BTS and the upcoming slavery nerf

[Ming]

What I find interesting is that the rah game Civ IV group plays on normal speed. But with Civ 2, our group loved 2x production because it speeded up the game. Our group thought playing 1x1x was like watching grass grow. Wouldn't playing a quick speed be the equivalent of playing 2x production in Civ II?

[EyesOfNight]

Playing quick speed is actually slower than 2x in Civ2. Playing normal speed goes far beyond slow. 1x1x moved WAY faster than normal speed in Civ4.

[Ming]

In quick speed, I would assume that the production and research rate are enhanced. Is it like two times faster than normal... three times faster?

[EyesOfNight]

probably like 3 times faster. Tech speeds aren't really what's increased the most. Bronze for example takes 7 turns in the beginning. City growth, and production are increased but not the way it was in Civ2. You still get 1 hammer for a forest for example, it's just that the cost of a unit has been reduced. It takes something like 15 turns to get a worker at size 1 on normal, it takes 10 on quick. Cities grow faster. I would say on average everything seems to be about 5 turns faster.

[Ming]

So I can understand your argument when it comes to the luck factors you suggest... yes, obviously a unit lost to a barb can be recreated faster... and a tech from a hut doesn't save as many turns as it does at regular speed.

However, you indicate that you play with no huts or barbs. How then does quick speed give an advantage over normal speed since everybody is playing under the same rules. Granted the game goes quicker, but everybody can crank out units at the same rate regardless of the speed.

[EyesOfNight]

Whenever you increase speed, you increase the rate at which people start attacking. It opens up more opportunities for someone to screw up and for someone to take advantage of it. If you have 15 turns before I can send a warrior to you it's a lot easier than if I'm already choking you in the first 10 turns of the game. By turn 30 I might already have 10 units in your base unless you do something about it. On the other hand, on normal I might only be able to send 3 units which isn't a very effective choke. There's no real way to get to people fast on normal. You have all the time in the world before someone really becomes a threat to you. Also, with higher production speeds, making choices between making units or expanding becomes more important. It's much easier for someone to build an army big enough to destroy you so you have to balance between military and economy more. You mentioned most the p eople in your group don't like quick speed, well that's because on quick they're going to die much faster if they don't have the skills needed to compete. It was the same way in Civ2, new players didn't want to play 2x2x because they could literally die within 10 turns if they didn't play on a high enough level. It's that way in every game. Any time you increase the speed of a game, the chance to die becomes greater.

[Kuciwalker]

Whereas you don't want to play normal settings because they don't minimize the facets of the game you don't know how to handle.

[EyesOfNight]

And those facets would be? Last I checked it's not real hard to click on a building to be built or set some specialists. Kuci would be an example of a lower level player that would be unable to survive long on quick speed.

[Kuciwalker]

Any non-military victory, for one.

[EyesOfNight]

Yeah, non-military victories are for SP, except for launching a spaceship. I don't know of too many games though that go all the way through to a spaceship. This isn't simcity, even though a lot of beginners like yourself would like it to be.

[Ming]

So if I'm reading what you are saying correctly... the only real difference (since all players can crank out the same number of units as quick) is that you are saying that dumb players will make mistakes, and that the smart players will use the time to kill them. Is that really the only difference?

[rah]

Well Eyes, thank for conceding that skill is required on all settings.

Yes your settings does remove some of the luck from the game and maybe maximizes the skill required. (not 100% convinced of the latter since bad players will make mistakes regardless of the timeframe, but I agree in theory)

We do enjoy larger games so we do have to accomodate some players that aren't experts in order to get enough players. To us, the more players, the more fun, and the more competetive the game. Emphasis fun. The ability to manipulate betters, equals and lessers is real skill. Duels eliminate the need for this skill.

And yes, I don't want to play the game for money (i'll play other games for that, golf poker etc), but I don't need to to get respect. And the better players in our games get respect.

Different strokes for different strokes.

[MJW]

Getting a tech. from a hut is a great example that game balance when play against AIs and humans are very different. You cannot use them against the AI and the AI does not use them against you (a lot). Humans can abuse it an awful lot though.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
1. I never said the game was pure luck and that the results were random.

2. My argument from the beginning has always been that your settings decrease the skill gap between players by adding in random factors out of the player's control. Civ4 is a game that equalizes quite effectively on its own, you don't need to play on settings that make this fact even worse.

3. My settings have the largest skill gap and require the most amount of skill. They allow for the largest leads. Your settings stifle the size of the lead allowed. I can only get so far ahead playing on your settings. It has nothing to do with skill, it is just the way the game is made. The skill ceiling on Civ4 is very low compared to previous Civ games. If we were playing Civ2, taking all 3 of you on would not be a problem at all. In Civ4 however, the game isn't designed to allow the kind of leads needed to take 3 people on at once, especially on normal speed. Your settings make an existing problem worse by tying the hands of the player and bringing everyone down to one level.

So in conclusion, yes the better player will win most of the time with your settings, or any settings for that matter. My contention is that what separates the good player from the lower player is much less on your settings than on my settings.

FWIW I agree with this. I think a lot of the wider disagreement comes down to subjective issues though (with a large slice also from Eyes' um, unique style. )

My natural tendency is also to look at a game for it's potential for strategic & tactical depth to separate good players from bad players. But not everyone has that mindset, and once you have moved away from trying to make it as pure a test of skill as possible you might as well do whatever you and your opponents find fun.

So in larger games unlike Eyes I don't think it matters that much about barbs and huts, because whether you succeed or not is always going to come down to a range of factors, many of which are out of your control anyway. Just do what feels right. In a competitive duel if you argue for barbs or huts you are either blind to how the game works or cleverly trying to equalise with a better player through luck.

Not sure why you play on normal speed though - that's just insane. Partly because it's a waste of time, but also because of the potential for skill angle. It's not really the point Eyes made though - it's more that whatever you do to the game speed the movement side doesn't scale (unlike Civ2), so the tactical side of the game (predominantly where players actually interact) is in practice more important the quicker the tech and production rates.

[EyesOfNight]

So if I'm reading what you are saying correctly... the only real difference (since all players can crank out the same number of units as quick) is that you are saying that dumb players will make mistakes, and that the smart players will use the time to kill them. Is that really the only difference?

For the most part, yeah. Your window of opportunity to gain a lead and kill someone in Civ4 is small. The potential maxes out fast due to the maintinence system severely restricting expansion so any early leads you get will slowly disappear as the game wears on. On normal speed those leads never really materialize and whatever lead you do get you can't really capitalize on. Quick speed means a larger window of opportunity to pull ahead, and the fact that it doesn't take as long to play a game.