View Full Version : What difficulty will we play?


DaveShack
Feb 07, 2007, 11:33 PM
What difficulty will we play?

Noble
Prince
Monarch
Abstain

Link to discussion thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=203317)

4 days, public

fed1943
Feb 08, 2007, 04:45 AM
From the possible choices: Monarch.

(I do not think a higher level would put people out of the game, but I can be

wrong).

Best regards,

jimkatalanos
Feb 08, 2007, 06:47 AM
I don't mind.

LordOgre
Feb 08, 2007, 07:55 AM
i voted Prince so that the AI would be on the same level, no need to get more challenge since we have enough with the political discussions.

Furius
Feb 08, 2007, 09:47 PM
I've never played the game successfully above noble, so I think in monarch I would feel uncomfortable about offering an opinion...

ordinaryguy
Feb 08, 2007, 11:40 PM
never played noble or more difficult before, so I think noble would be best. Otherwise, I might feel uncomfortable participating.

Falcon02
Feb 08, 2007, 11:56 PM
never played noble or more difficult before, so I think noble would be best. Otherwise, I might feel uncomfortable participating.

Don't, the first Civ III demogame I participated in was on monarch level I believe, when I was still playing Noble.

By participating you will help to improve your own skills as you watch other people discuss strategy. You give in your opinion, and you might be surprised that people will actually listen to you.

Even those who play lower difficulties have something to contribute. Your weaknesses might be micromanaging production over an entire empire. However, you still could contribute to general military strategy, or research. Or improve your own micromanaging skills via a governorship, where you only have a few cities to keep track of. And even then you have the resources of all the other citizens here.

ordinaryguy
Feb 08, 2007, 11:58 PM
Don't, the first Civ III demogame I participated in was on monarch level I believe, when I was still playing Noble.

By participating you will help to improve your own skills as you watch other people discuss strategy. You give in your opinion, and you might be surprised that people will actually listen to you.

Even those who play lower difficulties have something to contribute. Your weaknesses might be micromanaging production over an entire empire. However, you still could contribute to general military strategy, or research. Or improve your own micromanaging skills via a governorship, where you only have a few cities to keep track of. And even then you have the resources of all the other citizens here.

ok then, but I still support noble.

Falcon02
Feb 09, 2007, 12:44 AM
ok then, but I still support noble.

That's fine, so long as you're still willing to participate if we play a slightly higher difficulty level.

TheAmerican
Feb 09, 2007, 01:33 AM
Prince is a fair compromise between Noble, and Monarch.

Macha
Feb 09, 2007, 01:57 PM
If that's the case you would have said Noble if it had been Prince,Noble and the one below noble.

Chieftess
Feb 09, 2007, 06:25 PM
While I can play above Noble, I think Noble might be good for a demogame. It's a safe enough level that will allow for the occasional mistake.

potatokiosk
Feb 09, 2007, 07:10 PM
I would prefer Monarch, although I would also be satisfied with Prince. I think a group of people working together can handle a challenge.

chessplayer
Feb 09, 2007, 07:48 PM
Noble is better for noobs like us :)

Talkie_Toaster
Feb 10, 2007, 02:35 PM
I vote Noble, that's the one where the AI and human are equal right?

ordinaryguy
Feb 11, 2007, 01:54 AM
That's fine, so long as you're still willing to participate if we play a slightly higher difficulty level.

No problem ;)

dutchfire
Feb 12, 2007, 09:50 AM
So we'll play prince?

ordinaryguy
Feb 13, 2007, 06:33 AM
So we'll play prince?

I guess so. Majority wins this time, though I would prefer noble.