Do you quit when you know you will definitely win?

[Rohili]

I've read people mentioning that they typically quit the game when the AI is so far behind that you know that you will definitely win the game. I was wondering how prevalent this practice is?

Personally, I tend to continue playing the game even when I am far ahead. I derive enjoyment from just building up my civilization, planning and executing wars against the AI, teching up and playing with more advanced units, etc.

 

[ash874]

yes
in 6 years of mostly civ but also total war, i finished maybe a handful of games

 

[Lord Monkey]

I'm so good at Civ, I assume I'm going to win as soon as I start a game, then I quit immediately so the computer can avoid yet another humiliating "defeat" at my hands!

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

This is a phenomenon I just really don't understand.

 

[Fariic]

I play huge marathon games, with no victory conditions.

 

[Gath]

I'm so good at Civ, I assume I'm going to win as soon as I start a game, then I quit immediately so the computer can avoid yet another humiliating "defeat" at my hands!

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

This is a phenomenon I just really don't understand.

Because playing is the fun part, not the victory screen. Especially the lame POS victory screen we have in civ 5.

 

[CYZ]

I used to always finish my games. But in civ 5 sometimes you're going for a culture/science/diplo victory and you already know the ai isn't going to catch up anymore. At that point i can either
a) go for a quick domination victory (again)
b) wait out all those turns for my intended victory
c) quit and go to bed

 

[HeavyTwenty]

I'm so good at Civ, I assume I'm going to win as soon as I start a game, then I quit immediately so the computer can avoid yet another humiliating "defeat" at my hands!

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

This is a phenomenon I just really don't understand.

Waste 30-60 minutes of my time to see one of the worse victory screens ever created? Maybe if the game was optimized so the AI turns didn't last so long. Plus most people are running mods now so you don't even get achievements (not that I care about achievements).

 

[zomg]

Its the time investment. If I know I'm going to win, thats the same as winning for me and I can start anew. The fun for me is in the challenge and when its simply steam rolling time its over.

 

[Olleus]

I'm so good at Civ, I assume I'm going to win as soon as I start a game, then I quit immediately so the computer can avoid yet another humiliating "defeat" at my hands!

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

This is a phenomenon I just really don't understand.

Because pressing end turn 30 times to finish my cultural victory isn't fun.

Because killing the 9th AI civilization in the same game in 3 turns isn't fun.

Because managing the production of 45 cities isn't fun (although that doesnt happen so much in Civ5)

ect....


Why do you feel the need to wait for the computer to tell you you've won? Why not play indefinitely after you've won?

 

[Lord Monkey]

Because playing is the fun part, not the victory screen.

What you just said failed to refute or really even address what I was talking about.

Even if you've overpowered and outteched an AI, you're still playing the game up until the victory screen. And even then you can keep playing.

Care to expound on what you meant, or am I correct in assuming that you just decide when "playing" is over, and declare yourself the winner?

 

[Alyosha]

I'm so good at Civ, I assume I'm going to win as soon as I start a game, then I quit immediately so the computer can avoid yet another humiliating "defeat" at my hands!

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

This is a phenomenon I just really don't understand.

It's really rather simple. Many people enjoy the early competition you get against the AI. Early in the game there's often a feeling of tension from knowing that you could get wiped out quickly if couple of aggressive neighbors ganged up on you and attacked. Competing for land, resources and allies whilst keeping the AI from wiping you out is fun. As soon as you are in a position where you're unstoppable the game loses its appeal. You've won! There's no tension. It becomes dull. You're just going through the motions until you get the final victory screen.

 

[KopOut]

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

So by your rationale, if I invest 5 hours in a game, and I reach a point where I am so far ahead of the AI that there is no way they will come back and win, that I should sit there and click thru the motions for the next 1-2 hours just to see a screen that says "well done?"

Is that what you are saying? Because I play the game for the challenge not a congratulatory e-card from 2k games. Once the challenge is completely gone it is no longer fun or rewarding.

Give me a game where it comes down to the buzzer, the final turn, to determine victory and I will stay for the end.

This is just common sense.

 

[Gaizokubanou]

I'm so good at Civ, I assume I'm going to win as soon as I start a game, then I quit immediately so the computer can avoid yet another humiliating "defeat" at my hands!

Seriously. If you're so far ahead you "know" you're going to win, why don't you just win? If you're that advanced it shouldn't be hard to finish off the AI. Also, before I get a bunch of "oh, I don't want to waste my time!" consider how much time you spent getting to the point at which you declared victory for yourself.

This is a phenomenon I just really don't understand.

My games crash every other turn around industrial era and I like to drag on my games as long as possible, so that's why I can't get a lot of victories (although I did still manage to finish my last epic game as China through about 20+ crashes).

 

[KopOut]

What you just said failed to refute or really even address what I was talking about.

Even if you've overpowered and outteched an AI, you're still playing the game up until the victory screen. And even then you can keep playing.

Care to expound on what you meant, or am I correct in assuming that you just decide when "playing" is over, and declare yourself the winner?

I think you are the one who is not addressing what we are saying.

When you have reached a point where you are merely clicking along to reach the end of the game, you are not playing a game anymore. You are just interacting with a piece of software, a very boring piece of software.

There is nothing at the end to make you go on other than a completist mentality or a gun to your head.

 

[Rohili]

I think the hallmark of a good Civ game is that it makes you want to keep playing even when you have won. I remember back in Civ 3 and 4, I always continued playing even after I reached the turn 2050. The game is fun enough to keep you playing even when you have achieved victory - you just set your own new goals and continue playing (e.g. wipe out a particular civ, finish the tech tree, etc).

With Civ 5, I don't feel that as much. I do keep playing till I win, but then I stop. Once I achieved victory, I don't bother continuing any more. The AI is just too boring and flavourless to keep me engrossed.

 

[Lord Monkey]

I think you are the one who is not addressing what we are saying.

When you have reached a point where you are merely clicking along to reach the end of the game, you are not playing a game anymore. You are just interacting with a piece of software, a very boring piece of software.

There is nothing at the end to make you go on other than a completist mentality or a gun to your head.

Cool your jets, son. You expect me to simultaneously respond to like 5 different people? Let's be realistic.

My point is, at what point does it go from "playing a game" to "clicking along to reach the end" of a "very boring piece of software?" The point of a game is to achieve victory by meeting the preset conditions. If the player decides when they've won, why are you playing the game to begin with?

PS - if you're consistently reaching the point where you're cruising around with modern armors and facing pikemen or whatnot, you're more than likely not playing on a high difficulty. If somehow you're some beast who dominates deity every time you try, why is it even fun for you in the first place?

 

[Sadan01]

Civ V is the first Civ where I haven't finished a single game yet. I'm usually bored of the game by the time it looks like I'm going to win, so I start a new game.

That patch cannot come quick enough.

 

[Alyosha]

C The point of a game is to achieve victory by meeting the preset conditions. If the player decides when they've won, why are you playing the game to begin with?

No, maybe you play only for the experience of winning, but for many that's not where the satisfaction comes from. I like building an empire. I like the minutiae of building an empire. I also like the idea of pitting my empire against other empires and winning - but that's only one aspect from which enjoyment is derived. Can't you understand? It's not hard.

And sadly the minutiae of managing an empire is what Civ 5 lacks.

Stupid 'streamlining' nonsense...bah.

 

[lschnarch]

Originally Posted by Gath
Because playing is the fun part, not the victory screen.

What you just said failed to refute or really even address what I was talking about.

Even if you've overpowered and outteched an AI, you're still playing the game up until the victory screen. And even then you can keep playing.

Care to expound on what you meant, or am I correct in assuming that you just decide when "playing" is over, and declare yourself the winner?

It is about the challenge.
As long as you may be in danger (may it be that you would be attacked, may it be that the opponent reaches a victory condition earlier, whatever), there is a challenge to prove that you can master it.
As soon as you don't feel such a challenge anymore, there is no point in continuing the current game. The time needed for doing so is better spent in a new challenge.

My point is, at what point does it go from "playing a game" to "clicking along to reach the end" of a "very boring piece of software?" The point of a game is to achieve victory by meeting the preset conditions. If the player decides when they've won, why are you playing the game to begin with?

See above.

PS - if you're consistently reaching the point where you're cruising around with modern armors and facing pikemen or whatnot, you're more than likely not playing on a high difficulty. If somehow you're some beast who dominates deity every time you try, why is it even fun for you in the first place?

You see, that is what many of us are complaining about: there isn't much fun in Civ0.V

 

[Lord Monkey]

Because pressing end turn 30 times to finish my cultural victory isn't fun.

Because killing the 9th AI civilization in the same game in 3 turns isn't fun.

Because managing the production of 45 cities isn't fun (although that doesnt happen so much in Civ5)

ect....


Why do you feel the need to wait for the computer to tell you you've won? Why not play indefinitely after you've won?

When I'm in that situation (cultural victory waiting mode) I try to micromanage to shave turns off the 30.

If it takes 3 turns to kill the civ, why not do it, considering the 200ish turns you've spent getting there?

There's an auto-production button in cities. I often use it when I feel the AI is doomed, so I don't have to keep telling my scads of cities to build theaters.

And sometimes I do play past the victory screen, until I'm satisfied. Usually I don't, because everyone is dead and there's no competition.