We love the 'X' day - a crutch for the weaker player? - Page 2

Venger · May 8, 2000, 18:07

quote:

Originally posted by Sieve Too on 05-08-2000 10:30 AM
I think Venger is missing the main point behind WLT_D. In order to do it successfully, you must be willing to give up a lot (expansion, war, good defense) while concentrating on infrastructure.

Oh I understand that, but I think the good player can pull that off all too easily.

quote:

I also think you overestimate its effects. By the time I'm ready to do WLT_D for the first time, my cities are probably around size 6 or 7 anyway. And after bankrupting my treasury for Aqueducts, the best I can do is get to size 12, assuming I've roaded and irrigated everything. While I'm doing this, I'm losing out on science.

Sure, you lose 12 turns of research. But with 50/50 tax and luxury you can buy your improvements on the go. Heck, even 60/40. You can bite the bullet for 12 turns and emerge with double or triple the production, research, and revenue. Just seems all too easy.

Now mind you, I don't do it. I just read alot of posts where WLTXD is just a de facto part of the game, and is how cities are grown. I just find that a little bogus myself.

quote:

Note that other gov'ts can attain similar explosive growth via food caravans.

But nothing like you can do in Republic/Democracy. Unless you use the infinite food caravan cheat.

Venger

Venger · May 8, 2000, 18:11

quote:

Originally posted by vik on 05-08-2000 11:15 AM
Bravo, Venger.

While I thoroughly disagree with your hypothesis, I applaud the way you have responded to the answers. It seems many (or at least several) here would hold you in a dim light for proposing WLTxD is a crutch. However, you have responded to the reasoning quite well, considering your statement seems to be a touchy subject with some.

I knew people would get bugged by it. I actually tried to take Crustacean's head off, but Ming nuked that post...

I try to be reasonable. It's not that I want to kick WLTXD top the curb, just that it seems to easy to abuse, if that's the word...

quote:

If you would agree that there is a trade-off incurred when using WLTxD, I think we could make some ground. The amount of resources a player chooses to allocate to luxuries directly affects the amount of resources taken away in science and taxes. Depending on the resource squares utilized, it can also affect food and shield production. For most players who plan on using WLTxD, it usually affects the starting city location as well.

Well sure, the question is whether the short term pain is worth the long term gain, and I think that's absolutely the case in WLTXD. Take 10 turns to double or triple production and research? Pays off in the next 10 turns...

quote:

If we can't agree there is a trade-off, perhaps we can agree that if WLTxD is available to all players (not just "weak" ones) then it is truly not a crutch.

Well good God man, I can't argue with that...

Venger

Venger · May 8, 2000, 18:20

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark on 05-08-2000 01:09 PM
Getting on this fairly late. WLT_D or Republic, heck, even trades or wonders are not requirements for winning. To win, you either conquer all of the remaining civs or get that spaceships to some stupid far off place. As evident from all of our experiences, there are countless ways of doing that. To say that Republic is a requirement is simply wrong (never done that govt myself).

Again, rhetorical statement, either one of the two (Dem/Rep) I believe is required if you expect to win on the hardest maps (Deity, large, 7, etc.). Requirement is rhetorical not literal.

quote:

To say that WL is a crutch - well, I only occassionally do it in my Science City and only by setting luxuries to 20-40% at most. It takes skills to grow your cities that way, thus a very valid strategy. And growing cities by 1 over a 50/20/10 year span is realistic.

I also settle at about that rate. As to growing your city over 10 years, sure. But again, my general complaint is with pegging Luxuries at a rate designed SOLELY to WLTXD all cities for a dozen turns to grow them to then revert back to 30% but with double or triple the production.

quote:

And luxuries at 80% is whoring?!

Absolutely!!

quote:

Think of a small college town on the day of a big football game. I have witness towns of 10,000 swell to 125,000 (temporarily though). I have lived in cities in So.Cal that grew from 40,000 to 140,000 in only 10 years!

Well, first, those people come from somewhere else, so it's not like they come to town and STAY there. Same for cities, I lived in Las Vegas during a huge growth spurt. And I'll be damned if it wasn't also due to a pegged luxuries rate...

quote:

Geez, next thing someone will say is that Pyramids are required.

Sorry, just rambling...

They help! But there is no single wonder that one cannot win without. But lose Pyramids, Mike's, Hoover, and Magellan, and expect to get pounded...

Venger

Canadian War Beaver · May 8, 2000, 21:54

Venger and co........ wltkd is no more unrealistic than adding caravans to the wonder production or to be more precise , starting a wonder , losing out on it and transfering the shields to another wonder.

the hoover dam is in no way similar in pieces to the cure for cancer.....

the game tries to be realistic, but alas it can only go so far

we already beat the realism topic of civ to death last millenium, so if its realism your looking for, maybe a computer flight sim is more your spead.

However, i like your stance and there is nothing wrong with your opinion, keep up the good work and watch the debate continue

, after all, thats what these forums are for

catullus · May 9, 2000, 03:00

Neither of the two representative governments are required for a win. But they help sometimes. Like WLT*D, in the hands of the mediocre player, rep. and demo can dramatically worsen the state of your nation. After revolution is over, you may end up with cities that are starving (settler support), non-producing (unit support), poor and stupid (all trade must go to luxuries to meet increasing demands).
The correct timing of revolution is one of the marks of the Perfect Player. Like correct timing of WLT*D is.

Governments, wonders, luxury settings. All are parts of the Civ2 players' advanced tool box. All can be used correcly with excellent results, all can be used by the weaker player to chop off his leg. The crutches he'll need then is found in the difficulty settings and the cheat menu.

C.

Ming · May 9, 2000, 08:09

Venger...
"I knew people would get bugged by it. I actually tried to take Crustacean's head off,
but Ming nuked that post..."

"Well, looks like Ming nuked my response. After all that hard work to clean it up, his post is an HTML mess..."

HUH???????

I have not done anything in this thread except to post, you must be mistaken.

------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net

Sieve Too · May 9, 2000, 10:02

quote:

Me: In order to do it successfully, you must be willing to give up a lot (expansion, war, good defense) while concentrating on infrastructure.

Venger: Oh I understand that, but I think the good player can pull that off all too easily

But shouldn't a good player be able to win the game using the correct strategies? WLT_D is but one of many strategies. Like any strategy, you give up X now in the hopes of gaining Y later. Given the severe restrictions placed on Rep/Dem gov't, there needs to be some incentive to switching to these gov'ts. Why is growing your civ via WLT_D less valid than plunking down a large number of small cities?

If you want to play a perfectionist style game, WLT_D is the only way to do it. How else can your 10 cities win against the Mongols' 40+ cities unless yours are larger?

Also remember that unchecked population growth brings on pollution. Mass Transit and Hydro Plants are a long way off from Rep and Dem. So while you might get into the low teens with WLT_D, you are basically stuck there throughout the rest of the mid-game.

In the area of realism, the "standard" method of population growth is exactly the opposite of what you expect in a real population, i.e. It takes more and more time for a city to grow each time a new citizen is added.

quote:

You can bite the bullet for 12 turns and emerge with double or triple the production, research, and revenue.

You can accomplish the same thing with ICS. Or capturing your neighbors cities. Or using Spies. Or demanding tribute. Or sharing techs in an alliance. Or sending caravans across the seas.

Also you are not correct in claiming that you are merely "taking 12 turns" to come out ahead. In truth, you must have already spent many dozens of turns setting up for WLT_D: a) building infrastructure, b) improving land, c) pursuing "peaceful" science goals. All the while you are making your civ more and more vulnerable because the above also implies: a) not building a good military, b) not settling and claiming new land, c) having obsolete units.

quote:

either one of the two (Dem/Rep) I believe is required if you expect to win on the hardest maps (Deity, large, 7, etc.). Requirement is rhetorical not literal.

My experience in exactly the opposite. I find it much easier to win via conqest than via the space ship. In conquest games, I never bother with Rep or Dem. YMMV of course.

Steve Clark · May 9, 2000, 11:03

quote:

Originally posted by Venger on 05-08-2000 06:20 PM
They help! But there is no single wonder that one cannot win without. But lose Pyramids, Mike's, Hoover, and Magellan, and expect to get pounded...

Venger

Not even close my friend. Mike is a very good wonder no doubt, but I have never had any use for the others and I constantly win at emperor/deity. With Fundy, SunTzu and Leo (plus a SSC), all of the enemy civs get clobbered!

Tom DeMille · May 9, 2000, 11:42

Maybe we should start threads like:

Wonders - crutches for the weaker player?

Caravans - crutches for the weaker player?

More than 1 city - a crutch for the weaker player?

Democracy/Fundy/Commie - a crutch for the weaker player?

Not playing Multiplayer - a crutch for the weaker player?

My point is, agains't the AI, even at Deity, there is nothing that is essential to winning. Skipping any particular wonder or government type will not make you loose.

The bottom line for me is having fun, and if that means seeing my population soar from size 8 cities to size 20 cities in a dozen turns, then that's what I'll do.

Sten Sture · May 9, 2000, 13:08

LoL - How about:

Defensive terrain - Crutch for bad tacticians
Instruction manuals - Crutch for bad improvisors
Tranmissions - Crutch for bad drivers
Money - Crutch for bad thieves

I can't believe this thread exists...

Ming · May 9, 2000, 14:02

Oh come on... give him a break. Everybody is welcome to their opinion. While I will disagree with him on whether the designers intended us to use WLYD's to crank up population, I have no problem with him stating that it could be considered a crutch.
I will disagree with him on that too, but he is just stating an opinion. And what fun would be these forums be with out a difference of opinion

The Mad Viking · May 9, 2000, 14:40

Sten- LOL

How about "Transmissions - a clutch for bad drivers!"

Venger
If you don't like WLT*D, don't use it. Next thing, you'll be complaining about building cities in mountains.

I usually don't use it myself. But the idea of recruiting people to your cities by with "social spending" or whatever is not unrealistic. The overall effects can be too extreme, but as everyone is saying this is a game, not reality.

Chess is a war simulation. It not very realistic. A few people like it anyway, and its hung around for a while.

Civ2 is extremely realistic compared to any game of similar scope and intent. It is also a fun game.

Cato · May 9, 2000, 17:07

On the realism issue:

Is 76 million population growth in 19 years (turns) realistic?

See USA, 1946-1964 (a.k.a "The Baby Boom"). I challenge any CivII player to match this type of growth.

It is a valid strategy.

Venger · May 9, 2000, 21:04

quote:

Originally posted by Ming on 05-09-2000 08:09 AM
Venger...
"I knew people would get bugged by it. I actually tried to take Crustacean's head off,
but Ming nuked that post..."

"Well, looks like Ming nuked my response. After all that hard work to clean it up, his post is an HTML mess..."

HUH???????

I have not done anything in this thread except to post, you must be mistaken.

I *****slapped him in a post, and I DID read it in the thread. But now it's gone. Figured you nuked it...

Venger

Venger · May 9, 2000, 21:09

quote:

<font size=1>Originally posted by Canadian War Beaver on 05-08-2000 09:54 PM</font>
Venger and co........ wltkd is no more unrealistic than adding caravans to the wonder production or to be more precise , starting a wonder , losing out on it and transfering the shields to another wonder.

Redeploying production is not nearly as disconcerting as what can be done with WLTXD.

quote:

the hoover dam is in no way similar in pieces to the cure for cancer.....

the game tries to be realistic, but alas it can only go so far

we already beat the realism topic of civ to death last millenium, so if its realism your looking for, maybe a computer flight sim is more your spead.

The most realistic part of Civ2 is that when playing last stages it seems to take one year to play one year...

quote:

However, i like your stance and there is nothing wrong with your opinion, keep up the good work and watch the debate continue

, after all, thats what these forums are for

Thanks, just wanted to bounce the topic around a little. Again, it seems too powerful to me...

Venger
[This message has been edited by Venger (edited May 09, 2000).]

mindseye · May 9, 2000, 21:19

Cato has a good point. Improvements in diets and living standards, increased availability of consumer goods - it's not hard to think of the factors that enabled the "Baby Boom" as something analagous to moving the luxuries slider to the right. And it certainly affected our entire civ!

Regarding the growth rate itself, WLTxD cannot compete with the growth rate experienced by the city I live in during the decades following 1849!

I love that phrase "crutch for the weaker player" - I think my playing style requires a full-fledged walker!

- mindseye

Venger · May 9, 2000, 21:50

quote:

Originally posted by Tom DeMille on 05-09-2000 11:42 AM
Maybe we should start threads like:

Wonders - crutches for the weaker player?

Caravans - crutches for the weaker player?

More than 1 city - a crutch for the weaker player?

Democracy/Fundy/Commie - a crutch for the weaker player?

Not playing Multiplayer - a crutch for the weaker player?

Okay, so does this mean you actually have something to ADD to the thread?

quote:

My point is, agains't the AI, even at Deity, there is nothing that is essential to winning. Skipping any particular wonder or government type will not make you loose.

How does that relate to the power of WLTXD and whether or not it's easy to abuse?

Venger

Venger · May 9, 2000, 21:56

quote:

Originally posted by Sten Sture on 05-09-2000 01:08 PM
LoL - How about:

Defensive terrain - Crutch for bad tacticians
Instruction manuals - Crutch for bad improvisors
Tranmissions - Crutch for bad drivers
Money - Crutch for bad thieves

You are a singular wit.

quote:

I can't believe this thread exists...

So SKIP IT. God people, if you have nothing to add, then freaking go DO SOMETHING ELSE.

If you think WLTXD is a perfectly reasonable tactic, used to good effect, so be it, please say so. If you think it's too powerful, too easy, then say so. But if you aren't very clever, but really think you are, feel free to post your LoL posts down at the local gay bar, or Homeless Shelter, or some other place...just not on this thread.

Venger

Venger · May 9, 2000, 22:01

quote:

Originally posted by Ming on 05-09-2000 02:02 PM
Oh come on... give him a break. Everybody is welcome to their opinion. While I will disagree with him on whether the designers intended us to use WLYD's to crank up population, I have no problem with him stating that it could be considered a crutch.
I will disagree with him on that too, but he is just stating an opinion.

Disagreement I can take.

quote:

And what fun would be these forums be with out a difference of opinion

Apparently some of these guys are just amusing the hell out of each other...

Venger

Venger · May 9, 2000, 22:07

quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Viking on 05-09-2000 02:40 PM
If you don't like WLT*D, don't use it.

Gee, you know, I NEVER thought of that. Jeez...

Has anyone noticed I've posted at least twice asking the best way to remove it from the game in the rules.txt or wherever? Trust me I DON'T use it...

quote:

Next thing, you'll be complaining about building cities in mountains.

Why? You are appropriately handicapped by building in mountains.

quote:

I usually don't use it myself. But the idea of recruiting people to your cities by with "social spending" or whatever is not unrealistic. The overall effects can be too extreme, but as everyone is saying this is a game, not reality.

I agree with the too extreme part. Again, it's not that WLTXD exists, but that it can be utilized to ridiculous ends. As to reality, I don't find it realistic within the scope of the game.

Venger

Venger · May 9, 2000, 22:30

quote:

But shouldn't a good player be able to win the game using the correct strategies?

Part of my contention is that a good player should be able to win without what I consider a questionable strategy.

quote:

WLT_D is but one of many strategies. Like any strategy, you give up X now in the hopes of gaining Y later.

I'm not sure I'd call it a strategy, I'd more likely refer to it as a tool. Or crutch...

quote:

Given the severe restrictions placed on Rep/Dem gov't, there needs to be some incentive to switching to these gov'ts.

Severe? I really find the restrictions are more than offset by the advantages, all without the population growth aspect of WLTYYYD...

quote:

Why is growing your civ via WLT_D less valid than plunking down a large number of small cities?

I'm not sure why there is an attempt at a correlation between these two. Frankly, I find ICS more digestible than WLTYYYD, probably since I witness WLTYYYD firsthand and what it can do in my own Civ. I could add 10% more luxuries and explosively grow my Civ. But that's too easy, and cheap.

quote:

If you want to play a perfectionist style game, WLT_D is the only way to do it. How else can your 10 cities win against the Mongols' 40+ cities unless yours are larger?

As the geniuses at Hasbro took the Mongols out of the Extended Game in ToT, I'm not sure...but against any aggressive Civ - find a way. Probe their rear (God that's an uncomfortable sentence to type). Attack en masse. Take and consolidate. Whatever. Sometimes you may lose. But saying "I know, I'll whore luxuries for 10 turns so I can double my size", just seems too easy.

quote:

Also remember that unchecked population growth brings on pollution. Mass Transit and Hydro Plants are a long way off from Rep and Dem. So while you might get into the low teens with WLT_D, you are basically stuck there throughout the rest of the mid-game.

I imagine most of my problem with WLTYYYD is in the later game, maybe Railroad on, when most players should have good infrastructure of roads. It's not growing your capital from 5 to 9 that's so bad, it's growing it from 15 to 32 that really chaps my hide.

quote:

In the area of realism, the "standard" method of population growth is exactly the opposite of what you expect in a real population, i.e. It takes more and more time for a city to grow each time a new citizen is added.

I find it most realistic. Diminishing returns applies here.

quote:

You can accomplish the same thing with ICS.

No way. ICS is slower to develop, and is anathema to Rep/Dem. At least I would expect it so considering the higher city overhead required in those governments.

quote:

Or capturing your neighbors cities.

Not the same.

quote:

Or using Spies.

Another crutch - spy pimping.

quote:

Or demanding tribute.

Not under these govs.

quote:

Or sharing techs in an alliance.

What's an alliance?

quote:

Or sending caravans across the seas.

I never trade with a foreign city. Unless I'm about to sack it...

quote:

Also you are not correct in claiming that you are merely "taking 12 turns" to come out ahead. In truth, you must have already spent many dozens of turns setting up for WLT_D: a) building infrastructure, b) improving land, c) pursuing "peaceful" science goals. All the while you are making your civ more and more vulnerable because the above also implies: a) not building a good military, b) not settling and claiming new land, c) having obsolete units.

Isn't that part of good management under of Rep/Dem? I don't see city bloat as a piece of that puzzle.

quote:

My experience in exactly the opposite. I find it much easier to win via conquest than via the space ship. In conquest games, I never bother with Rep or Dem. YMMV of course.

The first spaceship I ever built was in ToT. And that was only to go conquest THAT planet...

I played bloodlust only in Civ2. Why? Too easy to build the spaceship. Plus, spaceship, big whoop. Try landing 25 divisions on the Carthaginian homeland for a mass invasion. Now THAT'S a challenge...

Oh, and as to governments...I never play Communist or Fanatic. Blech. Just a moral hangup or something...kinda like never being able to play the bad guy in other games...

Venger

The Mad Monk · May 9, 2000, 22:31

So, who wants to guess when the Horse is gonna trample this young'on for invading his territory (and successfully, I might add)?

------------------
The Mad Monk

"The capacity of a grass leaf to grow from the sheath
at its base is a useful adaptation to herbivore grazing.
It has also resulted, over the eons, in the piteous
spectacle of thousands of hominids vibrating behind
their lawnmowers from spring to fall."

-Someone's AP Biology Textbook

Venger · May 9, 2000, 22:37

quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Monk on 05-09-2000 10:31 PM
So, who wants to guess when the Horse is gonna trample this young'on for invading his territory (and successfully, I might add)?

Okay, I gotta ask, what are you talking about? This can't be to my credit I'm sure...

Venger

Ming · May 9, 2000, 22:54

Oh... you may find out some day. But Alexander's Horse doesn't really hang out in the Strategy Section too much

Keep up the good debate

Smash · May 10, 2000, 00:52

LOL

Civ2-crutch for weak gamers?

rah · May 10, 2000, 08:38

Put me in the camp that it isn't a crutch. It takes a lot of resources and planning to set up. (especially if you don't get any of the happiness wonders) Some games I use it and some games I choose to go a different route. Just another strategy. Just like ship chaining. A lot of people whine about it but it takes valuable resources and good planning to set up and take advantage of it.
Just another strategy.

RAH
Just doing as Venger asked.

JERandall · May 10, 2000, 09:53

quote:

Originally posted by Venger on 05-09-2000 10:30 PM

I played bloodlust only in Civ2. Why? Too easy to build the spaceship.

[...]

Oh, and as to governments...I never play Communist or Fanatic. [...]

Venger

God, Venger, we are all *so* impressed at your Civ-playing abilities. All the rest of us whining, WLT_D-using, luxury-whoring, spy-pimping weaklings are completely unable to compete with your pure and viruous method of play.

I bow at your feet and request that you enlighten me with you infinite wisdom about how the game should be played. I will never again move a unit or build anything without first asking you, Venger, if doing so is acceptable in the Pure and Virtuous Method of Civ-Playing.

Have I made my point? No? Did I at least amuse you? *No*?! Well, I sure as heck amused myself. :-)

------------------
JERandall

Bohlen · May 10, 2000, 10:12

Wow. What a thread. I'm here late, but here goes.

Bottom line...I don't think there is a way in which you can remove WLTLD from the game. Since it has been programmed within the core program and not within the text files there probably is no way to remove it, unless you are gifted enough to open up the program and actually rewrite it to your liking. How that is done is a mystery to me.

I hope that this topic was brought up as a legit topic and not as an attempt to "dethrone" AH by being more controversial and clever than he, because that's not possible. I think AH is the only person on these boards that can create such an uproar that people start getting pissed off at each other. It is his art and he is good at it. It's funny too. This thread is getting there, but it has a way to go.

Good topic nonetheless.

The Mad Monk · May 10, 2000, 10:29

Because of my playstyle, which involves having twice as many settlers/engineers as cities (after the initial exapnsion), and buying economic improvements, I can get democracies into "perpetual WLT*Ds" fairly easily. I set lux to 20% and never change it after that; coupled with universal marketplaces, banks, and fully roaded terrain, most cities jump from three to eight in next to no time. Stock Exchanges typically push them to twelve, and superhighways often take them as far as they can go.

Oh, and Venger...look to the mountain cities thread in the Civ General Forum, and gain understanding (if not necessarily wisdom)...

Crustacian · May 10, 2000, 13:05

quote:

Originally posted by Venger on 05-09-2000 10:01 PM
Disagreement I can take.

Venger

You don't seem to be able to do as you say if you feel the need to "slap" someone when they dissagree as I did.

You have an interesting point but you are not experienced with using WLPD and other posters replies shows they feel the same way.

My suggestion is give it a try, and maybe you will also see it as a strategy and not a crutch. I also said I did not think the logic you used in drawing your comparisons was consistant.

That sums up my points if you want to take another stab at "slapping" me LOL. It is Crustacian with an "i" tho

If you "slap" me for this then your words mean nothing when you say you can take being dissagreed with

------------------
The journey itself is the thing~Odysseus