Do you quit when you know you will definitely win?

Do you quit the game when you know that you will win eventually?

  • Yes/Most of the time

    Votes: 129 59.2%
  • No/Rarely

    Votes: 89 40.8%

  • Total voters
    218
I like losing.

I remember my first game of civ, civ III. I put it on the second lowest difficulty. I got my back end kicked. But I LOVED the how the game made me balance things! Eventually I got better, and started WINNING games. That's when I stopped playing to the end. The reason Civilization is fun is because it makes you THINK. If you move past that part, and into the part of mindless clicking, then it's no longer fun. That's why I now put the difficulty ALL the way up, and get my rear kicked, just like the good old days! :D

And on the subject of ciV, it's boring. The beginning is LONG (I normally play on quick, so I may not be judging this right), the middle is boring, and Im not sure about the end since I quit long before then.
 
There's always any ways knowing you'd win:
1. UN victory. I got the whole city states in my pocket, UN count down in 10. And I felt..bored. There's no declaration of war, none of the states are under attacks, nothing. What is this? Why the obliviousness? It's almost as if the AI didn't even know such a condition exist.

2. Science victory. Going this route means science advantage. Unless I'm playing immortal or deity, the tech parity is so huge when I go scientific route, I'm probably better off, and have much fun gunning for Electricity, spamming Mechanized infantry and kill stuff for 20 turns before returning to main menu satisfied.

3. The stupid AI giving all their cities to you upon suing for peace. I controlled Europe, Asia and Africa after England, Germany and Songhia alliance failed to win their allied war against me. It's time to quit. I didn't bother finding out whether France can do anything in American soil. Why bother? They can't mount naval invasions and you can pick them off at your leisure, or go for UN victory.

I quit cause i got better things to do with my time.
 
I def quit if I'm way ahead. Getting to the modern age with rail, tanks and bombers is almost like starting another complete game and if I can't get to that point without at least a few others civs who can challenge me, there's no point in my opinion

I always played emperor in cIV and sometimes I'd go into the world builder and give a couple of civs and extra settler or archers just so I'd ensure someone growing large enough to pose a threat to me the entire game
 
in Civ4? No, I always played to the end.

in Civ5? Yes. Because there's no point playing on to a garunteed victory when I'm not having fun and when turns take half a minute to complete.
 
Top Bottom