Incremental Buying...

[Ming]

ROTFLMAO

[rah]

So Vengerette,
I guess you're the only one here allowed to have an opinion. We're not allowed to disagree with the great one.

You were preaching your opinion. Note: CLEARLY in capital letters. I didn't say my opinion was the TRUTH. My ego doesn't require that. Your's obviously does.

The link was pretty juvenile, and is what was expected for your type.

I did like the nitpick part.

RAH
I'll comment wherever I like. Or does that break the vengerette rules?

[Venger]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by rah on 05-17-2000 08:29 PM</font>
So Vengerette,
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Oh GOOD ONE. Geez dude, at least make it kind of funny:

Vinegar
Vinaigrette
Whineger

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>I guess you're the only one here allowed to have an opinion. We're not allowed to disagree with the great one.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Every has their opinion, I am not the great one. I have convictions in my beliefs, but why wouldn't I? Do you not hold the opinions you do because you believe they are right?

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>You were preaching your opinion. Note: CLEARLY in capital letters. I didn't say my opinion was the TRUTH.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

It's for emphasis. Maybe I could bold them, and maybe I would only be strongly suggesting, instead of preaching. Can I get an AMEN my brother!?

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>My ego doesn't require that. Your's obviously does.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Apparently your ego requires you to go after me rather than ignore me...

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>The link was pretty juvenile, and is what was expected for your type.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

So...did you do it?

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>I did like the nitpick part.

RAH
I'll comment wherever I like. Or does that break the vengerette rules?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I welcome commentary - the exhange of knowledge and opinion is what helps us learn. But if you're gonna go after me, I will respond in kind.

Venger

[Venger]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Ming on 05-17-2000 07:27 PM</font>
ROTFLMAO
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I almost directly linked the graphics right on the page...figured you wouldn't like that too much though!

Venger

[rah]

I humbly apologize, I will limit myself to discussing issues with people that actually discuss.

RAH

[Matthew]

No caravans? BLASPHEMY !!!!!!!!

I'll only agree to no caravans in a game inwhich wonders, military units, and settlers are also outlawed.

Granted, you can save time by banning caravans. But you can also save time by banning all these otrher things too.

Civ II is a game that takes a lot of time, whether you`re playing someone who builds lots of caravans, lots of settlers, or lots of military units. That`s just the way it is. Granted, a lot can be done to mitigate this, but one way or another a Civ MP game is not something you are generally going to finish in 2 hours.

[CapTVK]

Talk about reviving a thread! Ming, Rah and MWHC at it again, just like the old days!

I don't know what to make to make of incremental buying. Knowing the switching &buytrick from Civ1 myself I was aware of it in Civ2. As switching was fixed in Civ2 with 50% switching costs (you could do the same trick with buildings and WoW's in Civ1). But because incremental buying for units was left open I consider it a nice trick you learn through experimenting and through experience. I didn't use it very much, unless I had to rushbuild a unit or help with WoW.

However, from the past posts I've noted that some players will implement incremental buying to the lowest level of micromanagement, EVERY FREAKING TURN! No wonder that some people take 15 min to finish their turn. imagine this with 5 cities, now with 10, 20 and finally 40, how much time will this take?
Besides long waiting times there's something else...This isn't making use of a nice trick, this is exploiting it!

[Smash]

Time limits are an advantage to the host and a major hurdle dealing with technical problems.

This whole subject(IRB) is rather silly.How long have you played civ?Have you ever played OCC or scenarios?Have you ever tryed to learn more about the game?

If you have then you know about IRB.If you havn't and don't,then you need to spend a more time learning.There may be a bunch of techniques you are missing out on.

I learn new things all the time.I don't cry cheat.I incorporate them into my play.Players like MWHC and XIN post "cheats and undocumented features" all the time.Its like keeping up to date with the latest theory in Chess.

I'm with Rah on this one.It won't be me bringing it up.You need IRB to time units with new citizens.To "even out" the sheilds when population changes.I don't think IRB will win a game.It'll help but is not a decisive factor.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Smash (edited May 20, 2000).]</font>

[rah]

Alright, now we're using initials for it.
IRB
IRB
IRB
Like the sound of that one.

RAH
Didn't say I would prefer no Caravans, just thought it would be interesting to try for laughs.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I'm telling you, playing with time limits makes it a harder game. We all know how to micromanage to the max. What fun is this? Play with a 2 minute limit. Now will see who knows how to PLAY better - not who knows the LOOPHOLES better.

[Ming]

MWHC... Time limits wouldn't really effect IRB, (another acronym... you just have to love it) since it is almost always done between turns when doing standard city maintenance. It doesn't really make any sense to do it during your turn, since nothing will happen until your next turn anyway. Maybe early in a duel, you might do it during your turn so you don't get caught as the turn shifts, but it really isn't a factor in slowing down the game.

Now this assumes that your opponent is doing city maintenance between turns and not during

And Matthew... I'm with Rah, it would be interesting to play one, but not something high on my list. Caravans are indeed a key part to the game... but some people play no wonders too