Does a built Monument in the capital become FREE with Tradition?

dragonxxx said:

OK, I get your point, but really - next time you should mention that you play exclusively MP. As you could imagine, most players here are playing SP, and things are a bit different

Click to expand...

kaspergm said:

I hear what you are saying, and have no doubts that what you say is true for competitive multiplayer gaming. That is not the type of game that I am playing, which obviously also explains our different strategies. If you play (casual) singleplayer, the free Amphitheatre is not that bad.

Click to expand...

Yeah well you came on quite strong dragon, saying I need to go play some settler matches. That was pretty messed up.

I shouldn't have to mention that I play MP because what's optimal in competitive multiplayer is what's optimal in the game as a whole. This is because human beings put your strategy to the ultimate test since they can actually think. If you can beat a highly skilled human with a strategy then you will demolish a Diety AI with it.

Also, just because you don't play multiplayer doesn't mean that multiplayer strategies are some how irrelevant to you. If you choose to ignore them then you are denying yourself opportunities to learn and get better at the game.

see, lets say CV is rather unplayable in MP and I completely understand your argument now . But its still a part of the game in SP, and has its own charm.
I personally don't play MP, because I don't have time for long sessions. I imagine a game on MP takes a while. How long is it actually?

dragonxxx said:

see, lets say CV is rather unplayable in MP and I completely understand your argument now . But its still a part of the game in SP, and has its own charm.
I personally don't play MP, because I don't have time for long sessions. I imagine a game on MP takes a while. How long is it actually?

Click to expand...

I would say that CV is not possible against skilled players. If you are playing against players of lesser skill than it might work out. I have done a sacred sites spam for CV before in a 3v3. But that is definitely extremely rare.

If you can pull off a victory condition like CV in SP then you are most likely playing way below your skill level. When you are truly being tested to your limits CV is simply not going to happen. Although it can be fun to pull off once in a while. I realize that what's fun and what's optimal can be two different things.

The duration of a MP game varies quite a bit depending upon what kind of game you're playing. A Duel can come to completion in an hour. The same with a teamer such as 2v2 or 3v3. It really all depends on how closely matched the players are in skill and resources. A lopsided game will be over rather quickly. A closely matched game could drag on for a few hours.

FFA is a completely different story. Those can last anywhere from 2 - 8 hours. Although it's extremely rare for them to last beyond 3 due to people leaving after a set back they feel is insurmountable. I have played some that lasted 7 - 8 hours getting into the info era and battling with xcom and stuff. Those are the best if you can spare that much time.

Multiplayer really tests your mettle as well as your stamina. Although you can have considerable spare time in the later eras when the turn timer is rather long. If you finish quickly you can have a minute or two to make a sandwich or something if you're not at war.

I rate and use ampitheatres for faster border expansion. Your expos quite often only produce 2 culture early on so an extra 1 culture from the amp is 50% faster border expansion

50%!

Don't really know if anyone mentioned it, but if you settle a new city then you get a monument in the new city (unless you got amphitheater in your capital already).

You get a monument whenever you make a new city and when that city is one of the first 4 cities built by you.

CraigMak said:

The other reason why they are garbage is because cultural victories are simply not viable in competitive games.

Click to expand...

It's kind of unfortunate that you didn't have the foresight to think "Hey, I only play Multiplayer, maybe I should preface my hilariously lopsided opinion with that"

As it stands, you're basically trolling.

CraigMak said:

If you can beat a highly skilled human with a strategy then you will demolish a Diety AI with it.

Click to expand...

There's a world of difference between a highly skilled human with a Settler who may try a high risk ploy, and an AI with a pile of free units and techs. Especially if the AI is programmed to build a deathstar and rumble over the nearest neighbour.

I think the word 'consistently' is missing, here

Chum said:

It's kind of unfortunate that you didn't have the foresight to think "Hey, I only play Multiplayer, maybe I should preface my hilariously lopsided opinion with that"

As it stands, you're basically trolling.

Click to expand...

Something is not trolling just because you don't want to hear about it. Offering strategic advice definitely is not. The truth certainly is not. Was Gallileo trolling the church? Is your teacher trolling you when they say you're incorrect? Just because you choose to play a certain way does not mean other people are trolling when they offer a better strategy which you choose to ignore.

If anything I am the one being trolled because I'm speaking the truth. Amphitheaters are in fact inefficient as well as culture victories. If you choose to pursue them that's fine. But they certainly are not optimal play.

CraigMak said:

But they certainly are not optimal play.

Click to expand...

Well, technically that is only true if you view "optimal" strict in the sense of winning fastest - but as you yourself pointed out above, that may not necessarily be the most fun or might just not be the target that one aims at in the specific situation. I agree your answer was correct within the context which you were speaking, but given that that context is not the one where most people play their games (since most people play singleplayer, not multiplayer, and at less competitive difficulty levels) it's not completely unjust to say that it would have been helpful if you had explained which context you were talking about.

kaspergm said:

Well, technically that is only true if you view "optimal" strict in the sense of winning fastest - but as you yourself pointed out above, that may not necessarily be the most fun or might just not be the target that one aims at in the specific situation. I agree your answer was correct within the context which you were speaking, but given that that context is not the one where most people play their games (since most people play singleplayer, not multiplayer, and at less competitive difficulty levels) it's not completely unjust to say that it would have been helpful if you had explained which context you were talking about.

Click to expand...

Optimal play in multiplayer is optimal play period. Multiplayer is where the best strategies are developed, used and defended against. Therefor, advice from MP is top advice about what's optimal. Those strategies can be carried over to single player and used to absolutely dominate the AI. Although Diety does some crazy blatant cheating so some strategies will not work since they require a level playing field.

Again, you evaluate the question only from the point of view that concerns how you can win fastest/against the highest difficulty level. I'm not questioning whether your points are true from that point of view, I'm just pointing out that players who focus on different parts of the game might be in another situation.

Interesting... somehow there are more pages in this thread (3) than the number of letters that were required to answer the simple question posed by the OP (2) -- "NO"

CraigMak said:

Optimal play in multiplayer is optimal play period. Multiplayer is where the best strategies are developed, used and defended against. Therefor, advice from MP is top advice about what's optimal. Those strategies can be carried over to single player and used to absolutely dominate the AI. Although Diety does some crazy blatant cheating so some strategies will not work since they require a level playing field.

Click to expand...

So you're saying optimal MP tactics and strategies are the best way to win the game no matter what. Period. End of story... except in cases where the AI has extra bonuses... in which case optimal MP tactics and strategies are not necessarily the best way to win the game no matter what. Okay. Got it.

Agree to disagree that multiplayer advice is the best advice to play single player. So many facets of the game are changed by not having the AI present... strategies will be completely different. Multiplayer can be a completely different game than single player, which is what most people play. Save for the unique MP situation described (and even then, ehhhh), I'm pretty sure most would agree that neglecting culture is pretty poor advice to the population of Civ players at large, particularly those still trying to improve their game.

It is possible to get a CV by the Renaissance Era. If you are playing MP and everyone plays for a Domination VC (meaning they build few culture buildings and burn all of the GW, GM, and GA), you might be able to accomplish a CV much earlier.

There are many threads in the strategy forum about the Legalism bump. The best players get four cities built with Monuments before taking Legalism. As has been pointed out, you can get free Opera Houses, and you can also get free UB which provide culture (i.e. 4 free Wats which is like getting four free Universities as soon as you research Education).

Bottom line, Monuments are cheap to build and are best built early. Getting four free buildings, it is better to get more advanced buildings.