|
Post by Ellestar on Jul 7, 2006 2:20:55 GMT -5
It hasn't helped. In 3 months now I am still never once in all this time been able to get ONE SINGLE team game though I have seen well over a hundred launched and asked and begged for the pass for at least fifty, usually to be totally ignored, but when replied it's always to say I'm not known or I'm probably a noob, ignoring my claims to contrary or saying stats mean nothing. I have sat in that room watching team games start, fill and launch for hours, always settling for 1v1s or the occasional cton. So time doesn't seem to help cos if you can't get one in 3 months... in a game, well there is no debate about time is there. Wow. Well, i got in my 1st teamer (and if i recall correctly it was one of the top teamers, ancient TBG, MUD players hosted them) after about 10-11 Civ 4 ctons (and 15 Civ 4 games total, including singleplayer) {Edit: ~10-11 ctons, not 15}. I didn't know anyone, i never played Civ 3 multiplayer (only 3-4 singleplayer games) etc. And back in these days, top teamers were hosted as a DirectIP ones (not in lobby) so it was even harder to get in them. Now there are more teamers going so it shoudn't be a big problem IMHO, especially with a good stats. I think you're asking wrong people Plus, not everyone gets better in one game at the front. Personally, I feel like a good player with some intelligence and some prior experience is going to be able to play acceptably with minimal advice on the front in a teamer immediately, even in their first game; a crappy player is going to play, well, crappy. There are people who have played 20 games and are among the best; MissLadyLuck is a great example of someone who I think is in my top 10 player list, and got there about the time she played her second teamer ever. There are a lot of people who have played 500 games and are still very poor; I won't name names on this count. I doubt that it's her first ladder account though. Well, there is a possibility that she's Civ 3 veteran and she played a lot of singleplayer and non-ladder games.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Jul 7, 2006 2:55:45 GMT -5
I doubt that it's her first ladder account though. Well, there is a possibility that she's Civ 3 veteran and she played a lot of singleplayer and non-ladder games. Everyone seems convinced of that, and I have no idea why. I didn't play any Civ3, but I did just fine my first ladder games (ctons) and renaissance teamer (admittedly an easy ring buildfest), and my second (on front support vs tommynt and weaksauce and others) and probably my third and fourth. Fact is, non-ladder games, in my opinion, do a much better job of improving a person's general play than ladder games. Up until March or so I played a lot of FFA games and such, and a lot of custom continents 1 continent per player sort of games, and that's where I learned the strategies that I use for teching and worker control and city management; I really don't think I've improved that hardly at all since I joined ladder. It's actually very difficult to work on those skills if you play mostly teamers, since it's much tougher to gauge how good or badly you're doing. If you're playing a 1-person-per-continent game, you should know "OK, I usually have about X cities by this date, and I usually get Civil Service by this date, so my new buildorder/tech path/expansion speed is doing a little better/worse." In a teamer, how do you know whether you are improving or doing worse with subtle strategy changes like that? It's kind of hard to say unless you are very experienced. The only skill that I feel I've improved at very much since I started playing ladder is military maneuvering and tactics, which is admittedly very important for playing on the front, but it only takes one game and a little bit of direction for someone to get the hang of that to the degree that they can attack and defend acceptably versus an average ladder player. Frankly, I would expect most of the best players to have mostly non-ladder and large game experience. I would be very surprised to find someone who became a very good player through only short ladder cton and teamer gametype play. To that extent, it doesn't seem strange at all to believe that MLL is a new ladder player, as she claims to be.
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Jul 7, 2006 3:23:15 GMT -5
I would think anyone with a few hundred games and a win percentage above 60% should without a doubt be allowed into any teamer. He may not know all the ins and outs of that era and team play but he is obviously one of the more serious players and has the basics down pat. With the basic known, the rest should be learn quickly and presto we have another member to the teamer elite.
The other day there was this guy with under 25 games and a win percentage of 39 and couldn't understand why he wasn't given the password. I wasn't the host but can understand why they didn't want to take a chance on a 30 turn only game leaving all unfulfilled.
DISCLAIMER:I have lost a city in under 10 turns. It was a complete lapse of judgment so keep the wise :oss comments to yourself please.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jul 7, 2006 3:26:09 GMT -5
It's actually very difficult to work on those skills if you play mostly teamers, since it's much tougher to gauge how good or badly you're doing. If you're playing a 1-person-per-continent game, you should know "OK, I usually have about X cities by this date, and I usually get Civil Service by this date, so my new buildorder/tech path/expansion speed is doing a little better/worse." In a teamer, how do you know whether you are improving or doing worse with subtle strategy changes like that? It's kind of hard to say unless you are very experienced. Well, you may check autosaves for your team and for enemy team But i agree with you, it's hard to play in a Civ 4 multiplayer without a singleplayer experience (or multiplayer experience in singleplayer-like settings). Say, i know how to play certain settings after i'll play them several times but i don't see a big picture. But i didn't found it fun to play single so i never really played it. I prefer fast decisions and action while single requires too much planning and patience. The only skill that I feel I've improved at very much since I started playing ladder is military maneuvering and tactics, which is admittedly very important for playing on the front, but it only takes one game and a little bit of direction for someone to get the hang of that to the degree that they can attack and defend acceptably versus an average ladder player. Well, i don't know what you consider average. I remember a 2v2 Ren (?) tournament about 2-2.5 weeks ago where i played with tommynt and we stolen 10 workers from enemy team in 30 turns ;D Ok, tommynt stolen 8 of them, but he was close to both enemies, i was behind. And our enemies weren't a new ladder players. Anyway, IMHO you can't learn how to play against ladder-style choking and double-moves in singleplayer and non-ladder multiplayer games.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Jul 7, 2006 4:03:33 GMT -5
Anyway, IMHO you can't learn how to play against ladder-style choking and double-moves in singleplayer and non-ladder multiplayer games. I do agree with that. The only way to learn how to seriously use military is to play against good ladder players, because if you play against worse players you can't possibly be forced to discover what works and what doesn't. Playing against ladder players is like night and day in terms of what wartime strategies you see. That's why I'm really confident that we should win the Civ4 ISDG - that is, if it ever starts ;D But if you told me to pick one of two guys on the front, like so: One had beautiful city management and production, and the other one had shining wonderful military skills, I'd take the builder guy anyway, because it's a lot harder to lose when you outnumber and outtech the enemy. I think the majority of ladder players end up the other way around; strong on the military and really weak on the building. Then again, I might be biased, because there are a quite a few better military players than me, but less who can outproduce or outtech me I agree. I have yet to see someone like that get turned down if they ask to get in a teamer. Usually when someone asks to get in, the host asks if anyone knows this guy, and if nobody does, then someone checks his stats. The only way someone isn't going to get in is if the slot is already filled, or if nobody knows him and he has like a 40% win percentage.
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 4:21:30 GMT -5
Apart from that there s really allways the option to just host the type of game u like yourself. or ask some friend to do so - also being in a clan is (if it s not kingz ) often like a free entrance card for teamers Nice Tommy I had you as a nice guy, that just changed. I had just joined Kingz and im gald of join it. Nice to know you insult people so easily. What would you think about me if I compare all the germans with that famous astrian who governed Germany something like 60-70 years ago?
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Jul 7, 2006 4:25:10 GMT -5
My name's Hombre, and I think Nazis have something to do with Civilization 4.
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 4:38:48 GMT -5
My name's Hombre, and I think Nazis have something to do with Civilization 4. Nice example of intelligence.
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 4:42:55 GMT -5
Pls, admins I would like you to delete Tommy and Elledge post. Tommy post is insulting a whole clan. And Elledge is just a BIG LIAR. Pls child in case im wrong can you paste where I have written that???
|
|
|
Post by tamijo on Jul 7, 2006 4:50:53 GMT -5
Honestly, it feels like this is way out of proportion to the issue. All we're doing is playing games of Civ 4 with each other. We're not harming anyone else in the world. If some friends go out to play soccer every Saturday and you see them at the park, do you get angry if you ask "hey, can I play?" and they say "No, sorry?" Come on. Im not even interested in playing your "hot player teamers" as im simply to old to accept someone to call me names if i make a few mistakes in a computergame. But i cant see how you can compare a few buddys playing soccer in the park, with playing in a ladder. What the boys in the park is dooing looks to me like those saying "im not the kinda man interested in joining a ladder, I like playing with my buddys, thats enough for me" But you want both worlds, you want the good stuff from the ladder, but you will not accept that there is a "fellowship" involved where you have to respect people, even if you dont know them.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jul 7, 2006 5:50:45 GMT -5
Hombre i m not insulting kingz clan but makin fun. U should really not take everything serious and come on some1 reading kingz posts in clansection just gotta smile
u decided to join a funny clan so act like a funny guy
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 5:59:31 GMT -5
Hombre i m not insulting kingz clan but makin fun. U should really not take everything serious and come on some1 reading kingz posts in clansection just gotta smile u decided to join a funny clan so act like a funny guy After read you I feel offended, thats why I have asked admins to delete your post. Maybe Im not that funny, I can tell you that when I joined Kings no one told me that we were a funny clan. I would like to know if any clanmate after read that post can fell offended as i was. If admin not going to delete that post I will understand that admins allow everybody to make fun of all clans (I will personally focus on MUD, not for his players, but for his capt).
|
|
|
Post by everybodysdarling on Jul 7, 2006 6:06:07 GMT -5
Hombre, if you didn't know: MUD is a funny clan, and tommy is a funny MUD captain.
(... omg i hope tommy will not feel offended now. ;D)
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jul 7, 2006 6:10:48 GMT -5
Hombre, if you didn't know: MUD is a funny clan, and tommy is a funny MUD captain. (... omg i hope tommy will not feel offended now. ;D) tommy wasnt funny Last and only time i played him in a teamer he was crazy pinging and shouting alot instead of helping a noob out who died quite quick due to being on front and yes that noob (was) me and is was my first teamer
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 6:11:12 GMT -5
Hombre, if you didn't know: MUD is a funny clan, and tommy is a funny MUD captain. (... omg i hope tommy will not feel offended now. ;D) Maybe you are funny, but in my point of view more than funny you are elitist. Have you ever readed anything in the forums about what means elitism to the ladder??? Are you going to allow any noob to join your clan? That will show me you arent elitist.
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 6:14:51 GMT -5
Hombre, if you didn't know: MUD is a funny clan, and tommy is a funny MUD captain. (... omg i hope tommy will not feel offended now. ;D) tommy wasnt funny Last and only time i played him in a teamer he was crazy pinging and shouting alot instead of helping a noob out who died quite quick due to being on front and yes that noob was me Yes, when you play with Tommy in his team, his all but funny. I have died in some teamers in tommy team (some was my fault). But last teamer I played with him (4v4 ancient tbg), he was the first of us who died, and then he continued pinging and getting crazy. You telling me that thats what Tommy understand about funny? Then I must explain you that 90% of players (cant talk about MUD) understand funny in a diferent way.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jul 7, 2006 6:17:30 GMT -5
Hombre, if you didn't know: MUD is a funny clan, and tommy is a funny MUD captain. (... omg i hope tommy will not feel offended now. ;D) Nah i think GameTheory is the funniest guild leader here and he has a style ;D
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jul 7, 2006 6:45:40 GMT -5
bleh wonder how hombre can judge me after playing like maybe 2 games with me
and the time i dont try to win a civ game anymore i ll stop playing totaly (I kinda stoped allready)
|
|
|
Post by everybodysdarling on Jul 7, 2006 6:49:38 GMT -5
Hombre, call me elitist, or civ diva ("civa" may be the right expression). And I will feel adulated. It lays in human nature (not only madonnas song) to prefer "old buddies" to play with, than some unknown names, where you don't know what to expect. And it's especcially in teamers where you are dependent on every single player. I don't mind letting some new guys in our "elite teamers", in best case on each team 1 new player. But I completely refuse to play teamers with ladder members who have around 10-20 reports only. It is always a va banque game, and as the team captain totally frustrating if these new players ignore captains advices, because they think they know it better themselves untill they die. Playing some known and established ladders we mostly avoid captains ping orgy (due to noobish planted capitol in anc teanmers), then later disputs and discussions. Play me in a cton, there I have no problems to play with new ladders. Au contraire, it's even nicer to have a Hombre as your neighbour, than tommynt. Oooops I did it again... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Hombre on Jul 7, 2006 6:51:16 GMT -5
bleh wonder how hombre can judge me after playing like maybe 2 games with me and the time i dont try to win a civ game anymore i ll stop playing totaly (I kinda stoped allready) You can check on my stats the number of games each of us have reported to the other, but take care in stats dont appears when we were on same team. We have played more than 10 times. Tommy you cant remember the number of games you have played with me. Most of players remember each game they have played with you. You know why??? the answer is not you are so good player "thats the answer for elitist people". The answer is cause you have pinged all the time and insulting most of us. Nice for you to always try to win and to be an elite player, but please, always remember that elitism can be dangerous, you just need to read some German history, you know what I mean?
|
|