Naokaukodem
Millenary King
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2003
- Messages
- 3,939
That, links with what i was saying above : I personnally never did ICS in Civ2. That simply never went through my head. On the contrary, I was maximizing the cities BFC because I had a sense that a bigger city was more powerfull, and it wants that it was effectively, but ICS was maybe more powerfull yet, which I didn't know. I tried ICS only in Civ3, where I played online and could see the other players' strategies particularly in the game lobby (lobby which disappeared in Civ5, it's too bad, it was kind of fun especially when seeing those rednecks wannabes talking about Hitler LOL).
But that was because of the worldwide brainstorming that I used ICS in Civ3, I would never have the idea to do so without, because again, I'm just average at best at strategy. So I'm surprised when you tell me that ICS was the only available strategy for Civ2. Personnally that was not a problem as I played more classically. It simply shows that players in general over all the world were already strongly immerged in the strategic aspect of the game. I can understand it; a demanding player will always want the best-end strategy. But simply, it was not my concern.
Granted, there is strategy in thinking out what are the best moves in order to beat the AI, researching this tech as soon as possible, building this wonder as soon as available, create X workers and settlers in that period of time, chop forest or what not... but I was doing it only in order to beat the highest diff.levels. I had a goal. I'm not surprised that Civ4 was such a plebiscite when considering those demanding world players : no "key" strategy, multiple way to achieve a goal (forest chop, slaving, etc.)
But again, hey, it's not really my concern. I don't play games for their strategic bit. Because first I have difficulties to really appreciate my choices. How can I compare my choices with the choices I didn't choose ? Once engaged, there is not back possible. Who can say what is best ? A choice is a matter of opinion, not a matter of fun. You choose a possibility, you engage into it, and then there you are ! Engaged, with every things that it means. Hands and feet linked. You are into it, like in a tunnel, you don't see what's near, only the little light ahead. So it's difficult for me to really stir fun from a choice. To say all, I wonder how one can have fun choosing. It's simply beyong my understanding.
So I have fun in other aspects : roleplaying, game structure, what it means, feeling, etc... and I'm sure I'm not a part of a so limited part of players as you seem to think.
I will try Crusader Kings 2, thank you !
