We love the 'X' day - LOTS!

Scouse Gits · May 17, 2000, 09:11

On the assumption that Ming will only cut a limited amount of slack for genuine non-spamming non-OT threads that go over the 150 post limit - I thought that it might be advisable to save some innocent from having to take a vacation.

I think WLTXD is perfectly legitimate and in no sense a 'crutch'!

Good civin'

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor
[This message has been edited by Scouse Gits (edited May 17, 2000).]

Ming · May 17, 2000, 09:15

Oh come on... I don't sit in front of my computer just waiting for some fool to post the 151st post to thread so I can ban them

When I see a thread has gone over 150, I just close it then archive it when a continuation thread has been started by the original creator.

And, I don't see this as a continuation of that thread. This is a pro WLYD thread... the other one was against it

So I look forward (gag) to part two of the other thread

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

Scouse Gits · May 17, 2000, 09:16

Sorry, Ming - I posted this simultaneously to your closing the other thread - I did not realize that it was Venger's perogative to open the continuation...

Ming · May 17, 2000, 09:20

Yeah, since it was a long thread it took some time to post to it, then close it. (and that's why we now have a post limit)

No problem. We can use this thread to discuss all the great ways that WLYD's are used as an integral part of our "crutch oriented" strategies

Crustacian · May 17, 2000, 09:26

But wait!!!!!! I have been pulled to the dark side of anti WLPDism.

Well not realy. Long live WLPD! It is part of the journey.

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

Oldman · May 17, 2000, 09:30

Did he like say crutch? huh, huh
yeah, huh, huh, he said crutch!! ha ha!!
say it again, huh huh!!
Crutch, crutch yeah crutch, ha ha
Huh, huh!
huh...

War4ever · May 17, 2000, 13:08

now now boys..... play nicely..... Venger may be a tad overzealous when he replies to posts, but egging him on is only asking for more silly behaviour from all

although thouroughly enjoyable to read on one thread, making fun of him on multiple threads is somewhat *yawn* boring.

Besides, as we all know, he had some good points to make and that is whats important here. still don't agree that WLTKD is a crutch though

Ming · May 17, 2000, 13:49

Oh don't worry War4ever. If he starts thread II on the subject, I will close this one down. I'm leaving this one open for now because there is such high levels of emotion on this debate (since the facts are scimpy at best, why not) and it obviously generated so much interest. Heck, anything that increases traffic to an On Topic forum is fine by me... as long as it is game related

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

JERandall · May 17, 2000, 14:24

One interesting point which someone made towards the end of the other tread (sorry, I'm too lazy to look up who it was) is that WLTXD is not just for *weaker* players -- it is available to everyone. And, rather than being a mark of a weak player, proper use of WLTXD is often the mark of a strong player.

Someone then said (paraphrased), "You have to use WLTXD (in multiplayer) to keep up with ICS or other fast-growth strategies." So it seems that the real issue is, how can a non-growth strategy compete with a growth strategy?

Certainly, on a small enough map, if you (a militarist) catch a growth and tech-oriented opponent early, you can crush him. But on medium and large maps, you simply can't find your opponents fast enough to make quick conquest successful. This is not to say that you shouldn't or can't harrass your opponents throughout the game, striking when the opportunity presents itself; just that, at some level, seemingly *every* successful MP strategy involves the growth/tech route.

Is this correct? Or am I horribly, mind-bogglingly, ignoramously wrong?

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

Ming · May 17, 2000, 15:10

Well, you are correct. That's why I hate playing MP on large worlds. It really removes the warmonger strategy as a viable option. (unless you are luck enough to start right next to somebody)
Playing on small worlds is great. Land is at a premium. You eventually (and sometimes it doesn't take long) run out of room. The only way to really expand is to beat up on somebody else.
But yes... every MP game is about expansion, growth and research. If you don't do this, you are doomed. The only difference between a big map and a small map is how early the combat starts

War4ever · May 17, 2000, 18:55

it was i who paraphrased the need for fast growth strats , although i am the only one who vocalized this, it is well thought of by many others

in reality, both ics and fast growth strats have one major weakness.... catch the person early and they are in trouble. Sounds easy right, not really. Players make adjustments once they have made contact of some sort... the elite players here turn fast growth or ics into dangerous weapons which seem unfair, but in reality are pure genius when pulled off corectly. I wont debate the issue as it was beaten to death last thread, but if your going to use either of these strats, go 110% or you will be beaten.

One cannot affoard to rely on just one strat though, the real key to civ is to know what the scenario is ahead of time and be flexible enough to alter your strategy as time allows.

Besides once labelled a certain type of player, people learn how to beat you at your own game. This game is forever changing and fast growth or ics are not the only ways to win, but they certainly have proven their effectiveness in many games.

Scouse Gits · May 18, 2000, 01:35

War - what happened to the Beaver? Or is this a touch of INS (Infinite Naming Sleaze)!

--------
SG (2)

War4ever · May 18, 2000, 02:06

lol @ ScouseGits the two of them

some problems i experienced thats all, but i am happy to say i have my old monicker back, minus the king post count i had