A game to FINISH.

agharta_id · February 16, 2001, 12:41

Hello.

I would like to start a game in which the participants (as many as possible) will return, no matter what (to the last city). Preferrably we would play all this weekend.

These are the settings i want to play on:

Sim. Deity. Raging hordes. 100x100. 1x 1x. 4 billion.
Varied. Large Land Masses. Seven Civs. Huts on. Wonders on.

Diplomat city steal negotiable (i dont really give a ****)

Unfortunately, i am behind a firewall, on an internal network, and far too lazy to remedy these barriers ....
so i can not host ...

Shamael · February 16, 2001, 12:54

I am not familiar with simultanous movement yet. What do i have to do to have this option enabled?
Otherwise i am interested and i can host.
How about today? I could be available about 00.30 AM GMT (That is 09.30 PST if i am not mistaken).
My ICQ is 108182494.
I prefere x1 movement and production,but i'll play any settings. Level and barbarian activity doesn't really matter.

Curumbor Elendil · February 16, 2001, 14:33

I'm glad you posted our conversation, so that your uncalled-for insults and overweening arrogance are available for all to see.

The reason I did not respond is that you are now blacklisted and on my ignore list.

------------------
Curumbor Elendil
http://pantheon.yale.edu/~jps35/
ICQ 56126989

agharta_id · February 16, 2001, 15:01

I am quite aware that i am on your ignore list ... this is exactly the behaivour that one would expect of a person who does not want to debate ...

as for the insults, those who read my response, and our conversation, will see that i did not call you a child or irrational.

i merely asked you if you were a child; and i merely stated that you had not rationally thought out the rules for civ: i did not say you were irrational ... for example: just beacause i have not rationally investigated esthetics, does not make me irrational ... instead, i am simply an individual who has not thought out the rationality of esthetics. period. end.

as for my "arrogance," a dictionary definition is in order, for that word is thrown around far too much.
webster's definition: offensive display of superiority or self importance; overbearing pride; haughtiness.

now, is he or she who presents an argument, based on the rational faculty in the human brain and empirical data gathered by that brain, arrogant? I think not. I if he or she was, we would all be in trouble, for science and philoosphy would be nothing more than "arrogant" wastes of time.

"offensive display of superiority or self importance" ... okay, so i was arrogant in that coversation ... the fact remains, though: curumbor forced me, with his assertions and evasions, to make my superiority offensive, instead hiding it behind passivity and proactive nudgings ...

(to those who understood that rigmarole, kudos!)

"overbearing pride" i had not been beaten in argument with curumbor, thus i had not reason to exhibit "overbearing pride" ... when i am beaten, you will be sure to see none of that childish rubbish.

"haughtiness" snobs are people who snub people based on class or higher knowledge they will not share, in fear that the people that they are snubbing will become their equals. I am not snobbish, for i have made a rational argument that any thinking individual can understand, and counter ... notice that inherent to "snubbing" or "haughtiness," is the the concept "ignore" ... curumbor has put me on his ICQ ignore list, thus he must be haughty, disdainfully proud----ARROGANT.

but that does not follow, for a simple reason: arrogant, as you have seen above, has too many meanings within it ... thus, for this reason, i will pass the torch to curumbor to explain what he meant by "arrogance" ...

your turn curumbor ...

Curumbor Elendil · February 16, 2001, 17:43

I am not interested in debating you, agharta, as you seem to have lost touch with the real world, in which games are played for fun, objective rationality having nothing to do with it. (The fact that you compare your 'discoveries' regarding Civ to the truths of philosophy and mathematics reveals how deluded you are both about your own importance and the proper role of this game in a person's life.)

Unfortunately, I cannot killfile you as I would do if this were a USENET newsgroup, but I will ignore you. You see, I'm interested in interacting with people in a tolerant fashion, playing on diverse settings in a relaxed, enjoyable atmosphere - and I will be doing so on this board long after you have been spanked back to the Zone where you belong.

------------------
Curumbor Elendil
http://pantheon.yale.edu/~jps35/
ICQ 56126989

agharta_id · February 16, 2001, 18:12

let us pick this message apart:

I am not interested in debating you, agharta, [this much is clear] as you seem to have lost touch with the real world, [possibly, but games serve that purpose: they allow the individual to lose touch with the real world] in which games are played for fun, objective rationality having nothing to do with it. [unfortunately that will not hold. civ is a game of simulation, thus the fun is in the simulation] (The fact that you compare your 'discoveries' [when one sees the obvious, it can not be termed a "discovery"] regarding Civ to the truths of philosophy and mathematics reveals how deluded you are both about your own importance [<--- is this what you meant by "arrogance"?] and the proper role of this game in a person's life.) [to lose oneself, to take a break from the real world]

Unfortunately, I cannot killfile you as I would do if this were a USENET newsgroup, but I will ignore you [oh, so you are an authoritarian that does not believe in free speech?]. You see, I'm interested in interacting with people in a tolerant fashion, playing on diverse settings in a relaxed, enjoyable atmosphere [ME TOO! ME TOO!]- and I will be doing so on this board long after you have been spanked back to the Zone where you belong [what are you talking about? i did not use any dirty language!].

GNGSpam · February 16, 2001, 19:20

CUR: hey - i cant play civ if thats what youre going to ask. why dont you sign up for the all-night game friday?

AGH: what are the settings?

CUR:1x1x emperor no huts or barbs, a modified rules.txt, 7 players you can read about it on the www.apolyton.net multiplayer forum. i think i sent you a message with a direct link to the thread - check your icq history.

AGH: yeah and i went there ....

no thanks, i do not play pseudo-civilization ... emperor destabalizes the game, no barbs and huts removes the inherent luck needed in a game that imitates real civilization ..

----------------------------

Let me tell you what I see in that above

CUR has a game set-up and he kindly invites you to join.

You then call it "Pseudo-Civ", speaking of silly things like "real civilization" and basically issuing an insult to his game.

Dont like the settings? To bad thats what their playing on. You can make suggestions, but dont just knock it all down.

And whats this "real civilization" bull****? And building the Statue of Liberty so I can change my Democracy into Communist for a war and then back again is "real civilization"? Oh god, give me a break. This is a game, people can play it however they like. Generally everyone is willing to compromise, but we dont need "Pseudo-Intellectuals" such as yourself to instruct us in the "proper" way to play.

Besides everyone knows real civ is a diplo game

KenThur · February 16, 2001, 19:48

I have had to delete only 3 people off my ICQ list (& thus players list) in 2 years of CivII MP playing. This whacko is 1 that worked hard to make it up my hit list.

Beware, this guy has a real good story to tell to get U in a game. Then turns into somthing else during play. Especially if U make it all the way to a 2nd session with him (seems to be about his max).

He gleefully told several of us after he bailed on a good game we had started & wanted to continue (despite HIS implusive departure) that he not only wouldn't give us his password to allow another willing player to jump in, he bragged about how many games he had locked up with passwords & wasn't about to give them to anyone, nor did he have any intention of finishing the games.

Be VERY wary of wasting your time with this guy.
Altho, if U make it a League contest, at least U get some points for him crapping out & refusing to finish games.

------------------
"Hm-m-m, doubt me you will?"

Shamael · February 16, 2001, 19:55

What are you guys fighting for? Emperor,Deity or whatever. What's the difference? Settings are same for everybody if I am not mistaken.
In my opinion,plain old Civilization is the best way to play.
I like huts. And barbarians. Happiness wonders too. Great Wall as well.
I noticed it's kinda hard to start a game here,so I'll be looking on The Zone tonight.
Perhaps some other day?

agharta_id · February 16, 2001, 20:06

I feel like picking my nose, but yours will do:

Let me tell you what I see in that above [okay bub, but remember: sight without reflection is reaction, not a thoughtful response. that is why the marxists called individuals, who "reacted," reactionaries ... they did not think the marxist position through]

CUR has a game set-up and he kindly invites you to join. [k, what settings? (here we go again!)]

You then call it "Pseudo-Civ", speaking of silly things like "real civilization" and basically issuing an insult to his game. [i insulted "his" game because "his" game is inferior. we are playing civ, a simulation game, thus settings that are as close to the real thing are very important]

Dont like the settings? To bad thats what their playing on. [damn, you just dont get it, do you? i was not asking to play, i was assaulting his "style" of play] You can make suggestions, but dont just knock it all down. [i dont know what this means ... when rational argument knocks down ignorance or incompetence, i follow right along]

And whats this "real civilization" bull****? [if you can not express yourself without profane language, do not express yourself.] And building the Statue of Liberty so I can change my Democracy into Communist for a war and then back again is "real civilization"? [this is the only intelligent thing you have said: true, the game lacks some realism, but let me remind you that the game was made in 95, with limited resources, for those with primitive computers (133! ptah). sid could only do so much. civIII will knockt the socks off civII] Oh god, give me a break. [he is a valley guy, a valley guy; okay, sure, for sure, for sure.] This is a game, people can play it however they like. [true] Generally everyone is willing to compromise, [not me] but we dont need "Pseudo-Intellectuals" such as yourself to instruct us in the "proper" way to play. [yawn: did you learn pseudo when i used it, or did you know before?]

Besides everyone knows real civ is a diplo game

Smash · February 16, 2001, 20:07

My main MP complaint used to be finishing games.Now it is starting games

Shamael · February 16, 2001, 20:21

Fortunalely,there are many games,many players and many servers on the i-net. I had a great time playing Warlords online last night.

agharta_id · February 16, 2001, 20:33

My main MP complaint used to be finishing games.Now it is starting games

i am playing right now, and have been for the last four hours ... i expect to finish this one, just like i have finish three in the last two weeks.

Curumbor Elendil · February 17, 2001, 01:26

Be careful, folks. Agharta plays ONLY on these settings. If you so much as make a friendly suggestion that one of them should be slightly different, he will call you "stupid," "a little child," and "irrational."

------------------
Curumbor Elendil
http://pantheon.yale.edu/~jps35/
ICQ 56126989

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 01:59

<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 Curumbor Elendil on 02-16-2001 12:26 PM</font>
Be careful, folks. Agharta plays ONLY on these settings. If you so much as make a friendly suggestion that one of them should be slightly different, he will call you "stupid," "a little child," and "irrational."

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Ah, the silent one speaks ... I tried to debate these settings with him yesterday, and he peppered me with assertions, not explanations. Eventually, he started to evade me with platitudes, and, eventually, ignored me altogether.

As for his first assertion, that i only play these settings, that is true. But that truth is qualified, as most are: if one can persuade me, through rational argument, that these settings do not best reflect real civlization, then so be it: i will change. The problem with curumbor is that he did not present an argument, just assertions: thus he has no right to trash talk. [what he is doing now] (notice that i my point of departure in civ is not based around entertainment or egalitarianism: i am concerned with settings that best simulate real civilization.)

And for his second assertion? I did not call him irrational, stupid, or a little child, I asked whether he was a "philosopher or a damn child." Note that asking is different than calling. Anyways, enough mind manipulation. Here is a bit of science:

Here is our coversation:

CUR: hey - i cant play civ if thats what youre going to ask.

why dont you sign up for the all-night game friday?

AGH: what are the settings?

CUR:1x1x emperor no huts or barbs, a modified rules.txt, 7 players you can read about it on the www.apolyton.net multiplayer forum. i think i sent you a message with a direct link to the thread - check your icq history.

AGH: yeah and i went there ....

no thanks, i do not play pseudo-civilization ... emperor destabalizes the game, no barbs and huts removes the inherent luck needed in a game that imitates real civilization ..

CUR: well, ok. the point is to remove the luck for purposes of gameplay, since we're dedicating a good chunk of time to this.

AGH: hence the "pseudo" civ ... if you want to play chess, go play chess ... if you want to play an expansion game, go play aoe ....

emperor level destabalizes the game: it makes democratic and republican governments too easy to manage ...

CUR: i dont see how that is. [great come back] would you rather play on deity? the problem with deity is that whoever gets the happy wonders wins. believe me, i have fine tuned this modpack so that it is very stable. [assertion; on what settings? how many civs?]

brackets mine.

AGH: not if there are always seven civs ... games that only have three or four human players end up as wonder races, because they have too few players ...

CUR: in a 7 player game it becomes even more unbalanced if one person monopolizes the wonders.[again, assertion]

AGH: deity, raging hordes, seven civ, 100x100, 1x 1x, 4 billion, varied, large land masses is the only proper way to play

AGH: then you are in a game where the other seven players suck.

CUR: but i wont try to persuade you to join the game - its up to you, of course. it should be a good game though. we're playing a game on these settings right now (new millennium eurodiplomacy) and its a good game!

AGH: a good builder can go the whole game without a wonder, and still make a significant impact ...

there are soo few professional builders.

AGH: are you a philosopher or a damn child? please do not use exclamation points to evade my points ...

CUR: what the **** are you talking about?

AGH: the language attached to your exclamation points is language used to end a debate you do not want to participate in ...

CUR: i dont know what you are talking about. i was having a casual chat with you about settings, and you make it personal. chill out dude. [notice the use of the word dude: i hate the word dude!]

AGH: you have never thought out, rationally, whether the type of game you play is rational ... [just because curumbor has not thought out whether the game he plays is rational, does not mean he is irrational. I have never thought out esthetics, but i am still (i think) rational (to an extent?)

AGH: nothing personal here .... i am as calm as the eye of a hurricane .....

AGH: the simple fact is that i made a series of statements as to the proper setting for civ [proposition], and to why i call other settings "pseudo-settings," and you went into evasion mode, not response mode ...

AGH: where did you go?

AGH: *yawn* are all folks in CT as mentally passive as this?

Rasputin · February 17, 2001, 02:02

Settings are there to qallow every person to paly their particular favoutite way. I prefer no wonder games a swonders are definatly unreal, but as this is a simulation not real life then errors are acceptable, as you say limited computer power makes real life hard to simulate.
Many things are totally unreal in this game, some of which in my opinion are
1. Same leader for all of eternity
2. Wonders
3. Inabilty to conduct proper wars as allies with differnet civs stacking together.
4. Stealing techs.
5. City Bribing
6. probably heaps more

February 17, 2001, 04:29

I told agharta via icq that I thought he was being totally unfair to Elendil. I maintain that belief.
Elendil is a great foe in the game (sometimes a friend - lol) and you can't afford to limit the players available to get games going. As you said.

In the end it is only a symbolic representation of reality and so many points can be argued till the cows come home. Let's be friendly about it. Take a leaf out of the Aussies book

ROTFLMAO!

I kept talking with agharta and discovered s/he is a good player. Carnide plays agharta and I saw the pg - agharta just trailing carnide who has all the happies.

I was intrigued by the settings you proposed above and the rationale behind it. It's a great idea and since then we have been discussing settings and doing custom maps to get the most 'real' experience possible. I sketched a map out and sent it to agharta. With your icons we can get a great modpak together here.

I just wish that you and Elendil could get it sorted out. He creates and hosts some of the best games I've ever been in. And as Raz says all these options are there for folks to work out different games.

------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 05:18

<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 Rasputin on 02-17-2001 01:02 AM</font>
Settings are there to qallow every person to paly their particular favoutite way. I prefer no wonder games a swonders are definatly unreal, but as this is a simulation not real life then errors are acceptable, as you say limited computer power makes real life hard to simulate.
Many things are totally unreal in this game, some of which in my opinion are
1. Same leader for all of eternity
2. Wonders
3. Inabilty to conduct proper wars as allies with differnet civs stacking together.
4. Stealing techs.
5. City Bribing
6. probably heaps more
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I am not going to respond to your "argument" nor your "writing" ... both are horrid, and thus not worth commmenting on.

As for your point: "many things are totally unreal in this game": i totally agree ... on some points, that is ...

1. "Same leader for all eternity" Although the game is obviously ridiculous in this aspect, I think it can be easily side stepped with a little imagination. Instead of considering yourself a leader who rules an empire for 6020 years, think of yourself as a GOD that controls sucessive leaders who rule an empire for 6020 years. Simple, everyone can understand, and much more gratifying.

2. "Wonders" The Chinese and Eygptians worked on their respective wonders for decades, and there is little doubt that these acheivments had a huge impact on their respective civilizations (and the world). As to what effect, that is open for debate. Storage for the pyramids? FOREVER? I think not. As for the whole concept of "wonders," it is not open for debate. Throughout history these monuments of human rationality, hard work, and wonder, have affected the minds, and perhaps the souls (if there are souls), of millions. I know that when i think of "freedom," the first thing that pops into my head is the Statue of Liberty. The Statue of liberity is a wonder, and w onders have to be integrated into the game somehow ...

3. "Inabilty to conduct proper wars as allies with differnet civs stacking together." I totally agree. FULLY. The stacking of units is the stupidest part of the game. The squares where units blink represent hundreds of square miles ... do i need say more?

4. "Stealing techs" How is this unrealistic? It may be a pain the ass, and hard to defend againt, but surely it is realistic. The Soviet Union is a prime example of this occuring in real civilization.

5. "City bribing" I am somewhat ambivalant about this apect of the game. I consider city bribing far too "concentrated" of a concept. All clumsily bundled together are these concepts: spy networks, coups, covert supplying of arms to dissidents in the army, bribing of powerful goverment officials, manipulation (ideology, threats, etc) of powerful government official ... this is one of the aspects of the new game that i hope they clean up, unravel, separate ... for instance: to "bribe" a city, one should have to set up a spy network, an intelligence network ... this could be done symbolically by demanding a certain amount of diplomats (based on city population) to be in a city (if they can get there), before a city can be bribed ... after the fourth gets in, a standard bribe price, based on gov type and treasury, is allowed for the next diplomat/spy. If the owner of the dip has the cash, fine and dandy!

the same could be done with a military twist: for instance, if two diplomats get into an enemy city, and opt to supply arms to dissidents (an option, just like bribing), the cotinued flow of weapons will slowly destabalize the city's gov ... whether or not a city is about to fall by this method could be measured through trade (the more trade with the dip's civ, the smoother flow of arms), the infected govs power and treasury and happiness, the strength of both militaries ...

anyway, i dont want to dwell here any longer, i am sure firaxis has given this ample thought.

"probably heaps more" Huh? I do not speak gibberish.

anyways.

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 05:35

<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 KenThur on 02-16-2001 06:48 PM</font>
I have had to delete only 3 people off my ICQ list (& thus players list) in 2 years of CivII MP playing. This whacko is 1 that worked hard to make it up my hit list.

Beware, this guy has a real good story to tell to get U in a game. Then turns into somthing else during play. Especially if U make it all the way to a 2nd session with him (seems to be about his max).

He gleefully told several of us after he bailed on a good game we had started & wanted to continue (despite HIS implusive departure) that he not only wouldn't give us his password to allow another willing player to jump in, he bragged about how many games he had locked up with passwords & wasn't about to give them to anyone, nor did he have any intention of finishing the games.

Be VERY wary of wasting your time with this guy.
Altho, if U make it a League contest, at least U get some points for him crapping out & refusing to finish games.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

MILO, AKA KRT AND KEN THUR is one of the slowest players ever. And yes, i mean "players" in a general sense. If he played AOE he would be slow, if he played chess (my god i can not imagine) HE would be slow, if he played horse shoes HE would be slow, if HE played rebound he would be slow, and if HE speed skated he would be SLOW! SLOW! SLOW!

"Beware, this guy has a real good story to tell to get U in a game. Then turns into somthing else during play. Especially if U make it all the way to a 2nd session with him (seems to be about his max)."

I bailed because i finally snapped. And do you know why i finally snapped? because KRT IS SLOW! unbearably. as for the 2nd session bull**** he is feeding you, that was the second session in A MONTH!

"wouldn't give us his password to allow another willing player "

Yer damn right i was not giving out my password ... it is personal, and i like it ... if i gave it to miLOW, it would be all over the net (slowly, of course, but surely).

"Be VERY wary of wasting your time with this guy." This sentence is brilliant. Be VERY wary of wasting your time: why would i keep playing if i was wasting my time? i would i have to be an idiot!

and i was.

thus i pulled the plug on milo, and my own idiotic behaivour: spending hours waiting while milo commanded every unit and rock in his bloody cililization!

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 16:04

*yawn*

War4ever · February 17, 2001, 18:55

Agharta.... i must come to the defense of some of my fellow civers......

I too have had "debates" with you on settings....

I too have been in a couple of games with you....

I too agree that Milo is slow... but a player whom is a ferocious opponent when the game hits the middle to modern era

I also have heard nothing but good things about curumbors mod packs..... and in games i played with him in the last millenium, he has proven himself time and time again as a courteous and reliable player...

Although i havent put you on my ignore list, as i do not even have one, i find your attitude somewhat offensive.

If only one person stated this, i would chalk it up to a bad experience..... but others seem to confirm your aggressive behaviour

This truly is a shame, no one wants to play with a *****, and no one will get to see your talents if you are perceived this way

The semantics of civ can be debated endlessley for days.... there is no "right" setting. Only settings which one enjoys....

Therefore instead of debating these settings every game , if you don't like them just back out.....

If your good enough there are always games around and if your willing to play "lessor" settings (whatever that may entail) then you will always find a game.

I prefer deity x1x1 , i also like x2x1, i will play some simul, and some not.... I will even play king games..... why? because i would rather be good at many different settings and make myself available to more kinds of players, thus increasing my gameplay and strengths.....

This game is meant to be played for fun..... fun is whatever setting makes you happy and with whatever people you enjoy playing with.....

I too would enjoy your company in games more IF you weren't so confrontational and condescending about the settings......

Sorry if my grammar and/or spelling bothers you, i tend to write as i speak..... which isn't always correct

<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by War4ever (edited February 17, 2001).]</font>

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 21:27

<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 War4ever on 02-17-2001 05:55 PM</font>
Agharta.... i must come to the defense of some of my fellow civers......

I too have had "debates" with you on settings....

I too have been in a couple of games with you....

I too agree that Milo is slow... but a player whom is a ferocious opponent when the game hits the middle to modern era

I also have heard nothing but good things about curumbors mod packs..... and in games i played with him in the last millenium, he has proven himself time and time again as a courteous and reliable player...

Although i havent put you on my ignore list, as i do not even have one, i find your attitude somewhat offensive.

If only one person stated this, i would chalk it up to a bad experience..... but others seem to confirm your aggressive behaviour

This truly is a shame, no one wants to play with a *****, and no one will get to see your talents if you are perceived this way

The semantics of civ can be debated endlessley for days.... there is no "right" setting. Only settings which one enjoys....

Therefore instead of debating these settings every game , if you don't like them just back out.....

If your good enough there are always games around and if your willing to play "lessor" settings (whatever that may entail) then you will always find a game.

I prefer deity x1x1 , i also like x2x1, i will play some simul, and some not.... I will even play king games..... why? because i would rather be good at many different settings and make myself available to more kinds of players, thus increasing my gameplay and strengths.....

This game is meant to be played for fun..... fun is whatever setting makes you happy and with whatever people you enjoy playing with.....

I too would enjoy your company in games more IF you weren't so confrontational and condescending about the settings......

Sorry if my grammar and/or spelling bothers you, i tend to write as i speak..... which isn't always correct

<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by War4ever (edited February 17, 2001).]</font>
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I am going to work backwards on this one ...

Your grammar and spelling are fine. Writing how you speak is the best way to write (this is how I write). There are no absolutes to writing well, other than writing so that others can understand what you have written. Coma, period and semi-colons denote nothing more than pauses in speech and thought. Sentences and paragraphs, points towards an overarching purpose or thought. WRITING IS SOLIDIFIED THOUGHT. nothing else. The reason why others can not write clearly is because their thoughts are not clear, or they are too lazy to think.

As for my confrontational personality, which is a guise, i am not very confrontational within the game. (i usually put everyone on mute, and just play) Then how do i explain this rant? This rant I am entangled in is nothing more than a gloried way to spark a debate. And I am failing miserably:

"confrontational and condescending about the settings......" Yes, i am confrontational, but no, I am not condescending. What you find condescending is the fact that i am making an argument that you can not counter.

"I prefer deity x1x1 , i also like x2x1, i will play some simul, and some not.... I will even play king games..... why? because i would rather be good at many different settings and make myself available to more kinds of players, thus increasing my gameplay and strengths..... " Well, I am glad you have hours upon hours upon hours upons hours of time on your hands. I do not. I am sticking to one set of settings (which may change, depending if someone convinces me otherwise), so that I can become godlike.

As I noted earlier in my rant, my point of departure is realism, not egalitarianism or entertaiment (differnt that curumbor and most other civ players) ... For me the pleasure derived from civ is in the realism. Civilization is a simulation game that was carefully thought out. The different levels are meant to ease newbies into the game, nothing else! Deity is the only proper way to play, because it best simulates civilization. There is not mistake here, sid made deity as the proper level, the level, when newbies advanced, to be played:

Democratic and Republican governments are easy to manage on king level because king level is an easy level.

It is easy to expand on king level because king level is an easy level.

It is easy to maintain militaries on king beacause king is an easy level.

Must i go further?

"If your good enough there are always games around and if your willing to play "lessor" settings (whatever that may entail) then you will always find a game." No, lesser game settings mess up my play on deity. Deity is very subtle, and thus hard to play fast. Now, i could think out the construction of every city, like milo does, or i could let it just flow, only thinking when on the offensive or defensive, in diplomatic matters, when deciding whcih wonder to build, which civ to eliminate, which civ to befriend, which civ to demand tribute! I will let it flow ...

"Therefore instead of debating these settings every game , if you don't like them just back out....."
Exactly, i agree. I have not messaged you since the last time we played. I have my civ icq section partitioned between deity players and king players: and you are on king. Thus i do not message you. Another reason, by the way, for my rant was to attract players of like mind. It has worked, to an extent.

"The semantics of civ can be debated endlessley for days.... there is no "right" setting. Only settings which one enjoys...." I am not a relativist or post modernist. There are "RIGHT" settings, it is just that people have been to lazy to look for em.

"This truly is a shame, no one wants to play with a *****, and no one will get to see your talents if you are perceived this way

" Now who is name calling?

"I too agree that Milo is slow... but a player whom is a ferocious opponent when the game hits the middle to modern era" Notice that in my rant on MILO, I did not once mention whether I thought he was a good player. From my experience with him, he is average. As for his mid-game play, i have no idea: i snapped before i could get there.

again: *yawn*

War4ever · February 17, 2001, 22:27

one correction..... 99.9 % of my games are on deity

It used to be the only setting i played , but a few dip games have changed this for the most part.

I do not have endless time to play, i make the most of my time..... with sporatic sessions of civ with dedicated players.....

I applaud you in your quest to become a god.... let me know when you get there and we can play again.....

I did not call you a *****, i said you were perceived to be a *****... there is a difference..

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 22:54

True, you never called me a *****, you said others percived me as such (including, yourself, i assume). Let me ask you a question: if others think i am a *****, and you are one of them, are you not calling me a *****, indirectly?... you are playing my game now! excellent. (muhahaha!)

Next thought on the list:
When i talked to you and played you, you seemed to prefer king level. Sorry, my mistake.

"I applaud you in your quest to become a god.... let me know when you get there and we can play again....."

Why you dirty egghead! You implied that you are a god already, and that all i have to do to play you is to become a god. You are being Offensive, Conceited, Condescending, and witty.

i like it.

but do not listen to me, i am a sadomasochist. i could be just fooling with yer hed while accepting the unbearable pleasure of being slammed.

War4ever · February 17, 2001, 23:09

Now this is my kind of debate

See its real easy to be nice, witty, conceited all at the same time.....

I don't think your a *****..... but i have used other male genetailia (spelling?)

Do you suck.... not sure, all i know is in everygame we were ever in..... i was off to a nice start and the others were behind me.....

alas these games were never finished ......

Good civin

Rasputin · February 17, 2001, 23:26

Greater minds than yours have tried to make me type correctly, I deliberatly choose not to to make it my trade mark.
I type fast and furious wiuth jsut tweo fingers andf cant be bnothered rediting or going back to retype my dribble.. It only slows me down, as you say we speakl as we think and i thin kso damn fast it gets ahead of my damn fingers..

At workl I get paid to be articualte and think, on the web and in civ i unwind and try to be some omne else....

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 23:31

hehehe.

what do you do?

Rasputin · February 17, 2001, 23:36

Now as to your point that tech stealing is real , jsut because you claim the russians hav ebeen doing it for years..
But how often does a nomadic tribe from africa steal nuclear science from USA, yet in Civ II this is quite possible, a backward tribe with little or no reaserch of there own , can sneak a diplomat upto a large well advanced civ and with no prerequisites can suddenly discover all...

Also your point on wonders being influential on societys minds and souls, i agree this could be an awe inspiring work, a morale booster if you like, so maybe all wonders shoudl only make people happy, but then again i bet the guys actually building the pyramids werent too damn happy about it, so maybe building wonders should make more riots !!! As for Statue of liberty being a wonder!! WHy ??? its jsut a statue to celebrate the french helping the Colonists to beat england in a war... no wonder in that.. but perhpas a morale booster again, but the abiltiy to change governemtns with no consequences jsut because you ahve a statue come on ...
and why does the auto update process of leos stop at auto why not continue for ever, if you can beleive that is realsitic to update a phalanx to a conscript then why not artillery to howitzer... ( I actually tried that one game made leos never obsolete, mad efor a quick fun game )

As you say maybe this will be addressed in civ3 but maybe not..

My whole point was that this game is jsut that a game, not real life. all settigns are there for fun and ease of use... if syd had wanted us all to paly your settings he wouldnt have given us options to changes...

Hopew my writing doesnt boither you too much and that you dont feel my repsonse is below your intellect level to bother reading

Rasputin · February 17, 2001, 23:38

I work at an oil refienry..

If you have ever watched the Simpsons cartoon and seen homer at work, well that is what i do, except unfortuantly we get no donuts.....

agharta_id · February 17, 2001, 23:46

<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 Rasputin on 02-17-2001 10:38 PM</font>
I work at an oil refienry..

If you have ever watched the Simpsons cartoon and seen homer at work, well that is what i do, except unfortuantly we get no donuts.....

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Ah, so you are an engineering type; this explains your refusal to learn how to type your thoughts quickly and correctly.

damn engineers.