 |
|
General Maximus
|
 |
Harrisburg, PA
Feb 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
i agree that have limited time makes you want to play your favorite setting all the time.
what Mr.Slowwhand is asking is whether you think being the best at one setting, or playing and having fun on all settings is your preference.
when i have limited time, i play whoever and whatever settings, i may not win, i may not lose, but i'll have fun, whoever and whatever.
my preference doesn't make me better than you, and your preference better than me, it makes us individuals with opinions. THAT is what slowwhand wants, your OPINION, not a chest thumping.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Deity Dude
|
|
Westland, Michigan
Aug 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
I didn't vote Sloww, because I would have to consider myself in the middle. I'll play king, emp or diety - 1x1x or 2x1x - any world size - just about any rules. On the other hand I hate 2x2x and would not even consider 1x2x nor would i want to play on settings below king. I've read in some threads about super deity and deity +5 settings but have never tried them and I suspect I wouldn't like them either ( but i would try them once ). I've never tried an MP scenario before - but again I suspect I wouldn't be into that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EyesOfNight
|
|
Why isn't there a to be good at all settings option?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SlowwHand
|
 |
of The Cooler
Sep 1999
time: 23:15
|
|
Maximus nailed it. Of course, as a Tuatha De Danann member he would understand.
In a Tribe game, it would be very easy to hand select members of the Tribe that had a preference for the settings.
Deity 1x, pick these members.
King 2x prod 1x moves, send these members.
Certainly, most have settings they would choose if it were a vote
We never do it that way, though.
Tuatha De Danann members are required to be adaptable.
That's about the only requirement, other than being an honorable player.
My vote, and I expect the vote of any of the Tribe, goes for being a well-rounded player.
One who won't pout with lower lip extended, and say "No deity", or "Small world only", or "I only do duels", or whatever.
Variety makes Civ all the more enjoyable, enlarges your circle of aquaintances, and makes for an all-around better player.
Having fun, as Maximus also noted.
Just an opinion.
Vote on.
Last edited by SlowwHand on 01-08-2001 at 03:10
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cavebear
|
 |
of the Pleistocene
Oct 1999
time: 00:15
|
|
Well, if I ever won games, I might not care about it so much. I *am* competitive. That said, I really do enjoy the construction elements of the game aside from whether I win. The competition is in how well I built compared to the other players *and* my opportunities. If I get great grassland and whales, wonderful. If I get plains and mountains, then I will keep that in mind when I evaluate how I played when the game is done.
I'm not good enough yet to make lemonade from deserts and barbs, but I'll at least try to make a quilt from the scraps.
I've been practicing 2x2x. It's not my favorite game, but I can deal with it now. Took some work and I still detest elephants and explorers that go through my civ like cruise missles, but what the heck, as long as everyone is in the same boat, let us play!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
31-07-2001 22:42
)
|