I just want CIV 5 to be a joyful game

[CHEESE!]

I think at this point there is only one thing left:
http://xkcd.com/386/

Guilty as charged.

 

[Durloth]

If (and that`s a big i) Hclass isn`t a troll, I think I understand his position and it`s something that have bothered me for a while regarding certain aspects of pop-culture for some time now: the "EXTREME!" trend (Written in caps to be as annoying to read, as to hear announced on the shows). Discovery Channel for example used to be a cool source of popular sience, but now it is all about EXTREME! (insert just about anything from -fishing to any aspect of -architecture).

While it would seem to be a paradox, because equal amounts of rewards given to both sides would cancel each other out, I guess OP simply wants that EXTREME! feeling, where every warrior is an EXTREME! warrior like Conan and every tank is an EXTREME! super duper laser tank. Balance issues aside it could work. Just put a couple of extra zeroes behind every thing in the game for EXTREME! inflation. It would look cooler if you had cities of 1000000000000000 inhabitants instead of only 100000. It would look cooler if you got 500000000000 gold instead of 50 for capturing an enemy city.
The Japanese understood it when they made Godzilla sequels. Monsters are cool= huge monsters are cooler= many huge monsters are even cooler ad nauseum.

Maybe the easiest thing would just be to quit Civ and instead start playing Black & White?

 

[Shurdus]

Or, you could mod the game so that every unit is renamed to EXTREME unit. EXTREME workers, EXTREME fishing boats, EXTREME scout... Awesome!

 

[smachy]

You want me to "prove it" right?
So, you are now the persuader... in this single issue. Prove it!

Prove it to me it is a must, for me to prove myself correct in order to get what I am persuing.

Now, you must prove why I must prove that you must prove to the developers that your idea is good. This can go to ad infinitum, but there is actually a reasonable way to put the burden of proof on me. But, you have not done that, so I have no burden of proof. While I am nice enough to point out to you that you should prove your points with objective evidence to persuade others rather than relying on subjective feelings and beliefs, I am not nice enough to give you the answer to attack my position.

Thanks Shurdus. But, in United States law, Res ipsa loquitur only applies to negligence case and has nothing to with the burden of proof. I don't even understand US law well, so if you are talking about some other jurisdiction, then I apologize. But, you are correct that people who are making a positive claim or brought the claim has the greater burden of proof.

 

[Durloth]

Or, you could mod the game so that every unit is renamed to EXTREME unit. EXTREME workers, EXTREME fishing boats, EXTREME scout... Awesome!

Exactly! "You just captured EXTREME Babylon! You recieve 50 EXTREME gold."
BTW: It can`t be a mod. Not because we`re lazy, but because they take the fun out of the game. You shuld not have to press CTRL+W to access it (like you can today to get almost all the features OP wants), because that takes he fun out of the game (even though we`re not too worried about being labeled as cheaters). It shuld all be built into the core mechanics of "EXTREME Sid Meiers` EXTREME Civilizaton 5000000000", with it`s EXTREMEly good AI (because the only reason they haven`t made AI with human capabilities by now is laziness). Where EXTREME battles will be fought between EXTREME Ghandi and EXREME Victoria over who can restrict or supply access to their territories the fastest using their EXTREME terraforming powers.

 

[Shurdus]

Well I am talking about Dutch law, there it has a place in negligence as well. It does have eberything to do however with the burden of proof. If something is very obviously true or false, one needs not prove it. It is common knowledge that it is true, if the other party wants to dispute it they have to prove that it is not true or false. It is about the burden of proof and nothing else in Dutch law, and I assume that is the case in American law as well.

Whatever may be of that, in this case it was obviously a bit stretching it that you needed to proof anything.

 

[Shurdus]

Exactly! "You just captured EXTREME Babylon! You recieve 50 EXTREME gold."
BTW: It can`t be a mod. Not because we`re lazy, but because they take the fun out of the game. You shuld not have to press CTRL+W to access it (like you can today to get almost all the features OP wants), because that takes he fun out of the game (even though we`re not too worried about being labeled as cheaters). It shuld all be built into the core mechanics of "EXTREME Sid Meiers` EXTREME Civilizaton 5000000000", with it`s EXTREMEly good AI (because the only reason they haven`t made AI with human capabilities by now is laziness). Where EXTREME battles will be fought between EXTREME Ghandi and EXREME Victoria over who can restrict or supply access to their territories the fastest using their EXTREME terraforming powers.

You mean ' supply access to their EXTREME territories the EXTREMELY fastest.

 

[CHEESE!]

I want my philosophical discussions back .

 

[Durloth]

Sorry, but your philosophy was too vanilla. Nowadays the only thing that can catch our attention is EXTREME philosophy.

Ehrm... I may have taken this EXTREME joke as far as it goes now. I don`t want people to see me as EXTREMEly annoying or anything

 

[Thyrwyn]

@Ahriman - I was wondering when that xkcd was going to show up in this thread. I didn't have the heart. . . .

 

[hclass]

Hi,

Here is something which should sound more constructive...

In Civ4, for all the games I have played, there is one thing I always do at the very beginning, I always tick only "Conquest victory" from the option page, disable the posibility of winning other type of victory. (I always dream of an option to turn all AI players become military mania and if I can turn off all diplomatic features, it will be better still)

But the AI players have no FEEL of the CRUCIAL victory setting I have made, they simply play as usual. e.g. I have never found Gandhi start playing agrresively when I allow only conquest victory.
Imagine if they are all human players, they will all dying to build up military as quick as possible.

I just want to point out an extremely SILLY game desgin wrt AI VS game victory selection:
It is logically impossible to make both work at the same time with the same priority when conflict araise due to user's choice:

1. Option to allow user to decide what are possible victory types. (Disable or enable victory type)
2. An AI civ (prototyped by who is its leader) will have certain favor to pursue certain type of victory.

Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Suho1004]

(I cannot believe that this thread is still alive.)

As for your last post hclass, in fact, you are not wrong. I think you are very right in that regard. And this is one of the things that I am looking forward to in Civ5--a more intelligent AI that is actually trying to win the game. I would assume (hope?) that if you uncheck everything but conquest victory, the AI will act accordingly. Thus I am really excited about the new AI with its three different levels of thinking (strategic, tactical, operational). Here's hoping that it lives up to the hype.

 

[hclass]

(I cannot believe that this thread is still alive.)

As for your last post hclass, in fact, you are not wrong. I think you are very right in that regard. And this is one of the things that I am looking forward to in Civ5--a more intelligent AI that is actually trying to win the game. I would assume (hope?) that if you uncheck everything but conquest victory, the AI will act accordingly. Thus I am really excited about the new AI with its three different levels of thinking (strategic, tactical, operational). Here's hoping that it lives up to the hype.

(Belive me, the Earth will still spin even if all of us have decided to end our life)

For the mentioned problem:
--- Solution 1 ----
Firaxis can solve the problem by puting victory of the same kind into a group. e.g. Dominant and Conquest as a group.
And a radio buttons is all it needs to make sure in every group at least one victory type is selected.
This should save Firaxis from modifying the AI (to make them looked aware of user's victory selection)

--- Solution 2 ----
Make AI with modifier in setting their character/attributes (which in the end determine what he/she will pursue)
Then based on what victory type user has enabled, 100% value is distributed equally to corresponding modifiers. (modifier of deselected victory receive zero value)
i.e. like my case, beause I select only "Conquest victory" 100% of value is added to the modifier of war/agressive, therefore making every AI player absolute warmonger.

---- Note: ----
It will take much less effort to solve by Solution 1 than 2, I would expect the lazy Firaxis will definitely choose 1, since they always seem to be lazy to me...

But I have heard about this thing called modifier in shaping leader's character in CIV5... (Could it have anything to do with what I have mentioned) I think Civ5 is going to be good. At least, this time the lazy Firaxis might have decided to choose a hardworking path... it at least sounds like a good news... modifier...modifier...modifier... O KA SAH KA! O KA SAH KA!

--- My preferred solution ---
And the story never ends with that probably good news above, I have a better suggestion for Firaxis regarding the problem:

Just discard the victory type selection from the option page and make every player declare what he/she wants to pursue at the beginning of the game. Once decided, there is no turn back. So, all man know at the beginning what each want to fight with.

 

[Suho1004]

I would expect the lazy Firaxis will definitely choose 1, since they always seem to be lazy to me...

Why you gotta be hatin' on Firaxis, homes? They're out there busting their butts to make Civ5 the best game they can make it, and you call them lazy? Not cool.



Seriously, do you really think that they just take the path of least resistance to put out a game? Do you think it's just all about the money with them, and they could care less about the final product? Never mind the fact that such an attitude has never been good business, the people working on Civ are fans of the game and want to see it succeed as much as you and I do.

We may disagree with some of the final choices they make, but I'm pretty sure that none of those choices will have been made because the developers are lazy or just don't care.

So cut them some slack.

 

[Shurdus]

Why you gotta be hatin' on Firaxis, homes? They're out there busting their butts to make Civ5 the best game they can make it, and you call them lazy? Not cool.

Your minority mixture culture talk on the other hand... WAY COOL!

I can see what hclass means, but without knowing in detail what exactly firaxis is doing it is very much premature to discuss any of this, and to call the lazy is not needed at all. Even if they focus on programming the AI like the AI in CIv IV it will not be the best, but to say that they program the game like that because they are lazy is pushing it...

 

[hclass]

Seriously,

do you really think that they just take the path of least resistance to put out a game?

Yes, I do.

Do you think it's just all about the money with them, and they could care less about the final product?

Yes, I do.
...
...
...
(You make me answer like I am marrying a girl... )

Never mind the fact that such an attitude has never been good business, the people working on Civ are fans of the game and want to see it succeed as much as you and I do.

The eagerness in getting something done successfully does not always gurantees a success. This thread itself is a good example.

We may disagree with some of the final choices they make, but I'm pretty sure that none of those choices will have been made because the developers are lazy

Why are you so sure?

 

[CHEESE!]

(Belive me, the Earth will still spin even if all of us have decided to end our life).

Ah! Now we're going into solipsism. 1984 here we come!

 

[Suho1004]

Your minority mixture culture talk on the other hand... WAY COOL!

Well excuse me. I was just drawing on my youth, when that sort of thing was popular. Pardon me if it doesn't float here.

As for you, hclass, if that is really the way you think... why are you even here? If you are so convinced that Firaxis are just a bunch of money-grubbing suits who don't even care about the game, what is the point of this entire thread? You said yourself (in one of your many, many posts) that the developers most certainly listen to what is being said in these forums.

Anyway, that last post convinced me that there is no sense in sticking around. Don't bother to reply (although you can if you really want to), as I won't be coming back.

(And I don't mean a Shurdus-style not coming back. Really, I have better things to do with my time.)

 

[CHEESE!]

Firaxis is a corporation. That doesn't mean they only want money and will whip out a product none of us like in order to advance their funds- and that doesn't mean they are Wikipedians, seeking to devote their time (and hence money) to better the world of PC games.

And why did my post convince you of that?

Hclass, to expect Firaxis to completely tend to your wants of a silly 'god mode' game (which it seems very few people want), and then call them moneygrubbing trick dealers, intent only on getting big sales, seems a little bit both selfish and insane.

Moderator Action: Please do not use foul language
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[hclass]

Now, you must prove why I must prove that you must prove to the developers that your idea is good. This can go to ad infinitum,

I definitely will feel like a cheap , if I need to resort to technical/legal term to scare away my opponents or to win a dispute, so, the below is not my argument, it is a plain description to show how I understand your description above:

That is "stack overflow" in bad program codes. It normally only takes place at the smartest part of a program which attempts to reuse codes to its maximize extend.

but there is actually a reasonable way to put the burden of proof on me. But, you have not done that, so I have no burden of proof. While I am nice enough to point out to you that you should prove your points with objective evidence to persuade others rather than relying on subjective feelings and beliefs, I am not nice enough to give you the answer to attack my position.

I think I am not quite clear in telling you why you are the one need to go first.
Let me make things easier to understand by telling you the truth. (don't tell others, please )

I have this crystal ball, a real magical one which let me see the future of outcomes. (only outcomes). It is what make me so sure about my requests. (See my very first post, just in case you have forgotten). Now, this crystal is apple of my eyes... well, I mean you have to convince me, prove it to me very very hard that - there is a must for me to send you my ball, right?

Thanks Shurdus. But, in United States law, Res ipsa loquitur only applies to negligence case and has nothing to with the burden of proof. I don't even understand US law well, so if you are talking about some other jurisdiction, then I apologize. But, you are correct that people who are making a positive claim or brought the claim has the greater burden of proof.

I think US laws is a good example, I mean there are so many of them, you can't do this, you can't do that. I don't believe any one in US will find it a fun to obey to all those laws strictly. So, read again my list of requests, I want a release from all those excessive restrictions, I just want more fun.

Moderator Action: Please do not use foul language
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889