I could get careless near a power saw and still count my number of post-Liberalism saves on one hand. Yet my total number of saves several dozen. I'm an openings addict! Is there anybody out there who has also suffered from this, then kicked the habit, who has some tips on getting oneself to go back to an opening rather than clicking that shiny Play Now! button?

Bostock

Yea I have the same sort of problem, the micro at the start of the game is just so much more involved than later on... in trying to improve my game I feel like everything I do prior to 300 ad is really all that counts.

I frequently abandon games as they approach the modern age, when a victory is obvious, it is better than pressing 'enter' 100 times waiting. The late game in civ is boring unless you are warmongering.

I love restarting too; chronic habit across lots of games i play.

And here I was thinking it was me, that it was something wrong with me....

We should make some sort of succession game for opening addicts, where we help each other and force our way past the late mid-game.

The opening game is certainly much more interesting, with the excitement of the unknown, and your optimizations having a greater effect. Should I expand or develop. Risk building stuff for long-term or beefing up my army short-term?

Once the entire map is known, you have won (or lost) the circumnavigation and liberalism races, the game focuses much more on diplomacy and trade. And these are intangible factors I simply believe the game doesn't handle as well.

This is also where you can look at the entire world and decide for yourself whether you've won or lost.

Much more fun to then start a new game than play the old one to completion! :)

How many of your supposedly won games would you have lost in the end. You dont know. You wont know, unless you keep playing.

The main problem with the end game is the lack of exploration as a factor and any sort of last ditch gamble. If one could use explorerers to settle ice stations at the poles, or a sea lab or a space lab that might add a little bit of spice.
In so far as a last ditch gamble- any sort of doomsday device might be a good idea, say your down in points, someone is ready to launch, there is no hope- but you can build an oil tanker with a nuclear device and blow the world up.
(the russians had the idea back in the 50's/60's? )

Right. Nukes.

I used to play like that back in Vanilla and Warlords, but BtS has actually brought me beyond the sword :D

And just recently I lost a game (space race by 8 turns) where in ~1800 AD I had been absolutely sure I was going to win...

I am an opening addict.
but i know why.

a civ game interest me only when there are both hope and challenge.
hope because I wont continue to play when the game is obviously lost for any reason
challenge because being world leader on 1AD and knowing that is all just about taking cities and vassalizing ennemies (which could take time) is boring.

most of my game stop around liberalism too, and I quit most of those that go past liberalim before modern era.

i force myself to play out a sure win, just so i can compare it to my other scores in my hall of fame. so i will press "enter" 100 times jsut to see ( i play on marathon). but quite regularly i get bored and decide to start a war with someone and drop a few nukes here and there for the fun of it.

the trick i find, (and this is something i started back in civ III) is to set myself mini-missions so that i am not always just pressing enter. sure it extends the game a little, but it also makes it more fun.

How many of your supposedly won games would you have lost in the end. You dont know. You wont know, unless you keep playing.
Sure.

I don't need to know that, though. Not if it means playing the same old supposedly-won (or lost) game for another three hours when I could go back to the excitement of a fresh start in that time! :)

Your mileage obviously varies.

If the problem is that you feel like you've won the game and are a tech leader in the early ADs with no serious challengers from the AI then surely you can just ramp up the difficulty level? I used to feel this way at noble and prince. Monarch is a whole new ball game for me, I feel constantly threatened by the AI. It's great!
:goodjob:

I am an opening addict, but for different reasons. I started playing civ because i am interested in history, especially ancient and middle ages. i like having one scout and finding new territory, once i've explored all the land i still play but one of the most interesting aspects is over.
sounds like most of you stop playing when you know you have won and just don't want to keep hitting enter. i'm the opposite: i'm hopeless at the game (well sort of) so i usually quit when it looks like i'll never catch up. or worse yet i think i'm doing well until i meet some civ that has me beat by a mile. specifically, i usually quit when 1) i missed out on circumnavigation and liberalism, and i'm behind in score, 2) the other civs are getting rifling and i'm no where near it, or 3) here comes the SoD and there is no perceivable way for me to successfully defend myself.
I don't have a handful of won saves and dozens of unfinished saves: for me it's hundreds of unfinished saves.
i learn more and more from this forum (thank you so much), and i am making extremely slow progress, but i have a long way to go. sometimes i wish i knew someone else who played who could sit next to me and say "no! don't do that! that's where you're going wrong!"
the most embarrassing thing is that this is all at noble level. and yes i'm reading all the noble help threads.
still, today will be like most other days, i'll start a new game and think "maybe this time it will work!". hope springs eternal. okay, rant over. thank for letting me vent.

I play alot of the saves from this board and obviously i play them out. Offline i'm mostly experimenting with early rushes, blocking strats, renaissance rushes, GPP farms etc. These games were never meant to be played to a finish. Most of the time it's clear after a renaissance rush at last (often before) if the game is winnable.

the trick i find, (and this is something i started back in civ III) is to set myself mini-missions so that i am not always just pressing enter. sure it extends the game a little, but it also makes it more fun.

I like this advice.

I also spend many an hour grinding out a game that's already won, because I like to compare victories. My current meta-goal is to win on Noble/Epic/Large once with every leader before moving back up to Prince (I used to play Prince level pre-BtS).

Maybe if I try the mini-mission idea on the endgame, I'll get to Prince that much quicker...

Yeah I rarely finish games, it has always been like that for me. Actually I think I used to finish games more often in Civ1 but I was a clueless kid of 10 back then. My initial strategy for defending cities was surrounding them completely with milita. :)

Hmm, seems like lots of people suffer from the same thing as me in a more limited degree. Most of my abandoned openings really are openings -- I mean, not even up to the Medieval era yet. Still, it's good to see that in some sense, I'm not alone.

Somebody mentioned a sample game, or forum game, for practicing not abandoning openings... unlike practicing how to do well in the midgame, where such a game is easy to imagine and even has already been done, solving the psychological problem of how to spur yourself to load up that midgame save and play on it is a bit hard to solve by offering a midgame save. :-) Maybe what I really want is a way to magically hide that shiny "Play Now!" from myself! :-D

Heh. And all this time I thought I was the only one ;) and ROFL at glieze :lol: But yea, I like the idea of that series thing, would be a good way to get me to finish a game :crazyeye:

I would probably not be playing right now if the PYL games hadnt come along. I like figuring stuff out, but once i know how something works i get bored real quick. Having other people to compare results to helps with that, as well as coming up with new ways to play.

Opposite.

I hate opening. Usually if I find, say, an AI close, I just restart. So here's how we go. You play the opening, I'll finish the game!

If he's really close he'll have to die right :lol:. Actually i often do the same in early games unless i'm actually testing early rush scenarios.

Signs that the "opening" is over and you are entering mid-game:

* there is no more land to easily settle
* the religious / diplomatic blocs start to form
* wars start to break out amongst the AI civs

All of these things essentially change the game from a REX/rush/gambit kind of game into a diplomatic and/or grind-it-out military game.

Usually if I find, say, an AI close, I just restart.

I start planning a rush at that moment. :p

The late game... it can be tedious to wait for your spaceship or culture - that's why I rarely get space/culture. I get bored and start conquering to speed things up.

Hmm, seems like lots of people suffer from the same thing as me in a more limited degree. Most of my abandoned openings really are openings -- I mean, not even up to the Medieval era yet. Still, it's good to see that in some sense, I'm not alone.

Somebody mentioned a sample game, or forum game, for practicing not abandoning openings... unlike practicing how to do well in the midgame, where such a game is easy to imagine and even has already been done, solving the psychological problem of how to spur yourself to load up that midgame save and play on it is a bit hard to solve by offering a midgame save. :-) Maybe what I really want is a way to magically hide that shiny "Play Now!" from myself! :-D

Well, we'd do it ... like I've seen elsewhere on this forum ... so we'll have a roster of players, one opens, plays some turns, then posts the save and another takes over. Succession game, y'know.

I start/finish games at a ratio of at LEAST 10/1. I dont think this is unusual at all. In fact, I think its very very common. I do it because the early game is so important and critical to success that it requires more practice. In fact, I have actually started tons of game with absolutely no intention of ever finishing them. Most of the time, I dont finish because my position is so dominating that the rest is just mop-up, and that can be tedious.

I do have some advice on how to get farther along though:

Create mini-goals - This was already mentioned, but its worth repeating. These mini-goals can come in many flavors. Some of mine are things like conquering a specific AI, grabbing a specific island or area of land, obtaining every Wonder or Resource in the game, either by building or conquering, Bee-line a specific tech, and "play til that tech", etc.

Play series games - This has been the best medicine for my half-game-itis. Playing a series type game that others are playing seems to make it "matter" more, so I tend to play em longer. LHC, NC, Immortal University, etc. Succession Games can also be great for finishing, since you dont actually play all the turns, so you tend to play your own turn-sets with more attention to details.

Create your own Victory Conditions - The way I see it, some of my games are "Won" long before Civ IV tells me so. Currrently I am playing the PYL III game. I have scaped and clawed a long time, and Justinian has gotten more and more powerful while I did, vassalizing all the remaining AIs at one point (two were voluntary, 1 conquered, 1 AI killed by barbs in the BCs). So I decided that when I captured 4 important cities that Justian owned, the game was "over". I have managed 2 of them, and still need 2 more, which I will try for today. This is sort of in line with the "mini-goal" thing, but I combine them, by having "mini-goals" along the path of my own invented "Victory Condition". In the same example, my "mini-goal" was to capture the AP city, since that wonder was a pain in my a$$. My "VC" is 4 of Justy's cities. Its worked well, I still have a strong interest in finishing.

Go DOWN in difficulty, but create your own tricky Role Playing Conditions - A bunch of players use this technique to create some really cool games that look super fun. Check some of madscientist's games, and try those ideas yourself. Cam_H also has a bunch of cool Condition games. Heck, just shadowing along with any posted RPC game can be enough incentive to actually "play it out".

Break your "routine" - If you always find yourself choosing the same leaders, and constantly following the same tech path, building the same Wonders, etc etc etc, then change it up. Try something different. Go for an early Oracle-MC sling with pre-chopped forests so you can get a fast Forge, run an Engineer specialist, and pop a GE for the Mids. Or try for a Feudalism Sling with a PRO leader and plan to try warring with only LBs (Sitting Bull rocks for that). Never focus much on religion? Go for the Religious plan, focusing on building the AP, UofS, Spiral Minaret, spreading it, converting all the AIs to your "Crusade". Its a blast, let me tell ya. Even if these new things you try arent exactly the "best" play, who cares? Its about having fun, and doing new things is a great way to spice up the fun-factor.

My post-BTS hall of fame is empty. I still haven't bothered to finish any of the games I've started since I installed the expansion.

Back when I was still in school and had more free time, I would grind out the endings of game much more often. Now I have less time to play and thus more focused on actually having fun when I'm playing. The fun decreases when I reach the industrial period, and I don't care enough about filling up my hall of fame to keep me playing until the end.

Now, as to why the fun decreases in the industrial period, part of it is certainly the tedium of managing a larger and more complicated empire. This is the part of the game where you've got to commit to which victory type you're aiming for, which means that you've got to envision all the diplomacy/research/pushing units around that you'll be doing before the game is over. That can be daunting. In some games it is because the drama has gone out of the game. But I abandon close games, too, so that's not everything.

I suspect that a part of the loss of the fun is because I'm less confident that the decisions I'm making are the right ones. If I screw something up in the earlier periods, I can chalk it up to an experiment and start over with little lost. But my perceived risk is greater if I screw up a game that I've already sunk several evenings into. So I chicken out and restart. This is why I'm sometimes bothered by this habit of mine-- it makes me feel like a coward. (But then I remember that it's just a game that exists solely for the purpose of my entertainment.)

The game is wasted when you restart anyway, so why not finish it, screwups and all?

The game is wasted when you restart anyway, so why not finish it, screwups and all?

It's not a waste if I've already played the fun part and enjoyed myself while doing it. It's a game-- like any single-player game, the only thing that makes it anything other than a waste of time is the fun you have while doing it. For some people, that fun comes from satisfying the game's defined victory conditions. For me, that's less important. Finishing the game provides the potential for a satisfying "you won!" from the game at the end. It also provides the potential for a frustrating "you lost!" On balance, that's not often worth the necessary tedium.

Maybe I should start playing exclusively for mid-game AP diplo wins...

I give myself heck for not finishing my games sometimes. I also have a start to finish ratio of at least 10:1. However, I do have a lot of games finished in my hall of fame still (10% of a lot is a fair bit still). I'll finish a game if: It is a nail-biter and/or I really enjoyed the game a lot.

In most cases, I just play the game until I feel it is in the bag or I messed it up too much to my own standards. I could probably still win 80% of the games that I give up on because they fall too far away from my ideal.

It's a good idea though to try and play the game at least to the point where you feel it is won or lost.

The modern age is more fun in civ4- corporations, many new units, UN, variable space race requirements. You cannot say "The game is in the bag" until you can see the victory movie. AIs often do crazy stuff, like sabotage the spaceship and it makes the game much more fun.

Much the same as the majority here, the tedium of a large scale campaign of overwhelming force spending 15 minutes per turn for dozens of turns to conquer a continent which is about 5% too small to get a Domination victory, then building a fleet, then going on to upgrade your units to the next level of overkill, etc., etc., is just no fun. You've won, unless you are intending to show off your HOF scoreboard to your girlfriend (not recommended), you are the only one who will ever see the thing, just accept that you've won and avoid the tedium. For those who enjoy whomping up on hapless AIs, whomp away, but I'd rather go back to a more challenging and interesting start.

Recently I found I was quiting my games after a short time. To break this habit, I made my wife promise me she'd kill a kitten every time I started a new game before finishing an old one. Unfortunately we've now become critically short on kittens, and Tokugawa is unwilling to trade his away.

I must admit that I start probably twice as many games as I finish, but I feel compelled to finish at least some, because I keep trying to get new leaders into my "top 10" scores. Used to be all Darius, HC, Ghandi, Ramesses and Elizabeth. Now I've added Qin, Roosevelt, Willem and Gilgamesh! (Okay, so Gilgamesh was mostly just a really lucky starting position...)

I finish all my games. In games that I know I've won I start fiddling with strategies - and learn more about the game. I've only played about 8 games so far though (Epic/ Standard).

Recently I found I was quiting my games after a short time. To break this habit, I made my wife promise me she'd kill a kitten every time I started a new game before finishing an old one. Unfortunately we've now become critically short on kittens, and Tokugawa is unwilling to trade his away.

Although I have never reached the age of rifles without quitting first, I can but ask: "But does he have rifles?"

Overall, potentially good plan. Will need a large stock of defenseless kittens first.

Bostock

I am an opening addict, but for different reasons. I started playing civ because i am interested in history, especially ancient and middle ages. i like having one scout and finding new territory, once i've explored all the land i still play but one of the most interesting aspects is over.
sounds like most of you stop playing when you know you have won and just don't want to keep hitting enter. i'm the opposite: i'm hopeless at the game (well sort of) so i usually quit when it looks like i'll never catch up. or worse yet i think i'm doing well until i meet some civ that has me beat by a mile. specifically, i usually quit when 1) i missed out on circumnavigation and liberalism, and i'm behind in score, 2) the other civs are getting rifling and i'm no where near it, or 3) here comes the SoD and there is no perceivable way for me to successfully defend myself.
I don't have a handful of won saves and dozens of unfinished saves: for me it's hundreds of unfinished saves.
i learn more and more from this forum (thank you so much), and i am making extremely slow progress, but i have a long way to go. sometimes i wish i knew someone else who played who could sit next to me and say "no! don't do that! that's where you're going wrong!"
the most embarrassing thing is that this is all at noble level. and yes i'm reading all the noble help threads.
still, today will be like most other days, i'll start a new game and think "maybe this time it will work!". hope springs eternal. okay, rant over. thank for letting me vent.

This is exactly how I feel (minus the getting whomped on at Noble thing - I still can't win at Noble, but I am always a 'contender' - someone the AI's either want to be in a DP with, or someone they are afraid to fight). The most exciting and interesting part of the game for me is the early unknown. That striking out into the Black Fog with a stick and a loincloth gets me excited, and the ancient wars with axes and swords are way more interesting than mowing down Rifles with Tanks and Infantry. I dunno...sometimes I'd like to stop the tech tree at the Medieval stage or something, or have more barbarians that built up more cities and networks to keep the 'wilderness and unknown lands' wild and dangerous, but without the retarded hordes beelining for my capital and pastures every two turns.
I just won a space race victory the other day, and I had to sit there for an hour pressing 'enter'. It wasn't pretty.

I dunno...sometimes I'd like to stop the tech tree at the Medieval stage or something, or have more barbarians that built up more cities and networks to keep the 'wilderness and unknown lands' wild and dangerous, but without the retarded hordes beelining for my capital and pastures every two turns.

Word, dude!

Can't find a way to delete it..

My finish:start ratio is zero since I've moved up to Emperor. I thought I'm lame so I'm glad to hear the same is true for many others. The main reason because I abandon games early is that I still can't progress past mid-game on Emperor with a solid empire. Often things tend to fall apart early so I keep restarting to explore the early game on that difficulty level.

Actually I'm not bored by turn skipping. If the machine is well-oiled I find it very rewarding to see the plan come together. What I find annoying is to have the feeling that I'm struggling towards a win, because that means that I've made some serious mistakes earlier, and that urges me to restart and to try to do it better.

My finish:start ratio is zero since I've moved up to Emperor. I thought I'm lame so I'm glad to hear the same is true for many others. The main reason because I abandon games early is that I still can't progress past mid-game on Emperor with a solid empire.
This is a related problem, but slightly different, one I like to call "Perfectionist Syndrome". I also have some of this, especially at higher levels.

You didnt get that city site you REALLY wanted, and the lame AI built it 1-tile off, or you missed that key Wonder by 4 turns, and even if you reload, its 5 pop to whip and you only have 8 total, or you lost your Woody III Warrior in a 95% battle with a Barb. It can be anything like that, really, but if its not PERFECT, you just dont have any desire to continue.

This is harder to get over than Imcomplete-itis, bro, and I have no good way to combat it. All I can say is "aim lower", especially at Emperor. I am playing an Emp game right now, and I decided very early on a VERY conservative path of progress, with a bunch of "if I get em's" mixed in. I wanted an economy based off the GLH, so that came first, and I said "And I will start the Oracle here, but if I dont get it, no biggie, cash will help too". Missed the Oracle, Mids, Colossus and MoM by a total of less than 10 turns, but it was all good, because that cash kept me REXing like mad and at 100% research for lots of turns, and now I am drafting Rifles and massbuilding Cannons and only 1 AI even has Liberalism, and none have Gunpowder.

My point is that you never really know how your game is going until it actually "goes" there, know what I mean? Hang in there siggy, I know you got skills, I have seen your games. I think most players would be SHOCKED at how winnable some position they think are "weak" actually are.

My post-BTS hall of fame is empty. I still haven't bothered to finish any of the games I've started since I installed the expansion.

I've got a bunch of finished games in my HOF. No wins though. A rather surprising number of "isn't that about 4 turns after the earliest Barbarian Horde event can occur?"

Pangaea/Always War/OCC/Emperor is not a winning scenario in my hands.

I've got a bunch of finished games in my HOF. No wins though. A rather surprising number of "isn't that about 4 turns after the earliest Barbarian Horde event can occur?"
LOL I went "0 and 1" about 10 minutes after I installed BTS and played my first game. Ramesses, and I even had Stone, then . . . "The Greek Empire has been destroyed" which should have been a clue since I saw Alex's scout a few turns earlier, heh. 5 turns later, 4 Barb Axes or Archers (cant remember now) showed up at my doorstep, and that was that, 0-1. I didnt mind, either, I actually did laugh out loud.

I just 'lost' my first game and it was exhilirating actually

I was Hannibal all by my lonesome to start the game and really was efficient in whipping and eventually getting ahead in the tech race.

Kept checking to make sure I was ahead, got 4 spaceship parts done first, was looking great.... then I was like "Hmm... Survayarman sure has been quiet over there...."

Sure enough, I get notification the next turn that one of his cities just became legendary.... sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!

I figure it out that I have about 45 turns until his 3rd city becomes legendary so I start building up nukes, getting spies and units together, get on like 10 transports... but alas, his land is too large, he has too many units which he rails over to me when I get to land, and I don't have enough EP to do any damage

So lesson learned! It was actually fun to see a message of another civ winning!

And funny enough, I've only WON one game, lolz

But I'm going to keep playing random Prince games with large map and 7 AIs until I win five games. I'm well on my way with Julius Ceaser (he's a little easy to play with IMO) and plan on winning via domination for the first time

It's a lot more fun when

A) You think of it as a challenge
B) You can look forward to the enjoyment when you actually get to start a new game! :)

This is a related problem, but slightly different, one I like to call "Perfectionist Syndrome". I also have some of this, especially at higher levels.

You didnt get that city site you REALLY wanted, and the lame AI built it 1-tile off, or you missed that key Wonder by 4 turns, and even if you reload, its 5 pop to whip and you only have 8 total, or you lost your Woody III Warrior in a 95% battle with a Barb. It can be anything like that, really, but if its not PERFECT, you just dont have any desire to continue.

This is harder to get over than Imcomplete-itis, bro, and I have no good way to combat it. All I can say is "aim lower", especially at Emperor. I am playing an Emp game right now, and I decided very early on a VERY conservative path of progress, with a bunch of "if I get em's" mixed in. I wanted an economy based off the GLH, so that came first, and I said "And I will start the Oracle here, but if I dont get it, no biggie, cash will help too". Missed the Oracle, Mids, Colossus and MoM by a total of less than 10 turns, but it was all good, because that cash kept me REXing like mad and at 100% research for lots of turns, and now I am drafting Rifles and massbuilding Cannons and only 1 AI even has Liberalism, and none have Gunpowder.

My point is that you never really know how your game is going until it actually "goes" there, know what I mean? Hang in there siggy, I know you got skills, I have seen your games. I think most players would be SHOCKED at how winnable some position they think are "weak" actually are.
I'm quoting all of it just to show how scared I am at how well you've read me. I was thinking to myself "I'm just a PERFECTIONIST, that's all" after I re-read my own posting (to spot any spelling errors, talking about perfectionism...) -- and now you've mentioned it in the follow up.

Thank you for your advice, I'll take it to the heart.

I think you're spot on in the last paragraph when you say "you don't know how 'good' you are until you've done it". I've seen it happening in my own games when they turned out to be better than I thought at first. It also cuts down right to the heart of what is being discussed in this very thread.

how "perfectionist" is perfectionist?

If your settler + warrior escort get waxed in 2500 BC by a bear, is it perfectionism to restart?

If you settle in place only to discover a host of resources just outside the BFC?

Both of those are dealbreakers for me, unless I'm playing in a posted game.

Try some HoF games slob, and be true the format, no reloads. It will help you learn to take that extra precaution of sending the warrior a step ahead of the settler each time they move, and also tricks like settling next to that bear, because he will leave your culture the next turn, heh. It helped me get over it (to a degree, I wont restart because of stuff I find later, but I will reload the eaten settler thing, heh)