Is Oxford that good?

[Victoria]

capable person and incapable person.

People have different abilities and intelligence.
When whacker can beat you at GOTM does that make you incapable because you are not grasping why he can beat you?
When you played did you play the correct strategy from the start and never made mistakes or changed to a better strategy?
The real answer here is people grasp things at different speeds and many people will understand if explained and you can ignore those that argue, at least you explained. To not explain makes many people feel like you are just here mocking them and it does make them feel bad. Me, well I can see some benefit In Oxford but not enough to always get it. The trouble is I may be missing some things but you do not explain so I do not know.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

People have different abilities and intelligence.
When whacker can beat you at GOTM does that make you incapable because you are not grasping why he can beat you?
.

I think he didn't beat me in 19, since he opened that save and discussed about the opening, but not posted his results in that game. Not sure if he has attended after 20.
I'm always willing to get ideas about better strategies, but not willing to waste time explaining repeatedly why some bad strategies are bad.

If you strategy is not a bad one it shall at least bring you to some results that look not very bad( at least sub-180 SV, or sub-150 other VC condition), no matter you're playing "amusement" type or not.

 

[leif erikson]

This is just a way to distinguish capable person and incapable person. In my previous experiences in the forum, I found capable person(there really exist a few) knows the idea of value immediately that when I say the names of these wonders, they can get enough information and figure out the reason themselves and can give constructive information, while incapable people insist on forcing me to give them "reasons" and still understand nothing even if I provide full-detailed reasons and usually leads to silly debates. So there's no need to provide reasons, which is the lesson this forum taught me in the previous discussions.

I'm always willing to discuss with the 1st type of people, who experienced some real games such as the guy who finished T138 SV in a pervious Gotm.

What if a person who doesn't even know the cost of Oxford talk about his many ideas about this wonder?So I try hard not to make these silly debates.

I think most of us are hear to learn. What you call silly debates are the way some people learn. Placing value on who is worth talking with and who is not is not helpful. Please discuss what you wish about the game, but not about the people of the forum.

Moderator Action: Please discuss the game, its mechanics and the value of playing in certain ways. Let us cease the discussion of each other.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[antimony]

"LilyLancer denounces you. (They just plain don't like you.)"

But seriously, I'm grateful that my offline life is fulfilling enough to not worry about being called incapable on an anonymous forum.

 

[Archon_Wing]

What if a person who doesn't even know the cost of Oxford talk about his many ideas about this wonder?

So you're really discrediting someone for not memorizing the numbers just because people don't update the wiki? It's not like it was that far off and not everyone may have access to a Civ 6 capable computer at all times. This is the age of phones after all, and people are just going to google a bit for research. I don't think it actually changes the substance of the point anyways. I mean, sure it was wrong, but expecting everyone to file a research paper with sources feels way too much like work in a forum about video games.

As for the rest, cool. Unfortunately, I guess a lot of us are not playing in the context you are, so there is little discussion to be had, unless others are aiming for the same thing.

 

[antimony]

Also there are different goals. I think Lily was comparing Oxford to other wonders, not saying whether or not you should build it in a particular game.

I just wanted to share how I would estimate the cost- benefit for a certain game, if only to see if there were other considerations which I had overlooked (which is the main way I learn from those discussions).

 

[Lily_Lancer]

So you're really discrediting someone for not memorizing the numbers just because people don't update the wiki? It's not like it was that far off and not everyone may have access to a Civ 6 capable computer at all times. This is the age of phones after all, and people are just going to google a bit for research. I don't think it actually changes the substance of the point anyways. I mean, sure it was wrong, but expecting everyone to file a research paper with sources feels way too much like work in a forum about video games.

As for the rest, cool. Unfortunately, I guess a lot of us are not playing in the context you are, so there is little discussion to be had, unless others are aiming for the same thing.

I'm not discrediting that one doesn't memorize numbers, but for his attitude towards discussion. If he knows nothing about that wonder, it's fine for him to make fun or make jokes, but it's extremely disgusting for him to publish an analytic. Posts like his are very misleading to those who want to learn because they look like an expertised analytic but in fact full of mistaken issues. Everyone is free to make fun or make jokes, but one shall be careful when he wants to make "constructive discussion", or anything looks like that.

Antimony, if you think I'm denoucing you, then my reason of denouncing you shall be "Though u are actually not, you pretend to be expertised. Your posts are in fact very misleading, thus causing troubles to those who want to learn."

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: As we cannot seem to discuss the topic instead of other posters, thread closed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889