Wonders are obsolete! - Page 3

deity · May 12, 2002, 01:52

Quote:

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
edit...
Deity, Ill play you, you choose the settings then. Fine with me.
Further Ming, you seemed to be on right now, as I am typing (read post time and dates to confirm)
get on the zone and we can go at it right freaking now.

You mean Deity Dude! I'm deity

But I don't duel.

Hmmm, two slow players! Maybe we can get a slow players diplo going. I'll be in that...

I can't believe Ming is putting up Eyes as a representative good player to play Strat. Why not War4ever - Someone of proven integrity.

Reading between the lines Ming, it is clear you are scared to play Strat - sorry but that's how it looks. You came on strong then wimp out.

StrategicKingMi · May 12, 2002, 02:09

Ozzy,Ozzy, Ozzy...As a fellow Michigander, and damn proud of it, not only did I want to play, but I got the Michigan board from somewhere and played several neat games on it with friends of mine. problem was we never followed trough with the game, or at least I was not notified.
(nice chicken pix)

StrategicKingMi · May 12, 2002, 02:25

As far as bragging about a win, I leave that up to you. I wont engage in such frolic. As far as complaining about land and huts, I wont. you beat me 2 of 3, Ill virtually shake your hand, publicly pad you on the back and say damn man, you rock.
What the hell more do you want?

Budthepoet · May 12, 2002, 02:49

Ahh Gary..... A challenge to the world, and so much feed back. The people of the civ world seem to be close minded, yet view your challenge as the same. I however realize that you are simply looking for new variances in a way to play an old game. I will accept your challenge. You know i will. Ill play what ever you give me an ip too. However, your choice in wonders sucks.... I would not choose any. Lets play with out them all together. Ill still compete with you. At any level.

I am TheNothing, the known Civ addict of the times....

Eyes_Of_Night · May 12, 2002, 13:34

I don't think ming really cares what you guys say about he's chicken. That's like saying you're going to kick someone's ass on the computer, it just doesn't do anything. I see the morons of apolyton have united and now provide a united front against the more intelligent people of the site. I for one don't really care about this whole post from strategicdicking. It's obvious he has yet to find a setting he can win on so he continues to search. He's a waste of my time and the only way I would have played him is if I was really bored like yesterday.

SlowwHand · May 13, 2002, 12:52

OR it could be that strat is another player trying to learn flexibility in settings.

Deity Dude · May 15, 2002, 21:36

Quote:

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
. As far as complaining about land and huts, I wont. you beat me 2 of 3, Ill virtually shake your hand, publicly pad you on the back and say damn man, you rock.
What the hell more do you want?

How about one out of one

Or do you wanna finish the challenge.

atawa · May 16, 2002, 13:01

Please tell us more.... what happened in the game?

Messer Niccolò · May 16, 2002, 19:19

Quote:

Originally posted by atawa
Please tell us more.... what happened in the game?

... did anybody play a game following this thread?

StrategicKingMi · May 16, 2002, 21:52

Sure, it was 5 citys to 5, I killed all Deity Dudes exploring units, destroyed a city and only lost a warior in doing that. I cut him off from most of the board and gathered all the huts. The barbarians killed 3 of my horseman, 3 more then he did. I got 5 techs from huts, 3 barbs and 3 empties. When game was ended he was over 30 squares away from my citys by land and did not have mapmaking nor would he have it in less then 25 turns. I had a vet archer 3 squares from his citys.
(sounds like I really got my ass kicked)
However, this was, beyond boring. It was a useless waste of time. We played for over 40 mins and not only did I not have a government change, trade or 20 citys and 20 units exploring the world, we combined only had 5 citys and 11 units in total. I was about 20 turns away from changing government and might have made it by 225 bc. This game could have dragged on pointlessly for hours with nothing new getting done. No exploring, no trading, no waring, no building, no roading - no changing the board in any noticable way at all.
I finally just said, I cant take this mind numbing pace any more, I have other things to do like watch my lawn grow, which I was longing for come the 55th turn.
It inspired a new post, go read it.......

Deity Dude · May 16, 2002, 22:58

Thats an interesting summary of the game, although not what i would call objective. True you did take a city with a vet archer - which you must have gotten out of a hut - so I guess they weren't all bad. True I only had 5 cities but I only wanted 7 until I got Republic and I had 2 settlers in the field. True you had a lone vet archer near some cities - he was also near the 2 diplos that were sure to bribe him if you kept him there alone or tried to attack with him.

I think the major reason you lost thru resignation (YES RESIGNING WHEN YOU ARE BEHIND IS A LOSS) is you saw the inevetability of the situation. I had Monarchy for about 15 turns already and was gonna get Republic in a few. You were researching Monarchy at 24 turns per tech.

Your description of how hopeless I was because I was 30 squares away and didn't have Map Making assumes I was interested in making some quick contact with you. I thought a few turns in Republic - celebrating to size 8 while you languished in despotism was a better strategy then going for map making.

It would have been interesting if we had finished the game and we would have found out for certain what happened but you chose to resign.

STRAT - I backed you on your challenge to Ming because I thought you were right. Basically the way I saw it - he shot his mouth off about you - you challenged him and he backed down.

But now you've done the same thing to me and I guess all deity 1x1x players. You shot your mouth off and said you would beat me (and basically anybody) on my settings 2 out of 3. I took your challenge and you lost the first game. I am assuming there won't be a 2nd - even though I offered a 2x1x for the second instead of my settings.

Like I suggested to Ming - he didn't have to play you but he shouldn't make excuses about it. Now I say that to you. You don't have to finish your challenge but please don't make excuses - its weak. I and other 1x1x deity players don't deserve to be called fat lesbians because you can't beat us at that setting, nor do we have to be called newbies or idiots, ala Eyes.

I know damn well what the outcome of a 2x2x king game would be between us - YOU"D WIN. I also know that after the game I wouldn't make a million excuses and I'd probably even congratulate you.

PS - I hope this thread hasn't caused any hard feelings on your side because there are none on mine.

StrategicKingMi · May 16, 2002, 23:05

lET ME, ONCE AGAIN EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOSING AND GETTING OUT PLAYED.
Clearly, I out played you in this game. I played as well as anyone in the world can play. I predicted on 2 ocasions where your units would be and laid in wait for them and killed them.
I got to all the huts, you did not.
The fact you got monarchy 40 turns earlier then I would have is not a testimony to any thing you did, rather to the fact that 1 x 1 deity is nothing more then a luck fest. 5 techs from huts burried me helplessly behind. Please educated my on the great things you did this game that allowed you to win?

Deity Dude · May 16, 2002, 23:18

You live by luck - you die by luck. Maybe if you played more 1x1x deity game you would realize a few things about huts and there potential impacts. If I am one or 2 techs away from a govt change - I generally pass on the hut until after I get the government change. (I know in 2x2x it doesn't matter as much because the techs are acclerated - if you pick up 2 or 3 bad ones you can make it up.) This is especially true if you had me cutoff, as you claim, from the entire board. If thats true I couldn't get those huts anyways so why risk the entire game on going for them.

But wasn't that what the best of 3 was all about. Didn't it assume that one of us could get better luck in one game but that over 3 it would even out.

No matter what you say, there are 2 things we can agree on for sure.

1. You lost the game.

2. You refuse to finish the challenge that you made so very publicly in this forum.

Everything else is just a bunch of talk.

I think anyone reading my last 2 posts and your last 4 or 5 over 3 different threads (this thread, Your self proclaimed greatness thread, and Your deity 1x1x = fat lesbian thread) will have a good idea what really happened.

StrategicKingMi · May 16, 2002, 23:29

I dont get it? I never said I would play 3 games with you, rather that I would agree to play on your settings. the 3 game challenge was for the blow hard Ming, the disapearing man.
Did i quit, of course, it was boring. Want to count it as a win, fine. I can live with that.
But please answer the question in my other posts, why is 1 x 1 deity such a good way to play?

Ming · May 16, 2002, 23:37

Quote:

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
the 3 game challenge was for the blow hard Ming, the disapearing man.

Did i quit, of course, it was boring.

And that's why I have no interest in playing you... I don't want to quit because it was boring...
No need to even start such a bore fest... At least I know you understand that concept based on your comments

Deity Dude · May 16, 2002, 23:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Deity Dude
BTW strat I'm ready for a best of 3 against you with my settings and my timer any time you are.

Quote:

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
Deity, Ill play you, you choose the settings then. Fine with me.

Hmmm, am I missing something here.

And yes, I do consider resigning when behind a loss. If that weren't the case I doubt any games in any sport would ever get finished. The loser would just quit and say they didn't lose but were just bored.

As far as why I prefer 1x1x to 2x2x or 2x1x I though I explained my reasoning pretty well earlier in RAH's thread about huts in 2x vs 1x. I also mentioned many times that I didn't think one was "better" but what I preferred and why I did.

General Maximus · May 17, 2002, 05:52

i read about half of this thread, and decided, I don't care, strat is the best, hoorah hoorah, get a life....z....zzzzzz.....zzzz.z.z.......

DrSpike · May 17, 2002, 11:26

Played DD. You have demonstrated with this game why 1x1x deity requires different skills. Christ, 5 techs from huts, a dubious decision to pop those.

atawa · May 17, 2002, 13:29

Have to agree with DD on this one, if you GAMBLE on huts you might loose as in any game of chance.

Face it strate, you might have persued the wrong strategy in this game.......

rah · May 17, 2002, 13:49

But when to take the risk is a big part of stratagy. Until you've started researching the first non-path to monarchy tech, you're safe. After that, it's a risk and you may want to wait till you're researching monarchy unless an extra tech will make you miss an odeo year. But If you think you're behind, you may want to risk it. Risk management is an important part of CIV, especially in MP. I have no writen in stone rules, it's always based on the situation.

Heck If I get off to a real bad start or if it's on a river, I may even open that hut with my second settler. It all depends. Even though I usually laugh when someone says they lost their second settler opening a hut.

RAH

War4ever · May 17, 2002, 15:37

Strate your the loser that no one wants to play. You quit b/c you think you own the map

Is this your new strat, be the first in land area and declare yourself the winner (in your head) and disconnect

I am almost always first in land area for the majority of my games......yes its a good strat, odds are you will pop more huts this way and/or reap the benefits/failures associated with them.

However , lets be frank......on deity x1x1 or even x2x1 just b/c you see the whole map, it doesnt' mean you own the whole map. Visible territory is claimed , but not OWNED. Unitl you have the land under your city radius and your in a govt different than despotism, i don't think you could say you were winning this game.

Then to quit b/c you were bored with the map, well maybe if you had a few more cities on the board yourself, you could have launched an invasion to knock DD out of the game.

i must be stupid as i fail to see the logic behind your claims of greatness

DrSpike · May 17, 2002, 15:48

Hehe the pick your own victory condition approach. Well War in our duel I am first in MFG and productivity, clearly the most important stats. Hence I claim victory.

I AM THE GREATEST!

War4ever · May 17, 2002, 15:51

but you only get the victory if you disconnect before i do.....i am leading in every other category..lets continue now, first to disconnect wins

DrSpike · May 17, 2002, 15:55

Well I refuse to play on the grounds that you talk rubbish. I am clear leader in pollution and disease, and I have the saves to prove it. I claim victory on account of your dishonesty.

War4ever · May 17, 2002, 15:57

Well my peeps are right behind you in pollution or at the very least just as dirty as you....we are the mongols after all....with our bad hygiene we win on a tie.... I AM THE GREATEST

DrSpike · May 17, 2002, 16:00

Damn you and all your smellly kind. I can see I have a lot of tricks to learn before I can be the greatest. I will start practising my disconnects and fuzzy logic at once.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · May 17, 2002, 16:23

Despite my never having played a single MP game, the MP forum is my new favourite on Apolyton. Thanks for livening up my Friday, guys!

DrSpike · May 17, 2002, 16:28

Not having played a game is in no way detrimental to your chances of being the greatest if you are sufficiently inventive.

rah · May 17, 2002, 16:35

but somehow approriate.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · May 17, 2002, 16:50

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
Not having played a game is in no way detrimental to your chances of being the greatest if you are sufficiently inventive.

*signs off forum because coworkers are looking at me funny as I roll on the floor*