 |
| |
|
|
MalevolentLight
|
|
High Above
Jul 1999
time: 00:26
|
|
1. More is Better
The more you have of something, the larger amount you will need in order for a lead to be useful. For example, if I have 100
cities and the opponent has 97 cities, that's only a 3% difference. However, if I have 2 cities and he has 1 city, even though there's only a 1 city difference it's a 50% advantage. Now lets apply this to a 1x1x vs 2x2x argument. Lets say I start with a whale, my opponent has only grassland. My production is up 50% compared to his, and if he tries to catch up in production by using a forest then my food is up 50% which is an enormous bonus. As you can see, starting with a whale on upper levels in a 1x1x game can practically win the game on it's own. And that's without even counting the trade you get from it. In effect my city is 50% better than my opponent's city. That is an ENORMOUS advantage so early in the game. But on 2x2x if my opponent gets a whale I can use a forest to even it out since I'll have the exact same production with only minus 1 food. So basically I will be getting 4 food a turn while he gets 5 food a turn. See the difference? 2x2x also opens up the use of silk early on in the game, which means I can mimic a whale with the exact same trade, production, at the expense of 1 food. This can be seen with all resources in 1x1x due to the fact you are working with such small numbers. In 2x2x the advantages of resources is greatly reduced hence making it more an even playing field.
2. Arguement 1 Applies to Argument 2
But not in the same way. On 1x movement there isn't a whole lot you can do to stop someone who has good huts. Reason for this being that you can't get to him to stop him. You can't take open cities, you can't rush him, and unless you get good huts to there is nothing you can do to even it out. On 2x you can send out horsemen to rush him, you can reduce the amount of huts he has by using different strategies. On 1x you can see everything before it attacks you. It's ridiculously easy to send out a warrior out of your city leaving it undefended to stop an oncoming horseman. On 2x you can't do that, hence the reason I wrote the luring strategy which lures a warrior or other unit out of its city to allow another unit to come in from behind. Again, more is better and when it comes to options you have far more options on 2x2x. 1x movement makes the huts you get that much more precious, and when you factor in 1x resources each advanced tribe you get is an enormous advantage since 1x deals with such small numbers.
3. Deity and Unhappiness
Again we are dealing with restrictions. Restrictions are what kills games. When you restrict the player you run into balance issues and it can be seen in any game out there. Civ3 has about 2 people playing it right now because the restrictions imposed on the player in order to make the AI stronger were too great and thus killed any sort of strategy in the game. Deity is the closest civ2 can come to being like civ3. Defending your cities for martial law is required on Deity, you have no choice. When you are required to do something everyone is brought down to 1 level, and when everyone is forced to play on the same level lesser players can make up for their weaknesses. I can name a zillion strategies that will work on King that won't work on Deity. In fact I can't think of any strategies that work on Deity that are special and game winning. There has not been 1 person to come out and give a strategy that can be done on Deity that can not be done on King or is not useful.
4. Hanging Gardens
I don't care what anyone says, in a duel and the game lasts until then HG will decide the winner. Again, rule 1 applies here. You have a 50% happiness advantage over your opponent by building HG. Your cities will get mad at size 3, his at size 2. However on King your cities get mad at size 4 while yours will get mad at size 5. Is this an enormous advantage? It's a nice advantage, but it's not game winning. When you start dealing with percentages so high big imbalances occur.
5. Expansion On Deity
On 2x2x King anywhere is expandable no matter where it is on the map. Even on 1x1x but it takes forever to get there. On deity you need to stay tight knit or your far away cities will be basically useless. In fact on deity you are at times forced to stop building due to the enormous corrpuption and riot factor. How can anyone argue that playing on a setting that forces you to stop building is somehow all part of the strategy? How can you even begin to argue that this doesn't slow down the better player and help the lesser player? If you have a bad spot on Deity, you are stuck with it, and that even applies to 1x1x King to an extent. On 2x2x King you can expand anywhere you want so if you aren't in a good spot you have the option to expand elsewhere.
6. Raging Hordes
I feel sorry for anyone that plays this. This is perhaps the most ridiculous setting in the game, even more so than Deity. Plain and simple, it adds the biggest random factor in the game. Entire games can be decided simply by who gets barbarians out of their huts and who doesn't. I can guarantee that if you lose your first exploring unit to a barbarian and I get an advanced tribe that you are done for. Not to mention that yet again this forces you to defend...but against what? You're defending against the AI. How does this make the game more strategical between humans? It doesn't and there has yet to be anyone that can even begin to argue it. It's just another random factor in an already very random game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jes
|
|
Hamburg, Germany
Dec 1999
time: 05:26
|
|
to 1.+2.
thats a reason we give a restart to each player if he wants. but even a whale isnt the winning point, but the ressources you find later in the game.
if you find a citie in a hut early in the game, you have in king 2 settlers to 1, in diety 3 setts to 2; you may count the percents by your own.
huts can give a huge advatage, thats right, but thats the same in king; in deity you must be carefully with huts, cause there might be useless tecs, and thats much badder than all.
if you finf a chariot in a hut in 2x movement, it will be very fast. several games are finished before they started really.
to 3. "restrictions are what kills games". i dont know if it works in english, but in german i would answer: "restriction are what skills games". 
to 4. you can repeat it endless, but i wont become true therefore.
to 5. expansion is a point, thats different from king, ok, but its not waht the game makes unballanced.
to 6. no point to deity.
summary: u say, there arnt not enough strategies in deity. ok, if you like tons of units, be happy with it. i wonder, why you have to use these tons of words to argue. better you would show your skill in games. but i dont like to play you anymore, cause you are blubbering like a river. maybe thats your way in civ: talking, but not doing. (yes i know, in former times you did you did...).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ming
|
|
Great Post Eyes... when you leave the insults and the ranting at home, you really can make some sense.
I hope other people leave the insults at home as well.
Point 1
While you are correct in your numbers crunching... there is still an advantage at 2x. While not as great, there still is one. I wouldn't call it "greatly reduced", but then again, just an opinion.
Point 2
As far as point two... I think I will just disagree with you on what makes a fun game. Your post indicates that you would like a game consisting soley of horse rushes and a race to see who can open the most huts first.
Frankly... you can do the same thing at 1x movement with the only exception being whether you see it coming or not.
No matter which settings you use, there will still be a matter of luck involved. In 2x movement, an early two move unit gives you too much of an advantage over the other person. Since you can cover twice as much ground quicker, it gives you a killer advantage for opening more huts. If you get a free 2 movement and your opponent does not, he's toast.
point 3
Again, your whole argument is based on the fact that you have to defend your cities in Deity... That is not true, and you know it. In your last Deity game, didn't you leave your city defenseless 
And your "no strategy" argument is getting old. Everything you choose to do is a strategy. Yes, there are some things you can do differently in 2x movement because your units move farther, but that's it. Whether it's early republic... early map making... early trade... early war techs and rush your oponent... there are tons of strategies at all settings.
point 4
Yeah... HG is a big. But so is taking a persons capital
Again... it takes more effort to deal with the unhappiness problems at Deity while still doing everything else you need to do. There are choices you need to make... and as you have said... choices are good
Point 5
Again... you blame Deity and claim it forces you to "stop expanding"... why? Deal with it. In our Deity games, I've never seen anybody stop expanding as long as there was still room to expand.
You do raise a valid point about finding better land at the start quicker... But, both sides have the same problem.
Point 6
I feel sorry for people that don't play RH's. I think a game where you can open a hut without fear of something bad happening to you is for chickens. Without any fear of something bad, the game becomes a race to open the most huts. Gee... now that's fun. Talk about a game dependent on luck. You keep talking about wanting to level the playing field, but by turning it into a open hut fest... you are just adding luck to the game.
And you right when you say it just adds another random factor. So what. Even if you play with no huts on premade worlds, there will still be luck. This way, the luck tends to balance things out in the long run. It also means you have to think and deal with what happens, instead of just playing some single strategy that always works. It makes for more interesting games, and requires more skill than just building as many horses as you can so that you can open huts the most huts
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MalevolentLight
|
|
High Above
Jul 1999
time: 00:26
|
|
I'm enjoying these responses, it's exactly what I wanted to hear. All I need to hear now is "We know deity is unbalanced and that it has too many random factors to be played on a ladder or for competitive play, but since we play for fun and are just casual gamers it is good enough for us."
ANd Ming, you play on like 30X30 maps with 4 players, of course there will be non-stop expansion since there is nowhere far to go. Again, you're talking about the happiness factor as if it's all part of the strategy, but I can get the same "strategy" by playing against the AI.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jes
|
|
Hamburg, Germany
Dec 1999
time: 05:26
|
|
i wonder you think, eyes really would argue with you.
sorry ming, i think this time you mean me. but im angry, eyes only tells, but never answers to srguments.
Last edited by jes on 04-03-2003 at 01:52
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
StrategicKingMi
|
|
I believe that I have said all this, maybe not as well and too the point but I covered every one of thoose points.
(Hanging Gardens is very unimportant and a luxury item on real island settings(2 x 2 king), trade all but makes it obsolete)
(Mageleons on 1 move is devestating way more so then on 2 move)
There is no challenge in being doomed from the very beging of the game by factors out of your control., its just a pointless waste of time.
Any one here got a job where you make good money like me?
Any one here like to be competitive in this game like me?
Any one here think that winning via luck factors is a useless waste of time? Again like me.
So, if you believe 1 x 1 deity is unbalanced, if you believe luck plays too great a role, if you have limited time and dont want to win by luck alone.... Then logic dictates you dont play 1 x 1 deity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
StrategicKingMi
|
|
1 more thing, can anyone post a meaningfull, factual post like this on why 1 x 1 deity is better????
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
rah
|
|
Apolyton Prince of Moderators, Master of Reason
|
 |
Lord of the Ferrets
Jan 1970
time: 23:26
|
|
Yes, it is more fun to play with people you know. (and trust)
WHICH brings up another reason why it's good to have some luck involved in the game. All the people that play in our group are not of the same skill level.
With a little good luck to the below average player and bad luck for the better player, the lessor player has a chance to get a lead and have some fun. People that get there butts kicked every game stop playing. Then every game will be a duel, because the competition will get thin. 4 player games are much more entertaining (and provide more challanges) then a duel.
But it's just like poker. Over time the better players will will win money. I don't need a ladder to tell me who the better players in the group are, it's obvious over time. You can tell who's getting better with experience over time. So instead of a definative ladder that might be based on me playing the top players a couple of times, our opinions of players are based over playing with them dozens of time. Since you can't totally eliminate all luck out of the game, which way is the fairer way to judge a person's skill?
So as far as I'm concerned I want luck in the game. It keeps things dynamic and let's me experience how to recover from a bad start. If I do poorly one game, my group isn't going to say I suck. They realize the luck aspect of the game. BUT if I have a bad start and come back, I'll be recognized for the skill that was involved.
AND finally, as Hydey put forth quite clearly, It's all about fun with friends. (and beer or whatever )
RAH
|
|
| |
|
|
|
trev
|
|
Adelaide, Australia
Feb 2003
time: 14:56
|
|
The Hanging Gardens is promoted as the WONDER that will win a game. It does give an advantage to the player with it
However if you are playing a game with 3 or more relatively equal players then the WONDER that makes the most difference in a game is the Great Library. Properly used it allows the player with it to increase the luxury rate (matching the effect of the Hanging Gardens) and increase the tax rate allowing more rush buys of marketplaces etc.
These effects combined easily outdo the effects of the Hanging Gardens
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-03-2003 04:28
|