has anyone here tried playing on deity

tipsy09

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
43
and just playing there until you get better? just forget about the easier difficulties...go straight to deity and get better
 
I don't think that most people who just pick up the game and go, could ever get far enough in a deity game to learn how to win. Or even make it past a 1000 years, except maybe the hardcore players from 2 and 3.
 
It's hard to learn when you lose in 3000 BC due to rampant barbarians.

While the key to getting better is to push yourself into hard difficulties, there is such a thing as pushing yourself too much.
 
Diety = the same idiotic AI not a better one as it should ..The Barbarians spawn rate is insane ...not hard to beat just tedious and you can be overwhelemed by the random barb <the other civs arnt any smarter either they just out produce you on every front > so not worth the time to play diety no fun in it or challange at all <sorry for those that love diety "challange" but watchign scores of barbarians charge my capitol in the first few turns so that i have a great general by turn 5 <provided im still there> is just well boring and the tedium of beatign down a barb city becomes even worse
 
You can win deity by putting all the AI on a small cramped continent, and give yourself a large empty continent to settle, and turn off tech trading and space victory. If you manage to survive the barbs, then you can catch up in tech eventually and go for domination or cultural victory. Another possibility, play dual sized map, and go for quechua rush.
 
You can win if you play dual sized map, using quechua rush (inca) or immortal rush (Persia) or war chirot rush (egypt). By using cyrus, I can win when the map size change to tiny with 2 opponent. babarian is not a big problem cause immortal can easy beat them. I beat Ottaman by immortal rush. Zulu is at the other continent and I win by diplomacy. Of cause, you need to have horse near your city. Now I am playing at small map size with 14 opponent. It is very interesting. I just have 1 city while the AI have 2 or 3 or 4 cities and all the land is occupied. I took 1 city from indian and make peace. All the continent is in strange peace even after entering industry era. Still working on that.
 
I like the praetorian rush. Duel Terra, Marathon, well I suppose that isn't a REAL diety game... But I did win.

If the game was played on Diety then it's a real Diety win. I've won on Diety with Quecha rushes which is even more cheesy :D
 
I don't consider dual a real win no matter what the other settings are.

And barbarians aren't a real issue in deity unless you depopulate your maps. Because you will be enclosed by other civs so quickly that the barbs can't get to you.
 
The only win i consider a "real" win is if you click the play now option so you can't change the settings and play at normal speed.
 
I regularly play and deity level, but only with loads of civs cramped onto a single landmass, or on the 24civ world map.. With so many civs cramped so close together, it's not difficult to warmonger your way through a bunch of them, and by the medieval period you can actually get ahead in tech because your empire is so much bigger and more prosperous than anybody else. Even with aggressive AI on, they're nowhere near agressive enough to keep up with a practiced warmonger.;)
 
I once did a duel map on Deity and gave myself a Modern Armour.

I won pretty quickly.
 
The only win i consider a "real" win is if you click the play now option so you can't change the settings and play at normal speed.

Why? Surely a win is a win. Okay, so non-standard settings can make a game easier (they can also make it much harder - check out the Ironman challenge for an example). But I don't see why a player shouldn't play at higher difficulty levels to make games on non-standard settings more challenging, and still consider it a 'real' win when they achieve victory. Or, equally, to use non-standard settings to help them adjust to a higher level.

Of course it's more satisfying to win tougher games. But playing with, say, 10 civs instead of 8 hardly constitutes cheating, does it?

Sure, if someone comes on here boasting of how they can easily beat deity, suggesting that they're some kind of expert when they're really just setting the game up to make it easier, you can justly point out that they haven't tested themselves against the toughest challenge that cIV has to offer. But, by the same token, if you haven't won a conquest-only quick-speed deity continents with raging barbs, always war, no city razing and the AI civs paired off into teams, then you haven't done so either.

I just don't understand why a game that comes with so many custom options should be played on standard settings or else not considered 'real'.

(Incidentally, if anyone has ever beaten the settings I mentioned, then you are truly a godlike player to whom I bow down in awed worship. As long as you didn't cheat by giving yourself a Modern Armour in the ancient era...).
 
Back
Top Bottom