities and tried to work my strategy in order to get the population boost (for that I needed at least Althing, the equivalent to Republic in this game). With three cities, all possible city improvements built I got WLT*D with Althing. I also got late in technological progress (60% luxuries really slow down science - to 72 turns per discovery ), with a puny army (no time to build a stronger one and no military discouveries that would help with upgrated ones), and with only two cities (yeah, I lost one to the Infidels because my rookie Warriors were no match for their I Horsemen).

                      -After editing-
                      Forgot to mention that my cities reached size 12. They don't go beyond that because I need the Catacoms (equivalent to Sewers) and I didn't reach the tech advance i need for that (can someone guess why? )
                      - -
                      So, bottom line, it is not that good a crutch for weak players like me .

                      But, wait, maybe it wasn't yet the time to boost the luxuries. Maybe only after all those improvements and developments Venger say are healthy choices in a sound strategy I can take full advantage of WLT*D!!! By then, maybe I don't even need WLT*D to win the game!!! But, then again, by then I will surelly be a much better player!!!

                      So, is it an easy strategy? IMHO, I don't think so.
                      [This message has been edited by Ecowiz (edited May 12, 2000).]

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Venger wrote, responding to me:

                        "Searching your post I found the sarcasm but found no humor..."

                        Very well.

                        "I'd like to find where I've precipitated any such remarks." [i.e., affrontery at light flaming]

                        Umm, in response to my original, sarcastic post. You have slammed anyone who dared disagree with you, *implying* (are you familiar with the definition of this word?) that their way of playing the game is akin to cheating, and using vulgar, sexualized language to do so ("spy-pimping", "luxuries-whoring", "engorging your cities").

                        "I fail to see how the WLTYYYD prep work is any different than the work needed just to make a successful democracy or republic."

                        Then you do not fully understand WLT_D. However, as you categorically refuse to *try* this strategy, you will never learn the difference between normal Rep/Dem preparation and WLT_D preparation.

                        "Quotes please. Find the denigrating posts."

                        Here they are:

                        "Why are half of your sentences yoda-esque?"

                        (This is at least vaguely insulting.)

                        "I'm not experienced in fellatio either but you can be damn sure I know it ain't for me."

                        (This is just uncalled for -- very vulgar.)

                        "Find the personal attack. Find it. Let's watch the thread develop and see where all the BS starts."

                        Here are some of Venger's personal attacks on me:

                        "What a jack ass. Do you have anything to add to the thread besides your overpowering ignorance?" [this one in response to my sarcastic post]

                        Personal attack #1.

                        "What are you, 12 years old?"

                        Personal attack #2.

                        "Well that was enlightening. I think that's what they tell new prisoners - assrape is part of the sentence. Get used to it."

                        Not a personal attack but extremely insulting. And, more sexualized language. Are you capable, Venger, of using another idiom?

                        "But if you aren't very clever, but really think you are, feel free to post your LoL posts down at the local gay bar, or Homeless Shelter, or some other place..."

                        An attack on Sten Sture. And *more* sexual idiom. Also gay bashing. And homeless bashing. Classy, Venger, very classy. (Note: that was sarcasm.)

                        "Curiously, have you actually addressed any of the issues?"

                        Yes I have: I submitted (in my very first post in this thread) that arguments over the realism of WLT_D were unfounded and misplaced.

                        "[...] you seem to post simply for the joy of seeing your name in HTML"

                        This is really, *really* funny coming from you, Venger. You have posted 28 times in this thread, often 4 or 5 times in a row. I have posted 4 messages (including this one). Which of us likes to see his name in HTML?

                        I also point out that it was you, Venger, who started the thread with the express purpose of stirring up trouble. If that's not an excuse to see your name in HTML, I don't know what is.

                        - - - - -

                        In the interests of peace and quiet, I will unilaterally stop posting after this message. Feel free, Venger, to lambast me, secure in the knowledge that I won't respond. You brave, brave man.


                        ------------------
                        JERandall
                        JERandall

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          An interesting thread despite the boredom claimed by RAH .

                          (I generally don't post in the CIV section as I am more a SMAC kind of guy, but these arguements arise in any TBS game that allows pop growth of 1 per turn so it seems germaine to post on the subject (forgive me my dyed in the wool CIV fans I used to play CIV2 all the time but have now moved on))

                          Venger,

                          Firstly I respect your convictions and generally your answers follow a sound point counterpoint format akin to a debate. You make some valid arguements .... pausing... (cause you know there's going to be a BUT)...


                          But...

                          When you use the term "crutch" it implies either:
                          1) a tactic that while legal either stretches the rules of the game or

                          2) if employed so seriously imbalances the game as to make it unplayable.

                          The first part of this definition re: legality was pretty well addressed by Ming. It is legal and a well documented effect.

                          Regarding point 2 comes to the whole crux of the arguement

                          I see both parties putting forth the arguement in terms of comparison of instant population gain for economies of scale vs. ICS strategy and how one compared to the other is equally unbalancing.

                          So now ultimately the point gets to a ICS vs. large city thread of which there have been numerous in the past. I don't intend to argue much on behalf of either point since most people have made their points re: need to have infrastructure in place prior to WLTPD (and one can draw the same parrallels in SMAC as well) etc.

                          The only point I wish to make on behalf of the larger city approach vs. ICS (which I am making the assumption is the strategy you follow)is this:

                          Once you have chosen to go the ICS route you unfortunatley have sealed your fate (moreso in CIV then in SMAC as one can augment city population size via crawlers in SMAC but I digress), population size is sealed to a finite small population size. This being said you indicated extra facilities tend to be wasteful and uneeded.

                          To my way of thinking what this purports is that only a portion of the game is actually played. If you never see the need to build adavanced facilites you in effect are only playing a small protion of the game and robbing yourself the experience of playing the grand tapestry of the game (ohh I shouldn't have gone that far as now I am waxing poetic... )

                          Thats my take on it at least. ICS surely is powerful but why play it??? As others point out population explosions seem to be the only way to somewhat balance the scales between the two approaches (your point being that it overbalances in favor of the larger city approach) regardless of the case I would prefer to play the complete game as opposed to a mere fraction.

                          Just my ramblings....

                          [This message has been edited by Ogie Oglethorpe (edited May 12, 2000).]
                          "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

                          “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Oops. Repeated incidentaly my last post.

                            But, since I'm here cleaning up the mess let me launch a chalenge to you, Venger.

                            Since, for you, WLT*D is a crutch, and to prove us just that, why don't you try and play a game with the following objective: as soon as it is possible, begin "demographic explosion" (hey, didn't something like that really happend in this century? ) through WLT*D and win (you may choose the ending, either by conquer or by sending the ship to AC; preferably the one you are more familiar with). You could then post the log of that game for us to see how it made your winning easier (I would surelly enjoy very much to learn it )

                            Just a thought
                            [This message has been edited by Ecowiz (edited May 12, 2000).]

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              quote:

                              Originally posted by Venger on 05-09-2000 09:56 PM
                              So SKIP IT. God people, if you have nothing to add, then freaking go DO SOMETHING ELSE.

                              ...if you aren't very clever, but really think you are, feel free to post your LoL posts down at the local gay bar, or Homeless Shelter, or some other place...just not on this thread.

                              Venger


                              Since being banned from this very serious thread by Venger, I went to a couple of local gay bars and a homeless shelter to discuss the humor of Civ and Apolyton ramblings. I got to meet some very nice, genuine people with some very interesting stories, but they didn't think my civ LoL's were terribly clever either.

                              Therefore I conceed that WLT_Ds are only for weak players, and I will continue to play SP in deity, large map, bloodlust, 7 civ, raging, no wonders, no howies, no bribe, and founding not more than 10 cities; but also now with no WLT_D. I am sure the AI will be much more of a challenge.

                              BTW - has anyone done OCC with no WLT_D??


                              ----------
                              How long til 150 posts??
                              Be the bid!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Since this thread is getting way to long for people to read everything in... I thought I would do an executive summary of where it is REALLY at.

                                Venger's points if you look through all the posts.
                                1) It wasn't the intent of the designers.
                                Wrong... It is well documented in the manual that the designers expected it to be used for dramatic growth.
                                2) It's not realistic.
                                That's just a matter of opinion... I think some posters have provided some excellent examples that it is indeed realistic.
                                3) It makes it too easy to win.
                                Again, opinion... many posters have tried to point out that it requires real planning and work to set it up right, but Venger just waves it off and doesn't agree.
                                4) He doesn't use it.
                                So what... who cares!
                                5) He doesn't like it because it feels like cheating to him.
                                His only legitimate point since it is a matter of personal opinion.

                                So after all of his posts, that's all it comes down to... HE DOESN'T LIKE IT.

                                So don't use it if you don't like it!

                                Fine... is any more discussion really needed!
                                [This message has been edited by Ming (edited May 12, 2000).]
                                Keep on Civin'
                                RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron O

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X