|
Post by MookieNJ on Jul 26, 2006 11:30:19 GMT -5
In the end, you're really going to love Warlords. The Great People names are randomized throughout the game -- Homer is no longer necessarily the first GA and Imhotep is no longer necessarily the first GE .
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jul 26, 2006 2:06:41 GMT -5
Although, to reply to your post, the Great People are just part of the whole Civilization experience. You control history and the outcome of the game. It reflects history, but doesn't necessarily mirror it depending on your choices and those of your opponents. Come on, George Washington is the leader of the Americans at the start of the game and America doesn't even exist yet ... it's just a game .
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jul 26, 2006 2:04:24 GMT -5
Jesus Christ and Muhammad Ali my be nice adds to the Prophet list as well, considering one founded Christianity and the other Islam. Um... are you sure about that? Quote of the year!
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jul 23, 2006 12:18:04 GMT -5
1. how is warlord expansion in terms of new content? are the new units/civics/leaders good? Check Elledge's CFC link, they have the complete rundown on all the released info. My opinion on the new stuff? It will be fun to see how ladder players use and abuse the new Civilizations, Unique Buildings and the Great General. As far as I know, they haven't released any information either way about some of the balance issues. Same as number 2 ... but with Warlords shipping tomorrow, I'm sure we'll see the changelog soon enough and see what they think they fixed about connectivity!
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Oct 14, 2006 4:40:30 GMT -5
Wheres he been hiding anyway Can't you read?
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Oct 14, 2006 1:24:04 GMT -5
Already saw him in the lobby earlier today, but great to have him back. Welcome back dude!
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jul 23, 2006 6:45:41 GMT -5
Yes but getting feud stuffs a slaved archer as you are forced to build the better (and more expensive) unit Nah, you can still build archers until you have Machinary and Iron hooked up.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jul 23, 2006 6:45:00 GMT -5
Nope but i have seen equally weird things happen. Once in a 1 city elim game i quick-moved a stack of camel archers into a threatened city. The enemy obviously attacked at the same time i moved my units in and the game made the sound of the city dying and being recaptured by my camel archers but it never actually killed me. It seems weird things can happen at the start of turns. I remember that game ... no city razing 2 city elimination. You were down a city and lost a second city, but immediately recaptured it instead of being removed from the game. That was so weird!
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Sept 1, 2006 23:03:00 GMT -5
Next game another "slow" plants a 2 city front. I'm done with this game for awhile outside of the occasional cton or cool game. Not worth getting so frustrated over people who should know how to play the game after it's been out for almost a year now. Enjoy another free 5 reports. Peace.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Sept 1, 2006 20:15:00 GMT -5
How can a player with nearly 700 reports on the ladder who has played in more Renaissance teamers than I can count think that planting a 2 city front is a good idea? A 2 city front where the fat crosses don't even touch. A 2 city front a turn after I say "please no 2 city fronts." You've got to be kidding me. There's another 5 free reports, enjoy guys. Not much you can do when a guy is completely dead before you research 1 tech.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Aug 23, 2006 4:52:03 GMT -5
I need noob insurance.
I am tired of making 5 reports after someone dies on the front before we can even finish researching our first tech.
I wish so many people weren't averse to playing clan games or vs. clan teams, because it can be so frustrating playing pickup games. On the other hand, when you're playing with your friends whom you can trust you can work together and have a lot more fun strategizing and playing as a real team.
Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jun 25, 2006 8:14:19 GMT -5
Its like if we made a world cup in soccer, without USA & Africa Just because they do not play well, that would not be a world cup would it. Except the difference is, including some bad teams in the World Cup doesn't hurt the good teams, including bad players in a teamer ruins the game for the good players. Before you play in ladder teamers, you really should have a handle on the basics of the game, such as the importance of building workers, cutting forests, improving your land, building cottages, and defending your cities. Play single player and ctons so you learn this stuff before you play in a teamer. I'll gladly help any new player transition from ctons to teamers. I'll glady help any new player who would like to learn the basics -- but I'm sorry, the place to do this is not in a team game.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Jun 22, 2006 1:35:35 GMT -5
Its immoral to rank hoard. end of story. Saying, "oh there is so and so, we play with him alot. Lets kick this other guy out so we can play with each other and then no one can get in our rank clique." thats whats dumb stuff i have a problem with. that ive seen many good players shut out of games. so i just think people should be a little less snobish. and i don't care if these guys block me from every teamer they ever play, cause im climbing the ladder and no one is gonna stop me. You're conflating two possible consequences with one motivation. None of the people you're talking about (maybe one or two, I don't know, but not the majority) give a nuts about their rank, or rank hoarding. They sure don't ever say "Lets kick this other guy out so we can play with each other and then no one can get in our rank clique," nor would it make any sense. People play with the same groups over and over because everyone is friends, everyone is on Teamspeak chatting, everyone is on at the same time, and everyone is of similar ability. That makes for fun games. I agree with Elledge here. First, if there are 2 teamers in the lobby, 1 with a bunch of people whom I enjoy playing with and 1 with a bunch of people I don't know, I'm going to choose the first one. Second, I don't think there are really any rank cliques. I live in the Eastern Time Zone, USA. In my mind, there are 3 groups of players. Because of my time zone, I call them daytime players, nighttime players, and late night players. Most of the rank at the moment is with the daytime players. Why should tommynt or anyone else from Europe have to stay up all day so someone on the West Coast, USA can play him? It's not that there are rank cliques, it's just that there are different people in different places all over the world playing ... if someone from the late night group were to have a day or two off, get up to #1, and then have to go back to work/school and only play late nights, then it would be harder for the European players to get the high ranks. In the end, when so many ladder players agree that rank is meaningless, who really cares? Third, personally I could care less about rank. Sure, when I was #2 I thought it would be neat to be #1 for a while, but other than that, whatever. I play mostly at night, and I've found a bunch of people of similar skill whom I enjoy playing with and who are on at the same time as I am. I could care less what anyone's rank is, I just want a fun game. I'd play non-ladder with these guys (and gals) any time, no reports on the line, just a good game with fun people to play with and against.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 18, 2006 12:52:15 GMT -5
Plus Quechas are just so cheap, and with Incas being aggressive, you should be able to add at least cover to them. Use a few cheap Quechas to soften up the Longbow then finish it off with a Longbow of your own.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 17, 2006 3:20:03 GMT -5
As a possible solution to watching new player after new player struggle to play on the front, Dey has come up with this:
If a previously agreed upon "new player" (or perhaps simply the last player chosen on each team) is on the front, the game can be reloaded (not remade) with that player swapping positions with another player on the team.
I know that some of the fun GameSpy connection issues may further complicate this, but I know I'm not the only one sick of having to report 5 losses because the weakest player on the team got stuck in the toughest position. If we can get behind this idea, new players can learn the game from a safer position, watch more experienced players and pick up tips, get coached from the veterans, and not be in constant danger of dying. It should be more fun for all, and hopefully will result in a collective drop of all of our blood pressures.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 17, 2006 2:48:25 GMT -5
As much as I love team games, I have to admit that I am getting pretty frustrated watching my unexperienced teammates getting slaughtered on the front just about every game while I'm on the other side of the map where I can't help them. In two of my recent losses, I have the highest or second highest MFG, decent GNP for having high MFG, tons of units, keeping my front safe and taking cities from the other team. In the meantime, in these two consecutive games, two different people on the front are building aqueducts in size 4 cities while they have no units. Along comes a stack of knights and they are dead. PLEASE BUILD DEFENSES IF YOU ARE ON THE FRONT! YOU NEED TO LIVE! WOULD YOU DO THIS IN A CTON? Ugh. Just use common sense, please, it's not hard .
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 10, 2006 23:30:05 GMT -5
Wow, these are some mighty bad :oss neighbors you got. He's going to have 3 axeman and 6 chariots before you can get your second city planted. Did you get his name? I want him to write the strategy guide instead of tommy. Please. I've heard someone say at one time or another that if you don't have such and such resource in your cap radius your dead for every era in the game. Read more carefully before you knock my point and bsaically call me a slow. If ONE of your neighbors has horse, he can get out a decent number of chariots pretty quickly. If ONE of your neighbors has bronze, he can get out a decent number of axes pretty quick. In either case, if you have NO RESOURCES AT ALL, it's really hard to fight off EITHER a stack of 6 chariots or 3 axemen. A chop, some slavery, and some good ol' production can get out either of these stacks relatively quickly. If you are forced to spend time building warriors and archers to fight off an early choke, rather than rush a worker and settler to get a second city up, you only give your neighbors MORE TIME to build up to attack you. In my last ancient game I was being choked by quechas. The nearest copper was on the top of the map in my 40% cultural expansion. After I fought off the choke with warriors, I built a worker, sent him to hook up my copper, only to find 4 chariots on my border. Never even completed the mine, as it was on a lovely tundra square, requiring an extra turn to finish. Not sure exactly what I can do in that case.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 10, 2006 18:39:19 GMT -5
If you are the greatest player ever chances are you will be able to expand quick enough to build your 2nd or maybe 3rd city in order to grab a resource you need before the threat is big enough to kill you. If however no resources are near then you are dead. If you invest all of your production into building workers and settlers in order to build a second, and maybe third city, to hook up strategic resources, then when your neighbor with horses comes knocking with 6 chariots you are dead. When your neighbor with bronze comes with 3 axemen, cuts your roads to your new resource, and chokes you, then you are pretty much screwed until construction and/or feudalism. What fun is that? Give me something more balanced please. That is why I like playing the later eras.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 10, 2006 12:30:35 GMT -5
As for playing teamers with newer players, I know that we absolutely have to. If we don't, eventually we will have no one to play with but a handful of people and we will be lucky to all be online at the same time.
As for teaching newer players the basics of teamers, as long as they have a will to listen and adapt their game to new tactics, they will be fine. However, in a teamer is not the easiest time to teach. If you've got 6 cities, 10 workers, a few caravels on the sea, and a bunch of units to move around, you're not going to have a lot of time to examine what a new player is doing, correct a flaw or two politely and explain why he or she needs to do something differently.
Perhaps, along with Tommy's excellent ancient strategy guide he posted to the forums, some of the more experience Ren Teamer players should write a few articles? We could give some of the new players interested in playing teamers a heads up on common strategies, civics, builds, worker actions, etc. so they are better prepared going into a game.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 10, 2006 12:14:13 GMT -5
Personally, I tend to avoid ctons like the plague because they are played, for the most part, on ancient, and I can't stand ancient. On Inland Sea, which I see most ctons are played, the player who starts with copper or horse in his or her capital has a huge advantage, and the player who starts with iron can at least survive. A lot of people I play teamers with feel the same, but I know a lot of players enjoy ancient more than anything else, so to each his own . As for me, I'd like to see more medieval and later ctons, where you can see all resources and get 2 settlers so you can find a key strategic resource if you are denied it around your capital ... that is a more fun game for me. If it absolutely HAS to be an ancient game, how about playing on Wheel? I played quite a few Wheel games hosted by SPM and I remember being a bit farther apart than on Inland ... so if you don't have a resource at least you're not going to have 6 axes or 6 chariots on you right away making sure you don't one.
|
|