Game Length (Marathon or Epic?)

[Crusher1]

Seems to work, since I'm currently working on my third Deity win.

Marathon makes the game dramatically easier for too many reasons to list. If you're a deity player on Marathon, congrats =D. On normal you will be an emperor player ^^. Maybe even Noble?!

Perhaps settler!

 

[CLST]

Quick Noble is the speed/level of the competitive.

 

[Crusher1]

Heh ^^. I just get amused when people say something like "Marathon" then bragg about their skill.

I consider myself a very strong Immortal player but a poor Deity player, where I only win about 10% of the time, however, when I play Deity on Marathon I can easily win 35-40% of the time. The speed of the game makes a HUGE and DRASTICALLY significant change to the overall difficulty.

So I feel it's important to severely exaggerate the effects so people get it through their thick skull that the game is EASIER on Marathon. I'm sick of seeing "Different".

Thats all

 

[madscientist]

Heh ^^. I just get amused when people say something like "Marathon" then bragg about their skill.

I consider myself a very strong Immortal player but a poor Deity player, where I only win about 10% of the time, however, when I play Deity on Marathon I can easily win 35-40% of the time. The speed of the game makes a HUGE and DRASTICALLY significant change to the overall difficulty.

So I feel it's important to severely exaggerate the effects so people get it through their thick skull that the game is EASIER on Marathon. I'm sick of seeing "Different".

Thats all

To be honest I don't give a damned if marathon is easier, harder, less true to it's intesnt, buffed, nerfed, or a mutilation of the Holy Book of Sid. I play Marathon because it's fun and entertaining and each long game is an epic story (yes for my off line games too).

I mean what difference does it make. It is a game!

 

[Crusher1]

It makes no difference when you attach a simple label like,

I enjoy Marathon because it offers a rich and truly in depth gaming experience which cannot be found with faster speeds.

BUT,

When you put it into words like the guy I was talking about before it changes everything

 

[madscientist]

Then I suggest pacing your comment rate to the appropriate speed.

I.E., forum post for the following:


Normal users: 6 post a day

Epic users: 3 post a day

Marathon users: less than 1 post a day

Conclusion: You have 5 post per day therefore you cannot possibly be a Marathon user.

Possibilities? 3.


1. Start a new account and post appropriately - if you so adamantly affirm to be a Marathon user take pride and do so accordingly.

2. You are lying to everyone and have never played Marathon.

3. In your heart you are a "Normal Speed" user and have been hiding in "The Closet" and are yet to reveal your true self to friends and family.

Actually dude I missed this post.

OK, a few points

1) I'll post as often as I damned well feel. Go try and get a moderator to tell me to shut up.

2) That's right I have never played a single Marathon game in my life. Every posted game I have played the past 2 years has been custome made in WorldBuilder. Go to My Signature of past RPC games to see them.

3) Better yet, look at post #19 in the Stickied sample Game Directory.

4) And I'll say Marathon is harder if I want


It takes alot to tick me off and ya did. Discussing the marathon/standard speed thing is one thing. Calling me a liar is something else.

I have said my piece, and I won't waste the threads time talking the matter.

PS: And I am pretty sure you took the quoted poster out of context, or simply missed what they said.

 

[Crusher1]

No one called you a Liar. I suggest you look down and see the humor that TMIT and I had with it. You are forgiven.

 

[Learningciv]

Heh ^^. I just get amused when people say something like "Marathon" then bragg about their skill.

I consider myself a very strong Immortal player but a poor Deity player, where I only win about 10% of the time, however, when I play Deity on Marathon I can easily win 35-40% of the time. The speed of the game makes a HUGE and DRASTICALLY significant change to the overall difficulty.

So I feel it's important to severely exaggerate the effects so people get it through their thick skull that the game is EASIER on Marathon. I'm sick of seeing "Different".

Thats all

How do you know marathon just doesn't suit your own personal playstyle better then normal? Other players who compete at the same difficulty might find the reverse as true. Anecdotal evidence (i.e. in "my" games...) holds TINY and INCREDIBLY insignificant weight in any arguement. It lacks a significant sample size especially with the variation possible in Civ.

There is no disputing that marathon gives earlier finish dates but I am yet to see statistical proof that marathon has a significantly higher win percentage then quicker game speeds.

I do acknowledge that in certain situations you can make the game easier on marathon. One example is taking advantage of a very powerful early game UU such as Quecha, Preat, Immortal or Vulture while stacking the map settings in your favour (pangaea, extra civs, etc). However I do not ackowledge that marathon is significantly easier in terms of win percentage when playing random settings (random civ/ai, shuffle/fractal) if the player has equal skill at both speeds.

 

[Crusher1]

However I do not ackowledge that marathon is significantly easier in terms of win percentage when playing random settings (random civ/ai, shuffle/fractal) if the player has equal skill at both speeds.

Your failure to acknowledge something doesn't disprove it.

 

[Learningciv]

Your failure to acknowledge something doesn't disprove it.

You have proof? So far I have only seen anecdotal evidence.

 

[Crusher1]

You have proof? So far I have only seen anecdotal evidence.

Have you any? Until you can prove my statement false my personal experience makes it true.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You have proof? So far I have only seen anecdotal evidence.

Proof would be incredibly difficult without a large # of participants, with a distribution of normal and marathon players (to remove bias from switching speeds and being unfamiliar with the new one). You'd also need to play enough maps with all of those players until you got a feel that the outcomes were not dependent on the map (spawning next to shaka on marathon is very different from spawning next to frederick). On top of ALL OF THAT, we'd have to control for difficulty level, because damned if that couldn't make a difference too .

I definitely find marathon easier, or used to. Now, it's harder for me to say it, because I can beat immortal pretty often on anything but quick, while I can't beat deity without supreme cheese on anything...but deity is so much harder than immortal that it's going to trump speed variance. That deity is hard is non-argument, but it's oppressively so .

 

[Learningciv]

Proof would be incredibly difficult without a large # of participants, with a distribution of normal and marathon players (to remove bias from switching speeds and being unfamiliar with the new one). You'd also need to play enough maps with all of those players until you got a feel that the outcomes were not dependent on the map (spawning next to shaka on marathon is very different from spawning next to frederick). On top of ALL OF THAT, we'd have to control for difficulty level, because damned if that couldn't make a difference too .

I definitely find marathon easier, or used to. Now, it's harder for me to say it, because I can beat immortal pretty often on anything but quick, while I can't beat deity without supreme cheese on anything...but deity is so much harder than immortal that it's going to trump speed variance. That deity is hard is non-argument, but it's oppressively so .

Thats the point I was trying to make TMIT. The sheer variance makes it hard to say either way. Just because one person plays with a style that makes the game easier on marathon doesn't make it so. I hold anecdotal evidence very poorly as I have seen people make rediculous assumptions based on it (i.e. at university I lived with a guy who didn't believe smoking was bad for him because his grandfather was 90 and had smoked his whole life).

Current LHC spoiler inside

Spoiler :

One example of variance is I find AIs are better at conquring other AIs on marathon. During the latest LHC I had a runaway Zara as he had conqured most of the main continent while I was in isolation. This would not have happened to the degree it did if I was playing normal. I can very safely conclude that that game would have been easier for me on normal as there wouldn't have been such a powerful AI civ.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You should probably spoiler the leaders in current LHC games.

However, THAT wasn't speed dependent. The only thing that stopped him from getting his 3rd vassal in my game (on normal) was the fact that I bribed him out of war and there were no AIs to instantly bribe him back in (which is an unfixed glitch that obsolete discovered). Well, that and I kept bribing him vs different targets throughout the game. He was very, very powerful there no matter what on the higher levels it seems.

I would not have gone culture on marathon. I'd have murdered 2-4 civs and won UN probably.

 

[Crusher1]

Some very elite players like Obsolete prefer not to play Marathon because they feel it verges on abuse. I am not anywhere close to the only person who feels Marathon is easier, and laughably at that.

 

[Learningciv]

Spoiler :

Have a look at my final screen shots to see the size of his empire. He had wiped Cyrus off the map claiming all of his cities, left Sury with only 2, taken over half of Alex's. He was on 51% land mass with only a 2 city vassal under him. Even at 800A.D. it seems he was bigger then when you finished.

I think AI's run away more effeciently on marathon. If they have a military advantage it gets pressed harder.

As for victory condition in LHC a big part of it was I dislike water (something I hope LHC will fix ) and I am trying to wien myself of military victories.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You make a good point, but isolation also distorts typical games. After all, the biggest draw of marathon is unit production, but you need far less hammers in those for 1/2 the game or so in isolation, and have less ability to hamper the AI from using those bonuses (albeit poorly, it still does get the marathon discount). Someone like shaka could be a serious problem (worst was lonely sury, before Rolo fixed the barbs to spawn with archers, those impi were EVERYWHERE). Shaka would have 40% land/pop at least when MEETING him on epic, I can't even imagine what happened on marathon.

But still, that's hardly a typical game, in fact the series is predicated on something fairly unusual.

 

[Jet]

Other players who compete at [imm-deity] might find [marathon is harder].

Sure, they might. The ones who post here don't, though.

Objectively the main reason longer is easier is that as a human you can usually get some kind of military advantage, Quechas/etc or no, even if it's just temporary, even if the advantage is just surprise or better preparation and adaptibility, and use the slower pace to press it against an AI. I think there are other subtler reasons too, especially on Marathon where the relative scaling of game elements is more unlike Normal.

To the OP: I used to play mostly Standard/Epic and switched to mostly Standard/Normal. I can play more games that way (which is a good thing, now that I've been playing for years I eat games like popcorn), I think research vs. war is a little better balanced on Normal, and I think Normal is harder and I like it to be challenging. Slower speeds for larger maps, though: that balances it better. If I played Large or Huge (which I rarely do) my first inclination would be to set it to Large/Epic or Huge/Marathon.

 

[Jamuka]

I don't play marathon because it's a joke. The AI is not programmed to play it correctly, it would be like playing Deep Blue in GO.

 

[Crusher1]

Here is another basic reason why Marathon is easier...........

2 games played on the identical map with identical build orders for settlers and identical city locations. The first set of pictures are played on Normal and shows that I have 7 cities with 2 settlers in route to new city locations at 1000 BC.

The 2nd set of pictures are played on Marathon and shows that I have 7 cities and 2 settlers already at their new city locations at 1650 BC. Please keep in mind that I did the exact build order for producing "settlers". Hell, I even had my workers doing absolutely nothing while I was waiting for my 1st tech to finish, same for the 2nd tech.....simply to keep the b/o's as close to pure while making settlers as possible. The games diverged a bit after the settlers but that didn't matter imo. I think I did miss out on the timing of the Library in Marathon by a few turns and a chop, however, it was no longer producing settlers.

I have already saved over 650 years with my REX on Marathon! 650 years! Seriously, that is overpowering. When you count into the equation that those 650 years are going to go by very very slowly just think how much stronger my 1000 BC Marathon game is going to be than my Normal game. They will not even be remotely comparable.......

So Marathon already offers a grossly overpowering start and we haven't even thrown in WAR and other benefits that Marathon offers. Seriously, I don't see how anyone can possibly think Marathon isn't supremely easier.

The initial saves are at the bottom.........feel free to tinker around and see how much you can abuse the Marathon start over Normal. There was some WB editing but both games were played the same way with the only difference being speed. I also entered WB to delete barbs that randomly appeared in one game but not another etc. Just keeping it real........but once again, it doesn't matter because both games were played the same way.