I want civplayer League back.

It would not take much to make this game competitive.
#1 Who gets 1st move each turn should be staggered.
#2 Military units in close proximity to the enemy should not be able to move rapidly before they can react.
#3 It should be possible to eliminate, balance or choose which natural wonders pop up.
#4 It should be possible to disable specific civs.
#5 It should be possible to remove the World congress.
#6 It should be possible to disable specific wonders such as GW.
#7 It should be possible to disable specific beliefs such as +100 gold or +4 faith.

It would not take much to make this game competitive.
#1 Who gets 1st move each turn should be staggered.
#2 Military units in close proximity to the enemy should not be able to move rapidly before they can react.
#3 It should be possible to eliminate, balance or choose which natural wonders pop up.
#4 It should be possible to disable specific civs.
#5 It should be possible to remove the World congress.
#6 It should be possible to disable specific wonders such as GW.
#7 It should be possible to disable specific beliefs such as +100 gold or +4 faith.

Click to expand...

even when there are some things being "unbalanced" - I fully agree here -

I think the main part of a competetive games is that the better player can overcome rnd factor - and this is fully there.

I win vs 99% of players 100% of games no matter the setting/land, no matter if getting outmoved (I allways get outmoved and am used to it).

So all these stuff is just minor - in end skill wins games - even when loosers often try to blame rnd things ...

Another idea I had would be to possibly introduce standard, balanced maps in which to have competitive matches on. More like Starcraft where you know what the terrain is going to be like and where to scout for your opponent.

I am not sure how well this would go over in the Civ community but it would make huge leaps and bounds as far as balancing the game if the maps were not random and were fairly laid out.

Has this been tried before? I think it would make the game far more competitive in nature. Starcraft has a die hard competitive, professional scene and I think we would do well to mimmick that.

Has this been tried before? I think it would make the game far more competitive in nature. Starcraft has a die hard competitive, professional scene and I think we would do well to mimmick that.

Click to expand...

12 year old koreans arent the main target group for civ I guess - neither is a big part of community as competetive as starcraft players.

Civ isnt starcraft - shoudlnt be and dont want be - still there is no reason to play good (serious?) when playing.
I will never understand the people screeming FUN - like playing bad is more fun as playing good ...

The objective here would be to create a fair and level playing field where the best player/strategy wins. This in itself would allow civ to become a game of skill. This would attract a competitive scene and allow the game to gain notice instead of being a joke.

I believe that many players are turned off by the fact that even after investing countless hours developing their ability some noob can come along and beat them because of a sweet spawn, fast clicks or overpowered strategy/unit.

Eliminating factors which can allow skill/experience to become worthless would cause more people to be willing to invest their time into the game. The objective is to grow the community and make the game more skill based is it not?

The objective here would be to create a fair and level playing field where the best player/strategy wins. This in itself would allow civ to become a game of skill.

Click to expand...

This is pretty much there allready ...

I can tell you that the game definitely is not "there". It is very easy for an extremely good player to lose to a mediocre player or even a below average player simply because of luck, op civs, op units, fast clicks etc...

If some guy can get 2 moves in every turn before you're aloud to move there is no way you're ever going to beat him. Your units will always die and his will always run away to heal.

It is very easy for a highly skilled player to lose to some one of lesser skill due to unbalanced game conditions. Camels/keshiek are a free win, Chukonu/longbows are absurdly strong, some guy can spawn next to a couple of ridiculously good natural wonders.

Some times your part of the map just has no production or luxuries or food. Some times there are great defensive mountains for your enemy and none for you. Many things cause the game to break down and not be a fair fight.

If you say you can overcome all of these odds and still always win then you would have to be far better at the game than anyone else.

I can tell you that the game definitely is not "there". It is very easy for an extremely good player to lose to a mediocre player or even a below average player simply because of luck, op civs, op units, fast clicks etc...

Click to expand...

just no

No medicore player d EVER beat me or one of the few other very good players just by clicking faster or having better land or civ.
In fact skill makes such a huge difference that even taking on 2 or 3 medicore players is easily possible when being good.

randomness isn't stopping people from playing competitive

civ 4 was active enough and had a ton of randomness and useless civs/leaders

what hurts civ 5 is the complete lack of playability. the engine is trash, and the developers took a dump on the whole turn-based part