|
Post by Speaker on Feb 5, 2007 15:54:49 GMT -5
Smatt, go win CCC and then we'll talk about who sucks. Last I checked, the score is Speaker 3 - Smatt 0.
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Feb 5, 2007 15:58:18 GMT -5
Smatt, go win CCC and then we'll talk about who sucks. Last I checked, the score is Speaker 3 - Smatt 0. Lol why bother reply Speaker we all know who sucks the most here btw anyone seen Cankaban today ;D
|
|
|
Post by smatt834 on Feb 7, 2007 15:36:56 GMT -5
and winning the CCC would prove what? that my clan and I play civ 24 hours a day? that if my clan would win the CCC i could claim that I won it? and the real score is maybe 3-0 but if this is true i bet every game was inland sea reni....good for you civ God you are the bestest ever. this is the inland sea is overplayed thread, not the I'm speaker and I talk off topic whenever i feel like saying something dumb thread.
|
|
|
Post by icelion on Feb 10, 2007 9:23:59 GMT -5
mirror teamer deserves to be played.Never seen it yet and rely its good game. expaaaand. ice.
|
|
|
Post by knupp on Feb 10, 2007 17:47:33 GMT -5
A few months ago I would have disagreed with you Zhenon...but not now. Practically 98% of ctons are played on inland sea, and they get soooo boring. I refuse to play ctons. It becomes a repetitive game of whoever has the noobest neighbors and can expand the most. Teamers on the other hand I don't even find fun anymore. Unless it's a clan match it comes down to a game of which team has the noob on the front that dies in 15 turns. It seems lately it's been extremely hard, for me at least, to find a game I enjoy. Unfortunately, there are not enough ladder players to say "I won't play with all of these people, all of these maps, or any of these eras." When that happens it become impossible to find a game.
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Feb 12, 2007 2:50:05 GMT -5
I started this thread in late september, but it pretty much still holds true. But sometimes I just need a game... I've even started playing the occasional future believe it or not.
With teamers, you are 100% correct knupp. If it's not Clan vs. Clan, it often becomes a game of who gets the noob on front. With TBG it can be kind of similar, but at least there's more of a chance for others to die too.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Feb 12, 2007 8:44:53 GMT -5
getting a less able player on the front of a teamer is part of the package, there is not really much you can do about it. I find playing with the same players game in game our awfully boring. This is why i often try to play with a good mix of players.
Its true teamers cost unbelieve amount of reports, when you personally have done nothing wrong. There are many players that have high 50's or low 60's win %, who are very strong players, also average players with big win %'s. But i think the key i knowing whose good and who isnt and just use stats as a very rough indication for unknown players.
IMO all the the decent(not even good) players could easily have 70%+ win if they play only ctons and 1v1's.
So basiclly what im saying is, you cant be put off teamers because new players die, although it can be fustrating, rest assured win% stats are fairly meaningless in most cases(but maybe not all).
Back to the original post, although i only get the chance to play once a week, i think more people are trying new maps, but i could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Feb 12, 2007 10:54:56 GMT -5
I have asked for the ability to "place" players in team games for the next XP, probability of success is unknown but atleast it's on the list. If this does happen it should revitalize random team games, I'm hoping.
CS
|
|
|
Post by lporiginalg on Feb 15, 2007 22:22:47 GMT -5
all i know is i like it better than tbg
but i've played lots of ladder games on great_plains, highlands, oasis, ice_age and am always happy to play lots more when I can fill the rooms.
|
|
redphoenix
Warrior
CCCAC Representative
Posts: 253
|
Post by redphoenix on Feb 16, 2007 15:34:01 GMT -5
I refuse to play a cton on inland sea regular, cylindrical is ok. I like any other map better than inland sea really. I guess IL sea is ok sometimes for some games, but never for CTON. The game needs some randomness, like zhenon put it. I want to have sometimes a harder game, sometimes easier. Sometimes in the middle. Nevre to know what you need to do to win etc. Changing game situations, pre-conditions. Multiple fronts, possibility to attack most enemies or be attacked by them. But I don't play civ just to build, like some I want some variety. Sometimes I like to build too, sometimes attack, sometimes its fun to try to survive with a very bad position/start.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad on Feb 16, 2007 22:40:52 GMT -5
pangea would be the only reasonable other map
|
|
|
Post by ironclad on Feb 16, 2007 22:41:36 GMT -5
they should make the maps exactly like in civ3, i dont know why they changed it with this crap . I still like ils teamers though !
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Feb 18, 2007 7:51:32 GMT -5
some people ll never change their behaviour - just ignore em
|
|
nicoya1
Warrior
Tourney Director
C4PTD
Posts: 253
|
Post by nicoya1 on Feb 18, 2007 23:27:56 GMT -5
it would be nice to have more of that map randomise that was in civ3. you never knew exactly what the map you were going to play was going to look like
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Feb 19, 2007 2:40:10 GMT -5
Balanced map is the good version of Pangaea, it's very similar to civ3
|
|
|
Post by grimarch on Feb 19, 2007 5:07:56 GMT -5
Well I played a fantastic 3v3 on Hub Medi. Good game, especially in the fact that one player left half way through and left his young daughter playing !!!
We still won....!
Grim
What i am saying is try Medi Hub its fun.....!
|
|