Do you play games starting in a later era?

[SPQR300]

I mean if you regularly play games when you don't start in the ancient era. If you play, please vote which kind of games do you play the most. I recently found out how much fun these games can be. Having tough wars in the modern era with nukes and the lot of modern units avaible is quite refreshing after having played a lot of games which were decided in the earlier eras. I believe modern era wars are more fun and complex, then earlier wars. When the game is not yet decided even by the very end of the game, you have to fight really hard in the last turns to win, or even replay them. One disadvantege I found is managing cities is a bit more repetative and tidious then before.
ps: sorry for poor English.

 

[SPQR300]

The poll suprised me quite much. I thought much more people play advanced starts, and play the BTS improved modern era. BTS is not about the ancient times. I have to say you are a bit short-sighted, and missing a lot of the game...

 

[DigitalBoy]

Ancient era start is the only way to play Civilization. That was half sarcastic and half serious.

 

[jeffreyac]

Well, saying we START in ancient times doesn't mean we never get to late-game content... I mean, I know the really good guys out there can win domination victories in 3000BC and all, but my games tend to end no sooner than Industrial age, and most often modern age, sometimes even getting into future tech...

 

[omglazers]

The poll suprised me quite much. I thought much more people play advanced starts, and play the BTS improved modern era. BTS is not about the ancient times. I have to say you are a bit short-sighted, and missing a lot of the game...

Part of the fun of an ancient start is building up your Empire; thats the draw of Civ.

I'd so a late start for fun but honestly, I think building up a civ and then having late wars.

 

[alex sword]

Go level up if game is decided in early stage .

 

[Duelingground]

I've never played anything but Ancient era starts, but with the new Rock of Ages requirement for Elite QM, that is about to change.

And, I wouldn't say only playing from Ancient starts is 'shortsighted' at all, plenty of my games reach the Modern/Future era.

 

[say1988]

I play (almost) the whole game from ancient to modern times, to the edge of future.

 

[Emperor Giulio]

I think the farthest I went was Future tech 18 or something like that. But that is just one of those surprise games that are going exceptionally good.

 

[hecubus]

I didn't play anything but ancient era starts until this latest gauntlet.

 

[magicalsushi]

And, I wouldn't say only playing from Ancient starts is 'shortsighted' at all, plenty of my games reach the Modern/Future era.

Starting in the future era makes the game *very* different from starting in the ancient era and playing through to the future era. If you believe they're the same, you've clearly not actually tried both. You're missing out on a pretty radically different game - presumably this is why SPQR300 said this outlook was shortsighted.

(Nb. this is assuming you don't use the 'advanced start' feature; using it would probably make the two types of game somewhat more similar. Don't forget, just because they added advanced starts, doesn't mean you have to use them in every single post-ancient game!)

 

[GIO888]

My favorite GW is Mausoleum of Mausollos, so that dictates an early start!

Also makes you good at spelling bee's.........

 

[von Krysiak]

yeah I believe that the only way to play Civilisation is all the yway from the very start. Lets be honest if you want to just have a modern time wars then there are a few titles that will suit you a bit better, Civilisation is all about standing the test of time, advancing through the centuries and growing into a huge empire over long period of time.
Playing the game different way makes it lose its taste a bit (my oppinion)

 

[say1988]

Starting in the future era makes the game *very* different from starting in the ancient era and playing through to the future era. If you believe they're the same, you've clearly not actually tried both. You're missing out on a pretty radically different game - presumably this is why SPQR300 said this outlook was shortsighted.

I believe you misinterpreted the comment.
It was in response to the idea that you can't properly utilize most of the BTS content when playing ancient starts. And you cna, it doesn't mean the game is the same for different starts.

 

[Peepers]

There's no substitute to an ancient start. It gives you access to the most options for building your empire.

That said, I find that doing a 'future' start game makes it quick (only need a few techs to go to space) and you get to play with the modern units right away. Players who consider themselves competent have a shot at beating Immortal and Deity. I've had a lot of fun playing future, and added a bunch of moderately high scores to my HoF.

I believe that 'real' civ starts at 4000BC, but the future start also rocks if you want a change of pace.