|
Post by prettyhatemachine on Mar 27, 2007 2:19:35 GMT -5
Ok. I am not a man of few words so lets set fire to the bush.
We need new ladder game type. I have the one u r all wanting but dont know it so bare with me here as will take me a long time to type this pretty speech in pretty grammar cos noone is following my point last time i lay for you.
WHY?: We's all familiar with CTON. They all play much the same. It's all about slavery. Not enough bonus that you get to see copper and can chop. Chop everything is best as health is irrelevent 95% of time. Huts give a mountain of gold, decent start army is free to maintain and no sacrifice, expansion has so little cost that noone values Organised making random civs have an exxagerated impact.
How's this Happen?: Cos ladder players are, on average, all playing in personal skill terms at Emporer level now but we are still CTONing on Noble. It's playing with a stupid handicap bonus meant for n00bs starting out at Civ4. It made sense for Noble level to be default for ladder a year ago, but that time has long since passed. It's liken we all played Golf together and teed off from the children's marker, then bitched wondering why every hole is a par 2, or allowing steroids at the Olympics. Chinese swimmers are no so pretty, the time has come to clean the drug culture out of ladder!
What's the difference between Noble and Emporer?: 1) Happiness: +5 on Noble vs +3 on Emporer (those 2 make slavery what it is for experts playing with a handicap. The main reason n00bs like MGT do so well is because their game involves exploiting this handicap to it's extreme. And you have to milk it to get the most out of your game, drastically limiting the options of play as extreme slaving is flat uber-ultra-overpowered for current skill level of ladder playing community (only).
2) Health: +3 on Noble vs +1 on Emporer (no more free lube. chop your trees and you will feel the greenies dildo)
3) Free Units: Noble 8 vs Emporer 3. Early army (typically slaved) now becomes a strategic decision as it will cost you 20-30% research.
4) Research costs 20% more and units cost 30% more.
5) Distance from Capital maintenance increases from 75% to 95%; Number of cities maintenance increases from 70% to 90%; Maximum number of cities maintenance increase from 5 to 7; civic upkeep costs handicap bonus removed taking it from 80% to 100%; and inflation raises from 90 to 100. (Effect of all those combined being that rampant expansion is significantly more expensive, even crippling, requiring more strategic thought, and Organised trait has noticably improved).
6) Odds of getting high gold from huts drops from 15% to 5% while odds of getting low gold increase from 20% to 25%. Odds of getting barbarians increase from 15% to 30%.
Pretty's Proposal Wake up and smell the wheelchair ramps u r all using. Stand up on your own feet cos they may take our rides, but they can never take our Frrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeedddomm.
Start hosting ladder games identified as Ladder PEP or PEP Ladder. PEP indicates game is a cton BUT at Emporer level. Or PEP Teamer.
End slavery forever! Host a PEP game today!
One more thing. PEP Teamers solve the whining about n00bs in teamers. In a PEP Teamer everyone is on Emporer by default, but if you got an odd number of n00bs, you put the n00bs on lower level. Monarch is enough advantage for your average ladder level n00b (1 extra happiness, health, and slight edge across the board edge of 5-10%), but for really serious n00bs you let them play Noble to balance the teams
i.e. if 4 GOD players were playing 4 MUD players the MUDs whine about having all n00bs on their team so you'd let the MUD players play on Monarch. And if GOD was playing vs ..A.. you'd obviously have to set them girl thingys as Noble so game can be balanced.
I'm Sexy, I'm cute, I'm popular to boot! Gooooooooo GOD Pretty!
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Mar 27, 2007 5:55:58 GMT -5
CTON are boring enough as it is without the added frustration of not being able to salve, to speed some stuff up.
health/happiness resources are powerful already, but if the difficulty was increased it would make it even more powerful. If someone has ivory, furs, gold, they would be unaffected by the change in difficulty level. (same applies for someone with rice, wheat, etc). Something like rice or corn gives a 20-something% increase in health (with gran), on emp it would give almost 40%!!!
Lastly, CTON attacks are few and far between, this is with slaving and not needing too much stuff for garrison. If you had to keep half your army in your cites to keep people happy, you might aswell make it always peace. Rushes are damaging to growth and infrastructure already... on emperor level ... dont even think about it.
This wouldnt make the games more fun, just more frustrating, with less options.
But i do agree with you, everyone is playing them the same(obviously some play it better then others - but the basic strategy is the same), this is not because of the difficulty level its because the game has been out for 18 months!!! Even the slow learners are getting there slowly but surely.
Increased difficulty is for SP IMO, where the comp basically cheats, so you have to play better.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Mar 27, 2007 6:21:40 GMT -5
rofl Dude ill play you diety any settings you like and slaughter you accross the board.... Unfortunatly people are so weak in this game that an emperor or higher cton would too similar to throwing a slow in a tornado... Why name it a PEP CTON when it might as well be called a R2MGT CTON. GJ on your post, it was actually organized clean enough to be readable, but next time use the format on something that has a shot of going forward
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Mar 27, 2007 6:43:35 GMT -5
Tony and MGT get the greenie dildo.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
It's good that pretty is thinking hard about how to make the game more interesting. This is a nice attempt to "refresh" the competition.
How about continuing to play at Noble but with no goody huts and outlawing Slavery?
Chinese Swimmers?
|
|
|
Post by prettyhatemachine on Mar 27, 2007 11:24:55 GMT -5
OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH IM FURIOUS!1!!
DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG THIS TOOK ME TO WRITE!!! I deserve win booker prize for this novel.
It dont kill slavery, that is just prose. It makes slavery whats its meant to be, merely one good strategic option, but you cant slaving army after army and every building you need for the entire game is all. It opens up other strategies as viable instead of make only one worth pursuing.
It would be frustrating at 1st cos alls is so used to teeing off from the womans tee. In long run it opens up new strats. Ye after 1 years we all play the same cos on noble there is only 1 best strat and a few best civs and we all know em. I handicap myself every game now just to save from falling asleep. All we r doing is go through the motions. I call this AoK virus. Every game Arabia map, every player Huns or Mongols, every worker has his task laid out, win goes to he who can stay awake the longest. Im serious!!
People dont even bother trying or using tactics anymore. Anyone noticed? I got yelled at ceaslessly by polynoob yesterday for bring a diversionary army round back cos it was deviation from the motions of egypt - slave chariots, send to front, slave chariots send to front, repeat ad nauseum till either batter them down (who also going through same motions) or it dont where you can blame your teammates for the loss.
Dont anyone else consider that we all now up to same point that we mostly all go through the exact same motions. Do you get that it reduces the game to be enmorously luck dependant, especially teamers. Is these two facts really what you enjoy about civ4?!?
Man, you know what it reminds me of. Monopoly. U play Monopoly with n00bs and they are saving up for mayfair and bla. Once everyone 'gets it', that you gotta buy everything then monopoly transforms and it comes down to luck cos that is the one best strat. Then you go buy chess, but not enough pieces. Like playing Ren Inland. So then u go buy a PC and get Civ and open the game up. Then you go and convert civ to Monopoly and come full circle so u can shut your brain back down and flip a coin to see which team wins.
And i dont care about name. Call it r2mgt then. I was trying to be witty but am my stoopidest when trying to be funny. just admit u have drug habit. u r addicted to your slavery. denial. its not just a river in egypt. seek help man. let pretty help you. its all gonna be ok.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad on Mar 27, 2007 12:40:47 GMT -5
Maybe after mgt can score points that ..0.. in CCC. obviosuly slavery isn't working for him .
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Mar 27, 2007 14:56:12 GMT -5
push it UP a notch? they'll never do it, lol what they REALLY want and what would take away MOST of their complaints about C4 in general is to play on settler level just like C3, you can pop not only tech, but settlers and workers quicker tech (they all complain about that) - which would limit the SUPERSTRONG UNITS like cats, cossaks etc that "they" always complain about only "superstrong" for a limited time because they'd tech past that quicker cheaper unit costs (another big complaint) and of course - less city/civ "unhappiness" I like playing at higher levels but what "they" truly want is settler level - but they won't admit it, lol. "they" don't want to be a "wuss at settler level" - they'd rather be a "wuss whiner" no difference to me.
|
|
|
Post by arthursrodrigues on Mar 27, 2007 19:20:19 GMT -5
AY for PHM!
|
|
|
Post by longhorn on Mar 27, 2007 20:21:15 GMT -5
I have been crusading for the same thing PHM! You are absolutely right. Ladder games should be played NO LOWER than Monarch, EVER, and higher than that!
He's right. The slave without consequences has killed every single other strategy and possibility and (quite frankly) made games boring as cattle manure. Every single game is the same, slave huge stack- BORING BORING BORING!
I fully support higher difficulty ladder games! Great suggestion PHM!
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Mar 27, 2007 21:24:38 GMT -5
Not a great idea to me. Just slow the game down and make it boring. You would have to add 50 turns to the game to get the same expansion/score. Not sure why slowing game down equal more excitement to you. It going to equal less expansion, less units, less war, and less excitement to me.
And what tony said is true. It makes good land even more valuable, which means more luck in game, depending on the land you get.
The challenge of ladder is playing against other human players with overall game encompassing strategies and tricks. Not trying to beat the harsh frown/mucks and maintenance cost that high difficulty brings.
But host it and see who comes. If I had time for a 180 turn to epic game, I would try it.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad on Mar 27, 2007 22:59:07 GMT -5
That is not the problem, trying playing a map BESIDES inland sea. You will see maps like fractal doesnt have one food resource or even 2 per city. Food resources are more rare, takes way more skill to play. Any mindless person can farm a plain or make a pasture. But to be able to balance "normal" land, I think that is where true skill comes in play. As far as I see it the game can become luck dependant on food resources on maps like inland sea; leaving the more skilled player who can play without uber land on the same level. Knowing when to slave, when not to slave, and just more indept strategy comes into play when food resources arent littered around cities. Why grow your city, only concentrate on salving those 2-3 food resources, its way more productive .. Basically you need a dose of fractal or pangea. Not the "easy mode" Inland Sea map. Everyone likes the "easy mod" like you said, so I doubt people will a map like fractal or pangea often. So in short too much food in map, just makes game too easy and unbalanced. Would also like to see settlers cost same in anc, but more or same in future. No clue why its the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by tamijo on Mar 28, 2007 0:06:40 GMT -5
New stuff is allways great, why not try it our. Im ready To balance the resource issue, maby sometimes on C4F maps.
|
|
|
Post by italiano on Mar 28, 2007 13:15:51 GMT -5
lol longhorn u can barely play noble .....And PHM as much as I usually disagree with u, u are right. I say step up the cton difficulty and make the game a bit more challenging....I have played tons of ctons where i fall asleep at how bored i am......Maybe sum1 should develop a modded civ 4 cton game...such as maybe 8 people on a duel map...
|
|
|
Post by knupp on Mar 28, 2007 14:03:13 GMT -5
ROFL. Yes slaving has no consequences at all... How come it is always the people who never use slavery who are saying that? Probably the same people that are getting killed by somebodies slave unpromoted chariot (noobie) strat. Give me a break. If you slave too much you kill your MFG, crop yeild, and gnp. Not to mention you'll have so many unhappy citizens you won't be getting anything accomplished when you stop slaving. Saying slavery has no consequences is ignorant. Of course somebody who slaves smart and doesn't "slave themself retar-ded" (as we like to say) isn't going to get hurt as much, but then again you should be slaving too. Slaving is part of the game, if you don't know how to use it then I would suggest not playing MP until you learn the basics of civ. Either way there is no set definite settings you have to play. Play whatever you want and I really don't care. However I think it's pretty useless to change game difficulty to emperor just because you can't deal with somebody slaving. Maybe you should stop working those unimproved tiles and slave every once in a while too?
|
|
|
Post by cryptococcus on Mar 28, 2007 14:48:29 GMT -5
Most of the time your post make some sort of sense Knupp, but not this one. All of the time your posts disagree with anyone who is not Ray. Actually I'm sick of reading your posts like you are some sort of CIV GOD. Unfortuanately, this one pisses me off more than other's for the simple fact that PHM understands the game more than you. Just play civ and stfu when other's post and all you have to add is "your wrong and I don't have any real basis why besides that I think I'm civ GOD".
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Mar 28, 2007 14:51:20 GMT -5
you shouldn't hide and cover your true feelings like that - you should be more open and say/post exactly what's on your mind.
|
|
|
Post by longhorn on Mar 28, 2007 15:33:53 GMT -5
However I think it's pretty useless to change game difficulty to emperor just because you can't deal with somebody slaving. You are totally off base here as PHM does have a darn good idea of whats going on here and explained it quite well. You can ask other sharp players like BigBen, who can help you understand the facts. I myself would play more single player, but can't for the life of me get the AI's to do the re-tard-ed SLAVE ONLY strategy. But I think I understand the real fear, if you weren't allowed to continue slaving 'without REAL consequence', you would simply become an ordinary civ player once again. Or maybe u truly do like the slave a CAT stack of doom strategy, maybe after approximately a year of being able to win with NO OTHER strategy but this- you think games are still fun. Ah well- your just another one who thinks every thing I like is too long a game, on too big of a map with too many different options strategies and choices. I concede that I am in the minority on this issue, just like you are about your TBG modern event without water! I still luv ya anyways Noob farmer! -lh
|
|
|
Post by knupp on Mar 28, 2007 15:52:43 GMT -5
Most of the time your post make some sort of sense Knupp, but not this one. All of the time your posts disagree with anyone who is not Ray. Actually I'm sick of reading your posts like you are some sort of CIV GOD. Unfortuanately, this one pisses me off more than other's for the simple fact that PHM understands the game more than you. Just play civ and stfu when other's post and all you have to add is "your wrong and I don't have any real basis why besides that I think I'm civ GOD". That's 100% untrue. While a lot of times I do agree with my clan mates that's usually not the case. You can come on TS and hear me debate with other RaY's on which strat is better than the other. Often times I find I don't agree with them more than I do agree with them (especially on early era strategies, where slaving seems to be more important). Whether PHM understands the game more than I, I can't say I disagree with you. I've never stayed up late reading the civolopedia, studied game mechanics, or crunched numbers. I play how I want, when I want to, and follow my gut instinct in games. I'm a Civ God? Really Crypto? Please find one post of mine where I ever said I was better than another player or everybody else. Maybe you are confusing me with somebody else? I think you are mad because I have strong opinions, and I don't usually back down from my opinions unless I am actually 100% proven wrong. This kind of crap you just posted is the exact crap I suggested CS to get rid of in another thread a couple days ago. I posted my opinion. That being I don't like the idea of changing all games to emperor because some people don't like slaving, or don't like that there isn't such harsh punishments for slaving. You post back posting some crap about how I think I'm better than everybody else and that I'm wrong... Now back to the issue...since you seem to really want me to back up my opinion. Noble is not some setting for noobs. Noble is the settings that completely evens the starting field for both the AI and the human player. Lower than noble, the Human player gets bonuses. Higher than noble, the human gets handicaps and the AI gets bonuses. So PHM's comment about Noble being for noobs is untrue. A problem with switching to emperor due to the fact that Slaving might be overpowered is that (especially in a cton) when a player leaves or quits it's AI is going to get huge bonuses. Free upgrades, more gold, more units, free buildings blah blah blah. Tell me why it is fair if the guy next to me quits and the AI then upgrades all of it's units and suddenly goes from the lowest power to highest? Another reason I don't like emperor difficulty in cton's is because of the luck factor in civ. It's hard enough to come back from loosing a bunch or odds that you shouldn't have lost, or getting horrible land. Now in emperor level the person who gets the happiness resources has a gigantic lead above everybody else. They can get their cities up to size 8, while I'm still stuck with a size 4 capital, and my other cities are size 3. Yea that sounds like lots of fun, especially combined with the fact that everybody, except for the person who got the resources, is going to be gnping and mfging slower due to smaller cities. Cton's are already hard to attack. If you go way out of your way to kill people you will lag behind in tech. This suggestion to change to emperor to limit slaving will KILL attacking strategies. If you want to play a gnp/resource gathering fest go ahead. I'll pass.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Mar 28, 2007 15:54:46 GMT -5
I happen to agree with a lot of what Knupp is saying here, does that make me an elitist CIV GOD as well? Maybe he wasn't as eloquent as he should have been, but I think he is still tilting because Goggy didn't send him enough units the other night. Oh well. In my opinion, Slavery, like most everything else in this game, is best used in moderation. If you build all farms and slave like crazy, you're going to have no GNP and no MFG -- that army you got better get a kill or you're screwed. If you build all cottages and no farms, you won't have enough MFG to counter an attack, whether it was built by slavery, traditional MFG, or a combination. Changing the difficulty level a bit surely would weaken slavery. However, as Necro said, with all the other changes that would come along with it you'd need to play 50 extra turns just to get the same score and tech path. Do you really want to play a 200 turn Ren game to get to Rifles? I'd rather deal with the slave rush and counter with Cavs and Rifles 50 turns into the game like we did the other night . There are a lot of neat things you can do in this game if you are willing to open your mind to new and alternate strategies. Getting locked in on one method of gameplay and doing the same thing over and over again ... in the end, now that truly is retar-ded.
|
|
|
Post by knupp on Mar 28, 2007 16:00:16 GMT -5
Once again somebody posts without having an idea of what they are talking about. LH when exactly was the last time you played a game with me? When exactly did I ever say I didn't like the games you like to play? I could care less what you play. Please tell me when I have ever relied solely on slaving to be a good player. To put down my modesty for just a second (and kind of proving Crypto right in this, and only this post) I really don't need to slave 100 chariots 30 turns into the game to kill you. Sure I use slavery, for workers, settlers, some units in bad production cities. But I'm not one of those fools who slaves himself tarded. Honestly if this was such a huge problem (slavery being overpowered) it would have been mentioned way before this thread. I think what people are seeing is that some fools just don't know the basics of the game. They insist on slaving until all their cities are size 1 and then coming to kill you. Those players would rather kill somebody and finish second to last in a cton, then building up and finishing first. I agree with PHM, that some people are just getting ridiculous and out of control with this strategy. But I really don't believe that a ladder-wide movement to emperor strategy is worth it. A good player can stop a "slave-myself-tarded" strategy with a good buildup and a little bit of slavery himself.
|
|