No room for civility any more?

[hexagonian]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Trouble is...many, if not most of those criticisms were spot on....Civ3 IS a game with some problems, some of them minor, and some of them fairly major.

Oddly, after enough time immersed in the guts of the game, I "switched sides." Could no longer continue avid support of a game with what I perceived and considered too many design flaws, stemming from bedrock level design decisions.
-=Vel=-

This, to me, is a very telling aspect of the state of civ3, and should be a cause of concern for Firaxis. What I've seen over the last few months is a group of staunch defenders of the game eventually get to the point where they see the limitations and flaws of the game. And to me, the caliber of the people who have flipped on civ3 is actually very high (especially a 'certain player' whose strategy helps for SMAC are legendary...)

Your impressions of the limited strategy options in civ3 is a point that should not be ignored. At the same time, there are probably a lot of players who do not approach the game in the same way you do, so for them, that concept is a moot point.

(Actually, I was tempted at one time to start a poll on who would be the next to flip, but that was a flame war in the making....)

Lib, Venger and Yin (yes, Yin because he actually had a lot of initial positives to say about civ3 after a couple of rounds with it) all have done a 180 on civ3 (...OK, you may have only done a 150), and with the possible exception of you, have also taken A LOT of heat from the loyalist camp.

For the most point, I have felt that the issues brought up by all of them have been very valid, but at the same time, sometimes the tone of the posts has been somewhat sarcastic in tone. (Note that the recent '95 thesis' thread actually had a lot of good observations but was very heavy on the sarcasm...) The sarcasm has been mainly directed at Firaxis, but once again, the line gets blurred in the mind as to who is the butt of the sarcasm.

I make no bones about the fact that I prefer the 'CTP2 Modded' model at this point in time. Before civ3 came out, there was a civ2/civ3 loyalist who would come into the CTP2 threads - all he would say that CTP2 Modded 'sucked' and that all of us who modded the game were wasting our time because the CTP2 community was so small.

It wasn't so much his viewpoint that was bothersome, but it was the tone and language that he used to present his viewpoint that was so irritating. Even when he was pressed about his viewpoint, it came out that he had not really played the Modded versions and had based his comments on gameplay in the default mode. Again, I understand that perceptions of a game are often based on incomplete info, and I can deal with that, but this person had no other effective argument rather than 'CTP2 sucks'.

I realize that my posting on how good/bad civ3 is similar to the poster mentioned above - all I try to do is to get players to have an open mind to some of the weaknesses that are noted by civ3 players and to continue to press Firaxis to hopefully fix these issues via patch, or 'shudder', XPack. (and IMO, many of the issues that may bother some players in civ3 have been addressed in the CTP2 Modded community - and 'Modded CTP2' has pleasantly surprised some of the civ3 loyalists as of late).

For me, one thing that came out of that incident was a greater understanding of the powerful pull of so-called 'preference issues', which to me ends up causing the majority of the flame wars that have occured recently here.

There is nothing inherently wrong with holding a preference for something - let's at least agree to respect those preference issues.

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by moominparatrooper

All that said; here's the off-topic material: Vel! Where's the meat about Velocigames and the Game Whose Name No Mere Mortal Can Recall? I'm dying to hear some news, man! If you're about to adapt Firaxis' doctrine on forum participation, please tell us so...

i hope Vel won't mind if i answer this ... (shhh, it's a bit OT ... if we're quiet maybe Ming won't notice).

we're steadily working our way towards a first initial playable version of the game ... most of Vel's original threads about the project have a link to our team forum at the bottom of them. there is a thread in the 'Other Games' forum (called 'Candle'Bre', i think)where you can download the rules for the game as it stands.

you're welcome to check out both...

now to get back on-topic:

yes, i think that the general feelings of dissatisfaction with civ3 have caused a lot of people to mod the game to suit their tastes (even if only a little bit, since the editor is limited). this means that for many people civ3 is a different game, and discussion of the standard version does not benefit from this - although perhaps the game itself does.

[Ming]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
(shhh, it's a bit OT ... if we're quiet maybe Ming won't notice).

[FrustratedPoet]

uh-oh .... busted!!!!!!



it won't happen again sir! i promise!

[Thrawn05]

I think you did yourself in FrustratedPoet.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
yes, i think that the general feelings of dissatisfaction with civ3 have caused a lot of people to mod the game to suit their tastes (even if only a little bit, since the editor is limited).

IMO, the main reason for the existence of so many mods is the lack of any scenario editor. Therefore, a lot of 'creative' energy goes into modding the basic game - and while there are a good deal of mods that aim to 'smoothen out' the rules (korn's blitz mod and vel's no-name mod being the most ambitious of them), even more modders (at least in my perception) are busy with creating maps and additonal units - the basic essentials of scenarios.

[Velociryx]

Thanks for the assist, Stoo! Vel's home sick today...UGH...nasty sore throat (and since much of my job involves talkin' on the phone fixing computer troubles, I figured I'd prolly not be of much use to them).

To glide off topic for a sec. again (using what mastery of The Force I have to make Ming look t'other way for a second), yep, what FP said! We're over at my site The Renaissance Portal in the trenches and working toward the first playable version of Candle'Bre! (v0.1). This first version will be playable from start to finish, but will be the game in its most raw, basic form (essentially, it'll be a matter of getting the map done, and testing the combat engine, with only the bare bones economic model in place--just enough to play a complete game).

In my mind, unit balancing will be among THE most critical elements of making the game a cult classic, and once we get v0.1 done, we'll be able to spend a TON of time making damn sure we don't have any uber units/useless units. As we continue to hash out the design, I'm noticing that the units are getting a lot more specialized, and that's a good thing, IMO. That, taken together with the fact that combined arms are a necessity to excel, should make for some *exquisite* game play, even with the bare bones version.

I could ramble on about it a lot more, but...lol...Ming's attention will only be diverted for just a second more, so back on topic....

Every time I check back here, I'm more and more heartened by all the different names I see....posting here, mostly in agreement
(and with one notable exception, even those who disagree have been doing so...civilly), and giving this thread a thubms up! That tells me that there's more than enough civility on this board to turn the tide....a very good thing, IMO.

And yep...definitely up to us....

-=Vel=-
(back to nyquil and bed with me)
PS: To get to the latest stuffages on Candle'Bre, follow the link above, click on "Discussion Forums" - Candle'Bre will be at the top!

[Spaced Cowboy]

Just wanted to say that even though I'm a newbie to posting, everyone here has been helpful and has managed to do so without trashing me.

I lurked for a long long time before my first post. I have to admit that I'm a little intimidated by some of the folks around here, even though I work with computers/email every day and have for a long long time.

I agree that people can argue, but should do so without flaming each other. I guess that is the way that they show that their arguement is weak.
RPM

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by RPMisCOOL

I agree that people can argue, but should do so without flaming each other. I guess that is the way that show that their arguement is weak.
RPM

That's true, I think being uncivil and flaming others, like us newbies, makes people tend to ignore what you are trying to say, like the "95 things..." thread, he had good points but who really got those on the first read through. I didn't just seemed like whining to me.

right now, the game is what the game is, until it's fixed- this is what we have to work with.

[Just My 2 Cents]

Hi, I'd like to chime in with my opinion, for what it's worth:

I'm a member of several forums, they cover the spectrum when it comes to topics. Some were nice but most have turned into what the chatrooms did once the internet started being used for purposes its developers did not intend (chat rooms, fps multiplayer, pron, blah blah blah):

every forum has it's share of "civilized posters". Just to pick one off the top of my head, let's use Vel as an example (and I'm just choosing him because I've never read a post where he was deliberately rude to another poster, even if that poster disagreed with him and even if the other poster was becoming hostile). these civilized posters usually generate 75% of the posts worth reading regarding strategy, etc... usually because they are open-minded and are willing to try someone else's idea even if it's contrary to the way they like to play (what many have seemed to forgotten is it's just a f***ing game, afterall). arbirtrarily let's say such posters make up about 10% of the board.

the majority of the boards make up another 50% (arbirtary), and I'll label them as sheep. I call them sheep because they're usually newbies, they have many questions to ask, they are not very experienced in Civ 3 (or even Civilization as a series) and they tend to agree with whomever seems to be the most popular poster at the moment. This goes back to me picking Vel. I've never met the guy, I've never emailed the guy, I probably will never do any of the above but just by reading his (very helpful) SMACX guide I figured he had some tips that might be worth listening to. I'm not going to agree with everything he says because frankly I don't. I just think his "online persona" is cool because he's one of the few civilized posters left on the internet. that's just my opinion and it ain't ass kissing. however it's funny to watch Vel or (insert nick here) make a post and see 15 other posters say, "Dude you're so smart, why didn't you design the game." Think for yourselves, man! Half the time I wonder if some of the regulars log on as different aliases to further a thread, we've all seen it before and frankly it's funny most of the time.

the next 10% I'll label the jerks. these guys get off on pissing people off and 90% of internet users have to learn that acknowleding a jerk's posts actually encourages him. the smart thing to do if a guy is pissing you off is just to ignore him, you don't know him, he doesn't know you, why the f**k do you care what he thinks? I could give a rat's ass about what anyone who reads this post thinks, most likely very few people actually will get around to mine. this is for me, doods, and that's what a forum should be about, pick up some tips, try to be polite, if you're really into that sort of thing, then hell, go ahead and try to make an online cyber-pal. but this is not real life, the only thing most of us share in common is that fact that we like (or intensely dislike) civ.

and that brings me to the final 30%, the lurkers. the guys who read posts occasionally and even less occasionally actually make a post. they sit back and try to distill some diamonds from the rough when it comes to strategy tips (and believe me it's been slim pickings lately, the 1.17f patch really hosed a certain poster's "guaranteed" approach to beating the game on diety level, and I don't think that's a bad thing). half the time they laugh at the little wars going on. a lurker rarely posts (and if you've read this far you're near the end) because this is how most forums work:

-the polite 10% and the jerky 10% make most of the "important" posts.
-if you are not "known" by either of these 20%, chances are you will be ignored or flamed, depending on which "class" responds.
-if you dare question the veracity of either class, you also risk being flamed by not only the polites and the jerks (I forgot to mention "civilized posters" can also flame you but they are very careful about how they do it to maintain their "rep") but also by the 50% "sheep" posters

in summary, a forum is really a small group of guys (and oh yes, it's almost all males, I don't know that many hot girls but the ones I know think civilization is a high-school history course) who exert their opinions on the sheep who bother to post, and revel in the satisfaction of making a person who in reality is probably a fairly level headed dude their "*****".

"Playing militaristically is SO boring. It's pixel pushing. It's not real Civ. It's not what the designers intended. Anyone who plays an agressive militaristic game isn't a very good Civ player."
-Popular Civilized Poster

"Oh man you're so right. I realize now that all my militaristic wins were cheap victories and I was cheating myself. Even though it's really hard to win on the higher levels without fighting at least one major prolonged war, I'll try to do it the hard way because that's how all the "experts" do it and only they can tell me how to play Civ."
-Sheep 1

"Well, I've never posted before but I think since it's just a game, and most of us play games to win, how you win the game doesn't really matter, unless you cheat, in which case that's your decision and no one else should really tell you how to play the game. We can offer opinions but since you bought the thing play it how you like it and most importantly have fun doing it."
-Lurker

"You're a f**king idiot. PCP just told you how to play the game and you come onto HIS forum and question him? Who the f**k do you think you are?"
-Jerk 1

"Now, now. No need for profanity. But thanks for your support, Jerk 1. I choose to ignore this peon, no one cares what he thinks and it's quite obvious he still hasn't grasped the game."
-Popular "Civilized" Poster

"You're all going to be my *****es when Civ multiplayer comes out, I'm going to use ICS, I'm going to go for an early game warrior rush and my pixellated minions will rape your pixellated women!!! Empire Earth RULZ!!!!"
-Jerk 2

OK that went on way to long but that's what I think, I really don't give a f**k if anyone agrees or disagrees, remember the problem with a democracy is even an idiot is allowed an opinion... which bring me to this: since everyone is entitled to an opinion, why can't we respect each other's? There's no right and wrong when it comes to a subjective decision yet I read flame wars between to parties who are arguing about what is the equivalent of "I like Techno music, you like Rock music, you're an idiot because you don't agree with me."

[faded glory]

I take a different I dont flame anyone. Unless they attack me. I just had a run in with somebody in the "Stalingrad" thread. I didnt mean it to be a flamefest, I just was attacked bye some guy who looked like he had a bone to pick. I dont know if its all frusteration. I think Velo, its more people who want to see things fixed.(People A).are fighting with people who like the game as is (call them people B). And to the people who think this game needs some fixin (People A), the peolple B are clearly acting as Obstructionists.

I think it comes down to that.

Thats my 2 cents

[notyoueither]

Yes FG.

I'm sure the following outburst encouraged constructive debate:

Originally posted by faded glory
E ****in relevent

The "Kill 60 units to take this heavily armed city only to have a bunch of starving, rag-tag civilians destroy the city and declare it independent cause of culture difference" is fvckin stupid.

Yes, that's a good way to get civil discussion going. Always works for me.

and then there's this one:

Originally posted by faded glory
Stop defending this piece of **** with historical analogys

It just doesnt happen like that. You dont move into a city EVERYTIME, just to have it ****in revolt. This Bull----......It needs to be fixed NOW!

On a roll now. I'll bet everyone on Poly was PMing there buds to come see this one.

Then someone points out that you might not have discovered how to combat your peeve in the game and they are greeted with this:

Originally posted by faded glory
Ohhh.......Im sorry Moron Of course dont blame the ****in game!?

Its not the devolopers fault it is a flawed pile of ****! Its yours for reading into the phoney hype!

Well...you can go to hell.

Now you have truely obtained orbit. Did your civ get credit for a space victory?

At the risk of seeing this sort of thing spill over to here, I believe that your behaviour is exactly what this thread is intended to address. Or maybe it's just me.

Salve

[asleepathewheel]

Faded Glory:

I would take your dichotomy and stretch it further into 3 groups:
A) those who enjoy the game as it is, or have minor annoyances, and will occassionaly post constructive critisisms

B) those who are unhappy with the game and post constructive critisisms without resorting to flaming or name calling etc.

C) Those who, for some reason or another, have to refer to the game as a "piece of ****" or a "flawed pile of ****" and then make disparaging remarks about the developers of the game and even those who enjoy the game (newbies who "just like the cool graphics and eyecandy")

While you may argue that group A is composed of "obstructionists", I think very few, if any, are actually trying to keep the Firaxis from improving it. After all, i think few would argue that the game is better completely unpatched?

I see the first 2 groups as supporting the game, helping its evolution, and the third merely as trouble makers. They could be arguing the points of the game constructively, as the first do, but instead they resort to ranting about the game ad naseum.

I would argue that this third group is actually composed of the obstructionists. After all, it seems they delight in the problems they perceive the game has. If these were the only people who purchased the game, would Firaxis continue to support it? or would it flounder like CTP and CTP2? The way these people rant, it would appear that the game is unsalvageable, so why should firaxis fix it? But, luckily for those who enjoy the game, the third group is having negligible effect on the game, it continues to be a top selling game which makes it more likely to be improved by firaxis.

Then I guess the question is, if I think the third group is essentially irrelevant, why do I even bother to post this or read their posts?

the answer? I don't know, maybe I'm masochistic

[Immortal Wombat]

AND BY DOES NOT HAVE AN E!!!!!!!

[faded glory]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Yes FG.

Of course, kiddy points out what I said. But not what was said to me


Faded Glory:

you may not be aware that there are numerous threads dealing with how to prevent cultural flipping. And with the most recent patch, it is possible to remove the possibility of reversion entirely

Don't refer to a game as a piece of **** when you don't understand how the mechanics of the game work, or if you do understand the game, but refuse to adapt, don't blame the game.

With regards to this being an unlikely event in reality, while that may be true, what in the game IS based in reality? eh? the names of the units I suppose. Maybe some other things, but not much. Does any Civ-type game simulate reality? Any game at all?
----------------------------------------------
To which I replied.

Ohhh.......Im sorry Moron Of course dont blame the ****in game!?

Its not the devolopers fault it is a flawed pile of ****! Its yours for reading into the phoney hype!
--------------------------------

To which you replied...

>>Ohhh.......Im sorry Moron Of course dont blame the ****in game!?

Hey there, no need to devolve into name calling, eh?

>>Its not the devolopers fault it is a flawed pile of ****! Its yours for reading into the phoney hype!

It's my fault that you think the game is a flawed pile of ****? What are you talking about? It was a concious design decision by the programmers. There are several ways to avoid the flips, and if you can't deal with it and destroys the game for you, then play a different game.

>>Well...you can go to hell.

I'll get right on that
---------------------------

Then I was savagly attacked bye a lamer.


Why should he blame the excellent game for you inability to placate your victims. Cities do flip in my games. Mostly to me. Hardly ever the other way. I like that.

quote:


Its not the devolopers fault it is a flawed pile of ****! Its yours for reading into the phoney hype!



It is the developers fault that the game works pretty well most of the time. Including culture flipping. Now I don't like the loss of troops. That is really annoying. So I don't leave my troops in. I just wipe out the civ in those rare cases where they have much more culture than I do.


quote:


Well...you can go to hell.



My how illuminating. I can see why you can't use culture flipping to your advantage. Uncultured lout. Much like the Assyrians. Conquered large territories and then culture flipped to be indistinguishable from the conquered.

quote:


Its obvouisly the fault of the devolopers. Oh I refuse to adapt?
Thats a load of bull kiddo





Don't you roll your eyes at me little boy. Now clean up your room and put the toy soldiers away. Your not treating them very well and they may run away to the neighbors little boy. He is much nicer to his toys.

quote:


The fact is the whole war thing is a fuxin mess. Almost all the cities you capture are raised.



Thats can be very true. The cities in my games were almost all RAISED out of the mud the late unlamented enemy had dragged their unfortunate populace through. In my last game I RAISED Thebes from the Egyptian capitial to become MY capital. Launched the Space Ship from it.







Ming I'll chill out. Sorry for the flames. I just had to say that!




Sorry you felt the need to show how poorly you deal with both culture and flames. Do try to get some culture for yourself. Perhaps if I was to point you to some nice Bach or Beethoven recordings or maybe some good musuem sites on the web.



Too which Idiot replied, (after being warned bye ming)

Newbie is youbie. I have been playing computer games since the Apple ][ and cassette tapes. Played Civ since it was an English boardgame. Not even all that new here. Just decided to stop lurking. I figured I would have gotten myself banned if I was dealing with Lib. I wouldn't be able to help myself.

quote:


What game are you playing? And why should I have to Raze entire Civ's to the ground? What the hell kinda simulation is that? It makes the game incredibly lame....




Civ III 1.17f. The one this part of Apolyton is for. The game you don't know how to play. I have no idea why you have to raze entire civs to the ground. I just take them over. Use their cities for my designs. Its not the game that is lame if I can do it and you can't.


quote:


uh?? Your a moron. Culture plays almost 0 in real conflict. West bank anyone? I dont see Israeli troops defecting or getting kicked out so easily.



I am not the one that can't flame without getting banned. I don't have to call people morons to show who is and who isn't. I don't see the PLO having a capital. I don't see the PLO having any culture. I don't see the PLO having a chance in Civ III.

I do see pictures of Genhis Khan and somehow he looks Chinese even though the Mongols were more likely caucasion at that time. They were culturly conquered by China and they took so many Chinese women as wives they ceased to exist as a seperate gene pool.

And the Romans turned so Greek they had the same gods under different names. Alexander started wearing makeup to copy the Persians. His general in Egypt changed his name to an Egyptian one. Ptolomy.

Care for more?

quote:


uh.....nice Thanks kiddo. But if you werent such a retard and actually read my post. I wasnt talking to you.



If you weren't so terribly, hideously, culturaly deprived you would have noticed that this a largely open forum. Anyone that can keep their temper seems to be welcome.

You will never become a succesfull flame warrior if you can't keep your temper.

quote:


no need to foam at the mouth jr.




I take it you are quoting someone in the room with you. Wipe the drool off you chin and no will mistake it for foam.

quote:


Nice flames. And you accuse me? Iwas over the flames jr. But seeing as how you attacked me like so!? Let the flames (in your case) the Lames! Fly



Over the flames? Is that why you are near to taking a trip to Mingapulco?

Flaming is an art form. That means you need some culture to be good at it. You are in danger of culture flipping.

quote:

Oh your a true warhorse now Bet your daddy is proud! !



He died in 1976. So I suspect that pride is somewhat beyond his present capacity.

Don't bring a knife to a flamethrower fight.

I like culture flipping. I use it. Its good for builders. Its not there for the warmongers.

They really don't need any help anyway. Any competent warmonger should be able to win, corruption and culture or not. A dozen strong producing cities should be enough to take over the world. The rest are there as rest stops on the way to domination.

[faded glory]

Oh notyoueither


Have you forgotten I was flamed first? Or did that fly over your head too?

[Ming]

Originally posted by faded glory
Oh notyoueither
Have you forgotten I was flamed first? Or did that fly over your head too?

Two wrongs don't make a right

So don't start it all over again.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

TDC,

"The Dumbest Clown"

is active again on one of his recent 'thread''s.

Just can't understand, can he? (it?)


AJ

Civility toward the civilized.
Ignorance toward the annoyance?

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by Ming


Two wrongs don't make a right

So don't start it all over again.

I think it'd be instructive for everyone interested in the "civility" issue to go glance at the "Stalingrad" thread at take a look at the message that provoked Faded Glory, and the posts by FG that preceded it. (There aren't very many, and they tend to be short.... the fact that not an insignificant number of the words in FG's posts are composed primarily of *s - both before and after he was "flamed" - helps keep down the verbage, too.)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Folks where do I start?

First pronounce me guilty.

Guilty of enjoying seeing a flame war in action. A little chuckle every once in awhile seeing it kinna like you can't help but look at a train wreck. A guilty pleasure.

But, in the same vein I don't think it right to encourage and feed the flames. If I'm not mistaken, flame wars themselves are indeed encouraged by the sense of notoriety it generates.

In order to defuse the anti-CIVil behavior a couple of things have to happen: a) cooler heads have to prevail to prevent rash responses b) The community must have enough resolve not to attempt to encourage the behavior through excess publicity and re-hashment

Folks let it drop.

I'll take the resolution for points a and b.

Og

[Jack_www]

I think that the best thing to do if your are personally attacked is to ignore the person. A lot of people who pick on other people do it because they like the attention it brings and the reactions of the people they pick on. Many times when I see flam wars going on, I wonder why people are fighting other a game for? There are much more important things in life to be worry about then a computer game. Some people hate Civ3, and other people love Civ3, and some just like to some digree. Just like if I like a certain food and someone else hates the certain food I like. I dont argue with that person just because they hate something I like. What will insulting someone else do??? No good comes of it. Why must people continue to such hatered towards one anther, and other the simplists of things? Why cann't people be kind to one anther. If everyone treated everyone else just the same way they wanted to be treated the whole world would be a better place.

I attend 'Internet World' every now and then--a computer software industry event composed of tons of seminars/workshops and a host of retailers/service providers. Oftentimes the speakers are industry notables. One such was one of the head honchos from Yahoo (if I remember correctly) and he make the interesting observation that, while the Internet has been ballyhooed as "a place where people can come together", it has really developed into a place where people "form into tighter and tighter niche groups."

In other words, rather than individuals focusing on what they have in common, they focus on the differences between them, and splinter into smaller and smaller groups based on a tighter and tighter set of commonalities (e.g., bass fishermen, afraid of flying, who have 4+ years of post-high school education, hate vegetables, and knit during their spare time). ((Yes, I know its an overstated example. I figure that limits the number of people I'll insult because they belong to that group and feel that I am unfairly picking on them .))

In my mind, 'constructive criticism' is far more difficult than simply 'destructive criticism' or plain, simple 'negativism'. It takes far more effort to state how things could be improved than to simply say that "it sucks."

I think we're fortunate to have a large number of people here that have some very definite, and specific, ideas on how Civ3 could be improved. Together with some who just want an audience while they complain. The trick, I suppose, is to ignore the flames and rants, and try to actively pursue the constructive discussions.

Thanks to all (including, and especially, any Firaxians who are listening) for working to make Civ3 even better than it already is.

[Skanky Burns]

Well said, DATarbell.

[FNBrown]

Just my two cents...

1.) Good post, Vel... you're a gentleman and a scholar, and your efforts are appreciated.

2.) The CivIII Stories forum is a model of civility, if you ask me. I've gotten along blissfully with Civvers from around the world while participating in a succession game there. If you haven't tried it, you should...

- Franklin

[Dienstag]

I just found this quote:

"Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing in the tempting place." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

[Ethelred]

I have read this post of Faded Glory over twice. Before I posted this I read the rest of the thread unlike my usual method of dealing with posts as I come to them.

I am only posting to clear things up. FG mixed my posts with his and others and did not make it clear who said what. I don't care to have my posts labeled as if they were his and his as if they were mine. So I am going to color code and make a few carefull remarks.


Dark red for my original statements

Dark blue for Faded Glory's

Black for anything new.

FG

------------------------
Then I was savagly attacked bye a lamer.
-----------------------


Funny way that was to show that someone else was being a lamer.

Suggestion FG. Don't tell, show. Thats the difference between the original Robert E. Howard Conan stories and the worst of the pastiches that Lin Carter produced.

Of course there isn't much to show. This next is what FG is claiming as me starting it. As if it hadn't allready started when he tore into the previous person.

Me

----------------------------
Why should he blame the excellent game for your inability to placate your victims. Cities do flip in my games. Mostly to me. Hardly ever the other way. I like that.
----------------------------

If that is what you think of as flames just what is calling me a lamer. This latest 'lamer' remark is now long after you promised to stop.

That was no flame. It was simple reality. When you raze a city you are making victims of the population of the city. Nothing in there was the least insulting as you had allready said you couldn't keep the cities from revolting. All I did was say I could keep the cities without revolts.

FG

------------------------
quote:


Its not the devolopers fault it is a flawed pile of ****! Its yours for reading into the phoney hype!
-------------------------

The next one is mine and I sure don't see anything inflamatory there.

--------------------------------------------------
It is the developers fault that the game works pretty well most of the time. Including culture flipping. Now I don't like the loss of troops. That is really annoying. So I don't leave my troops in. I just wipe out the civ in those rare cases where they have much more culture than I do.
--------------------------------------------------



FG

-----------------------------------------------
quote:


Well...you can go to hell.
----------------------------------------------


Me

----------------------------------
My how illuminating. I can see why you can't use culture flipping to your advantage. Uncultured lout. Much like the Assyrians. Conquered large territories and then culture flipped to be indistinguishable from the conquered.
-----------------------------------


All right, now that is a flame from me. Its in context and the discusion was about culture flipping. His inablitly to hold cities is largely due to not developing his culture. Hence "Uncultured lout".

I really don't see how that is a terrible and uncivil thing to say in the context of that thread.

Him again

-------------------------------------
quote:


Its obvouisly the fault of the devolopers. Oh I refuse to adapt?
Thats a load of bull kiddo
--------------------------------------


Well I didn't say he refused to adapt so who was fertilizing the discusion. I would guess what was in his mind was as mixed up as this latest post was in print.


Now here he quotes me without showing what he said. This remark was funny. He had a rolling eye smiley and I keyed on that. True its a flame but its still funny and hardly in the class of his. Its pretty civil for satire. I am not going to apoligize for being funny.


------------------------------------------
Don't you roll your eyes at me little boy. Now clean up your room and put the toy soldiers away. Your not treating them very well and they may run away to the neighbors little boy. He is much nicer to his toys.
-------------------------------------------


FG - he mixed this up real good.

Faded Glory
-------------------------------
quote:


The fact is the whole war thing is a fuxin mess. Almost all the cities you capture are raised.
--------------------------------



My statement but he ran it right under his l33t speak as if it was his.

------------------------------------
Thats can be very true. The cities in my games were almost all RAISED out of the mud the late unlamented enemy had dragged their unfortunate populace through. In my last game I RAISED Thebes from the Egyptian capitial to become MY capital. Launched the Space Ship from it.
--------------------------------------


I don't see anything wrong there. The only thing he could be annoyed with is my play on his use of the wrong version of RAZE.

Kind of hazardous thing for me do considering how bad my spelling often is. Still it seemed appropriate and I was giving a real example of what FG was claiming can't be done.


FG

------------------------------
Ming I'll chill out. Sorry for the flas. I just had to say that!
------------------------------


This whole post of his shows he has not chilled out.

Me

-------------------------------
Sorry you felt the need to show how poorly you deal with both culture and flames. Do try to get some culture for yourself. Perhaps if I was to point you to some nice Bach or Beethoven recordings or maybe some good musuem sites on the web.
-------------------------------


Again that was thread involving culture flipping.

FG

--------------------------------
Too which Idiot replied, (after being warned bye ming)
--------------------------------


Ming was not at all clear. I and others as well, felt what he wrote was directed at you. I was under the impression that my posts had fit his standards. Sorry that that they didn't but I was not fully aware that he has no humor at all. I had noticed that he sometimes is short on humor but I based my conclusion on how he wrote what he said. I thought that in this case he did manage to see the humor. My mistake.

His mistake was a lack of clarity if he meant to include me. He specificly mentioned you and said nothing that was directed at anyone else in that thread. I was clearly not the only person on that thread that reached the conclusion I did.


Me - here FG again quotes me without quoting what I was replying to. He called me a newbie. Apparently he thinks that my starting to post here only recently means I must have only started playing civ or dealing with the internet recently.

---------------------------------------------
Newbie is youbie. I have been playing computer games since the Apple ][ and cassette tapes. Played Civ since it was an English boardgame. Not even all that new here. Just decided to stop lurking. I figured I would have gotten myself banned if I was dealing with Lib. I wouldn't be able to help myself.
----------------------------------------------


So I said "newbie is youbie". Since when is that some sort of terribly uncivil remark. If FG had not called me a newbie there wouldn't have been the possibilty of my using that particular remark. Frankly that was first flame of mine that actually deserves to be called lame. It was definitly beneath my normal standards. Mea Culpa.

Nothing else there is remotely inflamatory.

FG

----------------------------
quote:
What game are you playing? And why should I have to Raze entire Civ's to the ground? What the hell kinda simulation is that? It makes the game incredibly lame....
-----------------------------


Me

---------------------------------
Civ III 1.17f. The one this part of Apolyton is for. The game you don't know how to play. I have no idea why you have to raze entire civs to the ground. I just take them over. Use their cities for my designs. Its not the game that is lame if I can do it and you can't.
----------------------------------


Again nothing in there is insulting. Well except to me. That first sentence is markedly awkward. I abase myself for it.

FG

--------------------------------
quote:


uh?? Your a moron. Culture plays almost 0 in real conflict. West bank anyone? I dont see Israeli troops defecting or getting kicked out so easily.
---------------------------------


I then made a very reasoned response with no flames at all. Its a bit long to quote yet again and its in his post. I was giving my technique for handling captured cities. Since when is help such a terrible thing it deserves this next remark of his?

FG

----------------------------
quote:


uh.....nice Thanks kiddo. But if you werent such a retard and actually read my post. I wasnt talking to you.
-----------------------------


My response to that wholly unwarranted remark.

--------------------------------------
If you weren't so terribly, hideously, culturaly deprived you would have noticed that this a largely open forum. Anyone that can keep their temper seems to be welcome.

You will never become a succesfull flame warrior if you can't keep your temper.
---------------------------------------


Again the culture remark is due what we were discussing. Culture flipping. The rest is fairly obvious but he didn't get it anyway. He posted in public. In a place where anyone is free to comment on anything anyone else says. Considering that I was commenting on his unsolicited comment to someone that wasn't talking to him his responce was a bit bizarre.

FG

-------------------------------------
quote:


no need to foam at the mouth jr.
------------------------------------


Nothing was remotely foaming in my post. I am not anyones junior.


Me

--------------------------------------
I take it you are quoting someone in the room with you. Wipe the drool off you chin and no will mistake it for foam.
--------------------------------------


Now that was a bit lame as well. Its hard to work with that sort mindless remark. I should have left it alone. Mea maxima culpa.


---------------------------------
Nice flames. And you accuse me? Iwas over the flames jr. But seeing as how you attacked me like so!? Let the flames (in your case) the Lames! Fly
---------------------------------


Me

---------------------------------
Over the flames? Is that why you are near to taking a trip to Mingapulco?

Flaming is an art form. That means you need some culture to be good at it. You are in danger of culture flipping.
----------------------------------



Yes it was still on the culture flipping thread.

FG

----------------------------------
quote:

Oh your a true warhorse now Bet your daddy is proud! !
----------------------------------


Me

-----------------------------------
He died in 1976. So I suspect that pride is somewhat beyond his present capacity.

Don't bring a knife to a flamethrower fight.

I like culture flipping. I use it. Its good for builders. Its not there for the warmongers.

They really don't need any help anyway. Any competent warmonger should be able to win, corruption and culture or not. A dozen strong producing cities should be enough to take over the world. The rest are there as rest stops on the way to domination.
------------------------------------



I am sorry I was treating FG as an adult able to discuss things and defend himself without his descending to elementery school remarks. It was my mistake to do that. Perhaps I should not be shooting fish in a barrel like that.

If he wasn't mixing things up so much I would have left this alone.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Maybe this particular tuppence is misplaced (and I mean that in its original non-sexual sense) but I think this topic is important and wanted to voice my full agreement - an open, welcoming board is something that everybody ought to support and enjoy.

Right.

However, I have a few theories to proffer. I noticed that the largest influx of new blood into these forums unsurprisingly followed the release of Civ3. It seems to be this particular infusion that has brought the largest attendant number of flame wars, either initiated by or initiated against newcomers.

Is this something that's unique to Civ3? From what I've seen, the game has drawn some criticism for sacrificing complexity and depth for surface gloss. If this is true, then does this have any connection with the differences in poster behavior? The SMAC forums (as Vel pointed out) were a haven for rational and considered posting in their heyday - SMAC being a game that scrimped nothing on the mechanics and was satisfied with a workmanlike graphical interface.

Typically, I don't have any answers - just questions.

Questions like "Where in Beijing can I find a copy of Civ3?" or "Why does every copy of SMAX I have go missing after a month or two?"

[Jethro83]

Its good to see so many people concerned about the rude, abusive and downright offensive individuals on the forums. The problem isn't just here, but in every forum, every IRC network, all through ICQ. Anywhere where direct communication is possible over the Internet has been afflicted. I'm not going to engage in any finger-pointing as it would make me look as bad as these undesirables, but I will say this. There's no need for people to be this way. If they are angry, they should go punch a wall or something. If they feel like just being plain annoying, they should control themselves.

But to all people concerned with this kind of behaviour... Don't let it get to you too much. If they indeed only do it to annoy people, then they've won if you react. If you react, you're giving them what they want. All you need to do is say, 'you have no right to speak to me this way' and just ignore them. Being uncivil to them in response will only sink you to their level. They annoy and offend to make themselves feel bigger. They are the ones who are small and weak. Not you.

We shouldn't be approaching the problem with our flameguns blaring, else we become the problem ourselves. Everyone in the world who wants to be civil and wants to see civilty on the Internet should simply shut the problematic people off. When they realise that their attention seeking insults are reaching deaf ears, they will eventually quit. Banning them isn't entirely the solution, as they will find somewhere else to do what they do, and believe me there are a lot of places where they can be uncivil (battle.net seems to harbour such behaviour, which is a problem as not all of us want to pay to play such games online and have to put up with these undesirables).

Those who are reading what I say and think that those who attack people to make themselves feel bigger are really 'bullies' are absolutely right. These uncivil types we're all concerned about are just bullies. Therefore, what I say can to a limited extent be applicable to other parts of life... work, school, etc. as it is a problem in those places too.

As someone who was constantly harrassed in this way, I can tell you now, they only want to make themselves feel bigger by victimizing people who aren't likely to hit back hard. I may not have any degrees in psychology, but I've had plenty of experience dealing with bullies, and know that they feel that good, honorable, civil types are a threat, as others perceive them as better people. Their solution to this is not to be a good person themself, but to attack the individual in whatever way possible.

I may be wrong in some cases, as the person may not know that what they are saying is offensive. In this case, moderators need to take action against them, to teach them the errors of their ways. Nothing helps them learn what's on and what's not on than to be deprived of basic rights derived from being in these forums with a straight-to-the-point message saying 'you had no right to say that. Goodbye. You're banned'.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be able to speak their opinions, as that is what makes places like this interesting. What I am saying is that attacking a person or group like we have been seeing is utterly wrong, and there should be a crackdown on such behaviour. And the best way I know is to use the method described in this lengthy post.

Feel free to reply to this using CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. Correct me if I'm wrong, add to what I have said. You're more than welcome to do that. Just be civil when doing so.

[Venger]

For the record Hex, I dunno, maybe I did turn on the game after initially liking it. But that had to be the shortest period that can be defined by quantum mechanics.

I can say the best thing about Civ3, and my utter disappointment in it, is it got me to go buy CTP2, which I find, when modded, quite fun, and I picked up SMAC to boot, which I had poreviously played from a friends CD once and discarded.

Of course, it also got me to buy Empire Earth, a pretty but ridiculous clickfest...

Venger