|
Post by Avogadro on Aug 14, 2006 0:35:27 GMT -5
Sorry gang, As most of you know I am both a civ3players and civ4players administrator. I have found in the past 6 months that I have become more and more lured toward my old civ3 community. I thank the admin board to have given me the opportunity to help start this ladder with them. Believe me CS and his boys and gals put in alot of hours into offering you all a decent place to play to test your skills and offers a haven where people do not quit games on you when you are on a roll. The ladder IS civ mp, no more no less. Open games cannot compare in caliber to the skills you ladderites possess. I am however finding this community to be becoming more and more polarized these issues of "noobs" vs "vets" is simply well....I say childish. I am rapidly approaching 8000 ladder matches half of which were teamers of my 3000 loses I am sure I can attribute a good chunk of them to being let down in a teamer. So what? I say GG, make my reports and treat the person who messed up with dignity. Guess what me being kind to these noobs who don't have a clue has allowed me to forge many strong friendships. Instead of chasing them away, try to embrace them as they represent the vets of tomorrow. Without them liking, integrating and learning from you great players then the ladder will be doomed. The non content will leave and you will be left with a core bunch of players say...100-150 with whom you will be stuck playing against for the next 3 years. Strength is in numbers. I remember being a noob died first 3 cton games. Then a player "cton" is her name, invited me into an ancient 4v4 teamer. Turn 48 I get hit with 35 upgraded gallics and BOOOM game over. I was embarrased and sure they would never let me play again. Next night, guess what? I get invited into same game. Died again Third night I live but my score is pitiful, I have 2 cities and no longer have any workers left by games end. I start reading forums, asking vets opening sequences to games such as warrior warrior settler warrior granary or warrior granary warrior settler warrior settler or make warrior in 3 turns finish chopping for granary turn 4, pop rush grain so that by turn 5 you got grain warrior and pop 1 (Aztecs even better get no warrior but can have barracks and granary by turn 5) Sigh those were the days, forums articles, One clan saying this is the best way, other clan saying no try this way, almost EVERYONE who wanted to learn got good real fast. Took me 1.5 years but I climbed that ladder all the way to the top, I was never the best civer by any means but I beat some tough competition getting to the top. If you didn't kill me by turn 30 well....you were likely in trouble. Why am I sharing all this? Because I do not find this community to have the same sense of "brotherhood" "community" and because of this I am stepping down as administrator. There as been a few additions lately to the board and I feel if I leave now...I will be leaving CS/SPM/Magzi and the gang in good hands. I'll come back once a month or so to get my back-side whipped and if any of you get nostalgic you can always some visit me in gs conquests room where I will gladly trounce you in a game of Quick civ, or even staright ancient 90 turns. I was told Red Pheonix made a bigger stack then my 239 Maya horses in 90 turn game using Iroq but I am yet to have seen those game saves Don't think anyone will touch my 147 Gaelic's without upgrade gold from teammates ;D And one thing is for sure no one will ever catch me in the number of times a player can die within first 15 turns, I still die about 1game out of 5 in this fashion Anyways best of luck to all clans, may you forge friends you can enjoy playing with for years and please give the noob a shot. If I come back, I will be a noob myself...
|
|
|
Post by decepticon on Aug 14, 2006 0:55:04 GMT -5
Well said Avo. I think you hit dead on the same reason I've said what I've said. However you worded it in a much clearer and more acceptable fashion. Thank You. Good luck. (I've had civ3 and all expansions since day 1..... maybe i try it online......hhmmm)
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Aug 14, 2006 2:48:41 GMT -5
I don't see how you can say the the CIV 3 community is any better in regards to not letting noobs into a teamer. I went back to play a future c3c teamer while back and they didn't want to let me play just because I preferred demo over fascism. I only got in after I convince them I was a player in the past.
If it were up to me teamer would be first come first serve and shuffle teams with all random civs and lets gamble baby. That would be the most exciting way to play, imo, and would separate the men from the boys, or should i say cry babies.
I think you just prefer the c3c game better(relive the glory days) is the main reason for this move. And I agree that many of the aspects of c3c were better but i also went back to play a c3c ancient and man was that slow and boring by comparison to CIV. If you don't have good land your sunk. It takes like 11 turns to chop a jungle and 5 or 7 for a forest I think.
|
|
|
Post by monoha on Aug 14, 2006 5:11:07 GMT -5
I don't see how you can say the the CIV 3 community is any better in regards to not letting noobs into a teamer. I went back to play a future c3c teamer while back and they didn't want to let me play just because I preferred demo over fascism. I only got in after I convince them I was a player in the past. hmm, u are talking about future players - future players in c3c aren't very nice to ppl that don't play future everyday (some of them only wants experienced players playing with them ) In almost every anc teamers in civ3 u will see noobs and vets play alot togehter - its great fun (when I play teamers, then some ppl see me as a noob ;D, some as a vet ) See ya in civ3 land ;D
|
|
|
Post by Magzi on Aug 14, 2006 7:11:05 GMT -5
All the Best Avo....................I'll still come and fight you sometimes over in civ 3 land ....................never got the hang of winning though!
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Aug 14, 2006 7:13:29 GMT -5
bleh Avo, every1 who played both games know that community was better in civ3, so what. It s even more unplayable from technical side imo.
I also agree that 1 big difference between both communities is that in civ3 players allways tried hard to improve, and better palyer shared their knowledge. I made several attemps do increase overall skill level, I play lot of 1-1 s which got mainly the reason to see what opponent does and help him afetrwards to avoid his mistakes and I wrote several articles, espacially how to build up - as fast buildup is for sure my biggest strength. But here are too many player around who think that they are the best allready and just dont listen to advice, but complain about pinging or whatever. It s just too frustrating to SEE people doing same mistakes again and again. While others getting beaten accuse cheating, map or whatever. Why got MUD clan double score of 2nd clan? Cause we constantly improve our game, share knowledge and try to learn from mistakes. Sadly I see few other players around doing same.
Another issue is just skill differences, when I started playing civ3 the overall skill was so high, that i had huge problem to compete after playing lot of SP for 2 years. Now people want join top level teamers who never played SP at all and maybe just a bunch of ctons/open games, sure they play weak and die.
Another real problem which ll never be solved is the teamplay of civ4, teamplay is so important, much more important then in civ3 where 1 player who just built a huge stack could takje out whole opp team on his own if he had a good day. But now having 1 weak player or having 1 teammate die is usually just game over. Gameplay is so defence orientated that it s just close to impossible to come back from a teammate loss, so sure people get angry on teammates dying.
Then comes last point .. civ3 was a better more skill involving game, civ4 cutted so much of micro and every patch which comes out cuts even more micro. WL is hell for micro players, now u cant even micro chops anymore, this makes it even harder for a good players to make up a teammate loss.
In fact I m a bit done with game, only thing which keeps me here are my MUD clanmates, guess u found no good clan with friends here yet so I understand u very well to leave us Avo.
WoW is the most bugfree game which was ever made on plant earth, got great graphik and great gameplay, maybe i m lost there soon ....
oh ya take care, goodbye and greetings to all guys around there, espacially people from GC, AWP and MAD
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 14, 2006 7:30:26 GMT -5
Take Care Avo, and stop by here once in a while. I'm not going to go into a long discussion of the two communities because that is really a apples and oranges comparision, since we are comparing C3P at 3.5 years to C4P at 8 months And there are only a very few of us that would remember Civ3PTW at 8 months Cheers CS
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Aug 14, 2006 7:36:01 GMT -5
i dont think its the people but the game it self, anyone that played C3C MP would say it is a way superior game. Maybe as admin you were almost forced to like it!
CIV 4 is VERY much geard towards building up and beating your enermy long term, by getting better gnp/mfg etc. Even the way the era starts are designed, with lots of setters and workers, trying to replicate an epic at that piont in the game. The excitment of hitting without the enermy seeing is gone, clever sneaky attacks are a think of the past. Ship attacks are only really possible around industrial era! This makes like 70% of games pretty much the same, in terms of what you build, how you move your units and generally how you play.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Aug 14, 2006 8:18:52 GMT -5
The fact that the two games are somewhat different does not explain to me why the "personalities" of the two ladders are in such contrast.
It seems to me that there is a sharp difference in maturity level between the players on the two ladders. I don't have an explanation for this. Rank-hording and rank-hounding are much more pronounced on the CIV4 ladder. They are practically nonexistent now on the C3C ladder.
|
|
|
Post by Lestat on Aug 14, 2006 11:52:54 GMT -5
Negative. U talking about bunch of vets which split ladder and created new one with name VETS. This name refusing any notion for word NOOB. Now they are part of c3c community and they playing with noobs Dont be ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by SirPartyMan on Aug 14, 2006 12:21:15 GMT -5
As one of the few people who regularly play games in both ladders - I find this discussion interesting, for obvious reasons.
The C3P group is older more established of course. And the games are different. The nature of team play is quite different indeed.
In both ladders, we have people who are helpful to noobs and people who aren't. In both ladders, we have problems/issues due to game bugs and deficiencies.
Overall, I think the ladder is more ubiquitous in CIV3 (majority of games played are ladder) than in CIV4 (where we are still a minority). We need to explain to new players the advantages of ladder play (less quitting, stupidity, etc.).
At first the two ladder admin boards were almost identical, but now they are diverging as most people are favoring one game or the other.
Thanks, Avo for all your help here with CIV4. I'm glad you'll still be helping us with CIV3.
Best, SPM
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 14, 2006 12:56:54 GMT -5
The fact that the two games are somewhat different does not explain to me why the "personalities" of the two ladders are in such contrast. It seems to me that there is a sharp difference in maturity level between the players on the two ladders. I don't have an explanation for this. Rank-hording and rank-hounding are much more pronounced on the CIV4 ladder. They are practically nonexistent now on the C3C ladder. Well I think that there are two factors that have made C4P different than C3P: 1. C3P is 3.5 years old and the vet to n00b ratio is heavily toward's the vets. Were as C4P is 8 months old, and likely no one can really call our selfes vets although we do now have a core group of players that we are leaning on now. 2. C3P has about 300 active players, which while they very active, and C3P is a vibrant commuity still, it is a very solid old membership. Civ4 and Warlords are very successful commercial games, and Firaxis was succcessful in stealing some of the RTS crowd to a TBS game, therefore we have a constant influx of new players and are constantly struggling to educate these new player in the ladder culture, and rules etc. We are only now at the point that we are able to appoint new C4P players as Admins knowing they have proven themselves in the community as leaders. I don't think C4P will ever be a clone of C3P, but after a year or two we certainly will be a mature organization and should have develped a character of our own. CS
|
|
|
Post by knupp on Aug 14, 2006 13:47:56 GMT -5
Personally I can never understand the argument people put on for rank hoarding. There is no rank hoarding. I came from cfc and rb. Both civ4 single player communities. I played succesion games and sp tourneys. Then one day somebody from RB (speaker) says hey lets get an MP game going. So I start playing some MP. Pretty soon I'm on the ladder. I was just some random noob playing ctons. Pretty soon I was getting let into teamers. I was still horrible at the game. The agressive building up and killing in MP is nothing like the AI. But I did something I don't see other noobs doing now. Some noobs will get in a ren teamer and build a barracks or forge first while improving his land without chopping workers or even chopping his buildings. When I joined ren teamers I would follow the direction of my teammates. They'd all give me suggestions on what to do. They made me better. I even have to admit that weaksauce through all his damn pinging every second made me a better player. The community isn't missing any "brotherhood." What the community is lacking is people who will join a teamer and follow the direction of his teammates. A person who will listen. Not somebody who will completely ignore you or flip out saying "DONT TELL ME HOW TO PLAY NOOB." I'll gladly let in anybody into any games I host if they are willing to learn and willing to get better at the game. We all have a hell of a lot to learn about this game. It's going to be hard for the community to grow when only 50 people are trying to get better. PS. I also have to include that I think I was a noob playing reni teamers for a good 3 months. Good enough to play but still a noob not really learning much from each game. Somehow I ended up playing a test game with a bunch of guys from RaY and soon after I was in the clan. That is when my growth in the game started. That was when I truly started to understand how things worked. I suggest anybody who is trying to get better at the game to find a bunch of good people who are trying to do the same thing. Start playing with them. Join a clan or form your own. Maybe clans should start bringing noobs under their wings one or two at a time and teach them how to play. After all they can't all go to KC..
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Aug 14, 2006 13:55:59 GMT -5
Let's take off our Rose-Tinted glasses when comparing C3P to C4P. I can speak from a lot experience on both ladders.
|
|
|
Post by tamijo on Aug 14, 2006 14:43:23 GMT -5
Everyone (im not talking about this tread but you know how many) is trying to explain what is wrong. I dont get it. ;D Nothing is wrong, i love warlords, i love playing in a ladder with no quitters, i love the fact that 95% off the people i'we been lucky enough to beat, have reported to me within a few hours, i love to chat with new people in lobby explaining them all the good stuf about CIV4PLAYERS, the things you can pick up in the strat. forum, the fact that someone (tkx conq and others) are setting up turnaments in there spare time, to make us happy, keeping them from playing for hours !, i love the fact that i can play with people from aronud the world, and kinda get to know a few off them. If you ask questions on forum nice people help you, tec. stuff too. The only downside is that it makes me realize that life is too short, and i have too little time to improve my game. Right now im 300 km from home in a cheap hotel, job issue, and i cant play all you wonderfull ladder players. High rank or low rank, specialist or worst-ever i love the fact that we have this. Its a new far better Computer i'we got, since i got civ4 and started on the ladder. NB.: i checked this by looking up on daily results : Some Top ten player are infact playing against new people, and players with no skill or win%, so if strong (or lucky) enough, everyone can climb to the top. Even though i think new players are better off with less ambition to start with.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Aug 14, 2006 15:36:00 GMT -5
Let's take off our Rose-Tinted glasses when comparing C3P to C4P. I can speak from a lot experience on both ladders. I assume you mean that people always see the good points about the past(C3P) and tend to forget about all the problems? If so I agree. How many real imposter problems do we have on C4P? Pretty dam few, and none if you watch the spelling of names. Imposters almost killed C3P at one point. And this is just but one issue, I'm not to happy with the bugs that Civ4 had on release, but if we take a look back at PTW and C3C I think we still raised the bar a fair bit.... I'll always remmber fondly my time playing with the great players and friends in C3P but lets not forget that C3C really was a poor MP game despite our efforts to over come the problems. CS
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Aug 14, 2006 19:01:14 GMT -5
the killcrash bug was in fact so bad - looking back i dont see how we could stand it
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Aug 14, 2006 23:29:15 GMT -5
Doesn't CIV 4 have a kill crash bug also. They just postponed it till the dead guy exits the game, and it now morphed into the retire/freeze bug.
|
|
|
Post by coloneltreize on Aug 15, 2006 17:15:21 GMT -5
I think Avo, Decepticon, whiplash, myself and many others agree in our assessment of the maturity level of the Civ 4 Ladder's players. But then again, I have never visited the Civ3 Ladder or any other ladder so I cannot make an accurate comparison. I consider myself a noob considering that Civ 4 is the first civ game I've played, so take the following with a grain of salt. My philosophy is that anyone who wants to be good can become good at the game if they can take enough time to consider all their decisions carefully each and every turn. But not all Ladder games allow this.CS agrees that the Civ 3 Ladder is more mature because they have been around much longer. Maybe he is right and that we just need more time. Since this Ladder is so young, no one can yet call him- or herself a veteran. Therefore, in teamers, it is presumption of the highest order for one player to say that his or her teammate should listen to them only. Teams should be just that: a group effort. If I am playing on a team and a teammate gives me advice, I will listen, and I will take the advice if it makes sense. That said, if there is a captain, everyone should listen to that player because leadership is necessary. The chain of command of who is the boss should be clearly established and agreed upon before play. In ctons, there is no reason not to let a percieved "noob" play your game. At the very least, you can say you had yourself a swift victory against an easy opponent. ;D That said, one way to tactfully reject a percieved "noob" without lying is to say, "It would be dishonorable for someone/people of my/our rank to beat up on you." I think people generally listen to your opinion more if you are an Admin. However, I would not want to become an Admin for that reason, or any reason. Besides, everyone knows that I open my big mouth way too much to be seen as mature enough to be recruited. I am zealous to a fault, but that is only due to my love of the fact that this community even exists. That said, I envy you, Avo, for having the clout to be able to raise the issues many of us had while being able to stay above the scorn of others yourself. Avo, I think it is necessary for a player with your beliefs about "community" to remain an Admin and set an example for everyone. At the same time, I respect your decision to leave, and I don't blame you at all for it. In closing, best of luck to you, Avo, in all your endeavors. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Aug 15, 2006 17:34:15 GMT -5
Shouldn't it be in with the old and out with the new if you're going back to Civ3 from Civ4? In all seriousness, thanks for all your hard work Avogadro!
|
|