Do you prefer to win by Conquest?

[Frostyboy]

Just Curious about peoples playstyles

 

[hawai_74]

yes i like to crush those stupids AI neighbor, but i always try to win in a different (pacific) way...it always ends with blood

 

[dojoboy]

I rarely ever go for a conquest victory, prefer space race and domination.

 

[superslug]

There's other victory conditions?

 

[sealman]

it all depends on the situations. However, once I have won the game, I will sometimes play on to eliminate my foes.

EDIT: Nothing better than seeing the whole world under the Seal Banner.

 

[superslug]

Yeah, my preferred games are huge pangaea maps. I make it point to wipe all the AI out as quickly as possible, well, all but one town. I do leave them one town just so I can milk the map for score until 2050...although that doesn't stop me from hitting that last town with an occasional nuke...

 

[The Last Conformist]

Making myself sole ruler of my home continent is always a goal in my games (I usually play Continents), but whether I proceed from there to world conquest or prefer to win by Spaceship varies.

Domination is essentially the same as Conquest to my mind, and I probably do it more often, since I dislike razing cites.

 

[kokoras]

It is not a bad idea to Conquest the whole world,but there is a small problem:It is rather impossible(in a standard map)
You must be at war from the beging of the game 'till the end of it,well it is not my style,i prefer doing other things also:My preferable V.C is the Space Race.

 

[Frostyboy]

I used to prefer peaceful building when playing CIV 2, but now - I feel it's too boring to stay within my borders. For me Civ has become a war game. It's easier to win by conquest as well I think.
When I feel for playing peacefully, the arrogant AI always attack or comes with insults - so there you go.

 

[ybbor]

Like sealman, i usually go for cultural, space race, UN, or other peaceful ways, but once the game's (technically) over, and i'm in the modern era.........well let's just say I have no need for the UN...

 

[Strengefuhrer]

I always attempt to win by conquest because the other victories are very fake. I mean "cultural" and "diplomatic" pfft.
Diplomatic should be more like MOO2, if you lose, then you have the option of fighting against the world, now united.
Cultural is just random and annoying, it comes unexpectedly and really is unrealistic.
Spaceship I find is a reasonable way of victory.
Domination is like conquest but not as good IMO, its easier but I dislike the idea of fighting then stopping halfway because I reach x%.

 

[civ_steve]

I find it just too painful to play for Conquest or Domination, so I only do those victories occasionally. (They are time-consuming, and I find myself short on time.)

If I'm playing for a Cultural Victory (20K or 100K), I use the F5 key, or the city display to track my status. I know within a few turns when the Victory will occur, so I wouldn't call that Random.

 

[Affirmative]

Originally posted by kokoras
It is not a bad idea to Conquest the whole world,but there is a small problem:It is rather impossible(in a standard map)
You must be at war from the beging of the game 'till the end of it,

Makes sense, to win by conquest you do need to fight to the end, and kill everyone.



This was domination, but conquest was not far off, about 30 galleons loaded with siphai were moving in


BTW large pangea

 

[Rameau's Nephew]

I usually don't win. The modern age is boring. (Actually, so is most of the industrial age.) I start over when it's become a fiat accompli. I think my hall of fame has 2 victories in it, plus one OCC that didn't make the list.

In the rare event that I do play a game out to it's conclusion, it's always a cultural or space race victory (or a loss, if I get frisky and try a game on emperor). I can't imagine many things more boring than moving around a couple 30-stack invasion forces to mop up the AI.

 

[Strengefuhrer]

If the AI wins culturally it always come unexpectedly for me.

 

[DS_Legionary]

Conquests is my preferred way of winning. Though, I don't always get to it. Having war is very tedious, and it takes quite a long time. So, if I run out of patience I'll fall back on Spaceship, or diplomatic.........that is if I've been a good little warmongerer.

 

[ybbor]

Originally posted by Rameau's Nephew
I usually don't win. The modern age is boring. (Actually, so is most of the industrial age.)

why does everybody think that? the modern age is the best time! it takes planing, and solid thinking. with railroads & quick units, you can actually get where you're going in less than 10 turns. with all kinds of abilities, like amphibious, airdrop, ZOC, you have to consider building more than 2 types of units. plus with your (and the AI's) industrial capacity you cna produce units, when you want. the discovery of flight makes the game infinatly more interesting, as the game now operates on a 3-d level, and you have to keep fighters handy to defend yourself, and an army of bombers ready to send the enemy packing, the industrial-modern age revolutionizes gameplay, and strengthens the power of the human's abilityto think & plan. there is not a more interesting time to wage war

 

[JonathanValjean]

No, I like to build my civ in peace. I generally conquer a couple of neighboring Civs during the course of the game, however, but that is the extent of my warmongering.

 

[Rameau's Nephew]

Originally posted by ybbor
the modern age is the best time! it takes planing, and solid thinking. with railroads & quick units, you can actually get where you're going in less than 10 turns. with all kinds of abilities, like amphibious, airdrop, ZOC, you have to consider building more than 2 types of units. plus with your (and the AI's) industrial capacity you cna produce units, when you want. the discovery of flight makes the game infinatly more interesting, as the game now operates on a 3-d level, and you have to keep fighters handy to defend yourself, and an army of bombers ready to send the enemy packing, the industrial-modern age revolutionizes gameplay, and strengthens the power of the human's abilityto think & plan. there is not a more interesting time to wage war

Sure, there are more decisions to make in the modern age. You spend all 20 minutes of each turn making decisions. The problem is that none of them matter very much.

The decision of whether to finish your library or crank out more horsemen in 1300 BC has massive consequences on the way the game plays out. Games are won and lost on such decisions. That's what I call interesting!

On the other hand, the end of the game simply plays out the decisions made centuries ago. If you've built an empire with an industrial base superior to that of your rivals, there's really no challenge at all (or consequences for poor decisions) in amping up your military and grinding him/her to dust. Regardless of the changed tactics, the lack of suspense involved makes it rather uninteresting.

And for the rare evenly-matched late game fight, the strategic disadvantage that the AI has is so large that it's pretty hard to screw up no matter what you (within the bounds of reasonable prudence, of course). Sure, you get all these nice new toys to play with, but they only compound the difficulty the AI has in handling itself. (I suppose it's different for multiplayer, but I don't have either expansion yet, so I can't speak for that.)

 

[Archer 007]

Sometimes.