LK Planning Thread

[LKendter]

Still looking for player #5

 

[DementedAvenger]

I'll join 120 if you'll have me

 

[LKendter]

LK120 start up
Monarchy, continents, civ = not played in LK series, just win baby.

Signed up:
LKendter
Mutineer
DementedAvenger
Thyrwyn
Jabah (skip Mar 24 to Apr 1)

Sign up requirements - previous experience at monarchy is preferred.

I will get this started today.

 

[LKendter]

Despite LOTR22 finishing I am *not* starting another SG. I am cutting back to 2 at a time while I decide what is next.

Civ4 IMHO is much worse for SGs are there are just to many different ways to play it.

 

[Methos]

Civ4 IMHO is much worse for SGs are there are just to many different ways to play it.

I would think that having more different ways to play it would make it more interesting.

 

[LKendter]

I would think that having more different ways to play it would make it more interesting.

It is creating a problem where players are trying to take the games in conflicting directions. Civ4 needs a consistent game plan a lot more then Civ3 did. However, I am finding people have to many view on how to play the game.

In the end, Civ4 SGs are less fun then Civ3 SGs for me.

 

[Conroe]

It is creating a problem where players are trying to take the games in conflicting directions. Civ4 needs a consistent game plan a lot more then Civ3 did. However, I am finding people have to many view on how to play the game.

From a lurkers standpoint, I find some of those games to be the most interesting to read. To me, a healthy debate about the strategy is not only interesting, but educational. And, in the end, the person whose name appears on post #1 will have the final say in any disagreement.

 

[LKendter]

From a lurkers standpoint, I find some of those games to be the most interesting to read. To me, a healthy debate about the strategy is not only interesting, but educational. And, in the end, the person whose name appears on post #1 will have the final say in any disagreement.

We could argue this all day, but in the end I don't like how Civ4 SGs are playing out. My concept of how to play the game differs to much from other players.

 

[Mutineer]

It is not matter of concept, it is matter of ajsting to situation.
Please, check this thread
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=163415
You will find that is this case I advocate complitly skeep Writing/alphavit in favor of Monarchy and very early war.
It is especially true for Continent games, where situation could be very different and one need to addapt and change.

 

[LKendter]

I am ending the LK series. While I can give a long list of reasons, it boils down to two core ones.
1) I am not having fun playing Civ4 in the SG format. I have *NO* intentions to detail all the reasons.
2) I have a long list of things I want to spend time with including Galactic Civ 2. Civ3 was so addicting that I was willing to avoid the others. Civ4 doesn't have the addiction factor for me.

Finishing Lotr22 was chore. I did it out of obligation, and not having fun. This isn't the only game that felt that way. Even now in LK120 all I am thinking is I can't wait for this to end, as I am tired of all the arguing. I shouldn't dread reading the reports.
Will I be back? I really can't say, but for now the game isn't worth playing. I actually dread the expansion, as the warlord part sounds like a push to make military more important. I can't change the fact that I am a builder by heart. At the moment I only see myself playing in the RB epics if the patch ever arrives.

 

[ChrTh]

Well, I can honestly say that I'll miss your games, Lee...on the plus side, I'm thinking about picking up GalCiv2 sometime soon...maybe we need a GC2 SG forum?

 

[ThERat]

LK, you are just one of the many C3C SG fanatics that can't seem to get into the Civ4 addiction mode.
I can sense that almost every single SG mate I played with in C3C is having the same trouble for one reason or another. It's a real pity, since the game had huge potential. Maybe we are all just burned out.
On the other side, I have to say that recently Greebley started another SG in C3C and I am immensely enjoying that. C3C has something x-tra, that Civ4 doesn't.

 

[LKendter]

On the other side, I have to say that recently Greebley started another SG in C3C and I am immensely enjoying that. C3C has something x-tra, that Civ4 doesn't.

The word is simplicity - once you understand the game it is easy to pass off to the next player in Civ3 and keep the flow going. Civ3 usually would only have a few questions over builds. Civ3 can play turn by turn with minimal long-term planning.

Civ4 OTOH *needs* a long term plan, and there just isn't a good way to keep it going at this time in SGs. To make matters worse that auto-logger abomination has caught on. At the very time we need more communication, a weaker system comes into play. A new format of mandatory reporting system needs to be designed, and I have no energy to develop it right now.

 

[Methos]

In all honesty LK I can understand what you’re saying. I enjoy playing Civ4, but find that most SG’s seem to have trouble with finding a direction. In truth I now look for games that have a defined goal pre-game. I’ve only started two of my own games, but both of them have had, or do have, a defined goal for that game.

You’ve already made your decision, but I do suggest that if you ever get to the point you wish to play another game plan out your victory condition and any other objectives in the first post. This should remove most of what you are not happy with.

Good luck LK and hopefully you come back after a while. I’ve enjoyed the few games I’ve played with you.

 

[Speaker]

Farewell LK. It was a great run!

Personally, I only played one, LK38. It was my second SG.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Sorry to see you go.

 

[Till]

Sorry to hear about it, LKendter! You are a true legend here.
I can see where you are comming from, though.

 

[Greebley]

I agree with you Lee. I have had issues with these things myself and have considered quitting or greatly reducing my games. I also find it more frustrating trying to make good reports - the pause is so huge switching back and forth. I have tried using the Alt-E in the logger but that only works occasionally and I lose my notes. Also, there are so many more details that make a difference while overall strategies seem less influential.

I wonder if things will improve as people gain a better understanding of the game.

In any case, I have enjoyed your games. Maybe we will see you when an expansion come out? Good luck to you.

 

[LKendter]

You’ve already made your decision, but I do suggest that if you ever get to the point you wish to play another game plan out your victory condition and any other objectives in the first post. This should remove most of what you are not happy with.

How to win the game isn't the problem. The problem is Civ4 diversity and how to play the game. One person prefers heavy GP push, another early war, another quick religion (like myself), another cautious expansion keeping a good science rate, another rapid expansion down to low science hoping to catch up, etc.

Everyone one of these is a valid strategy. However, you can't have player 1 push religion, player 2 military, player 3 rapid expansion, player 4 heavy GP, and player 5 something you didn't plan on.
If is better to grab techs early in trade, or late in the game?
The list goes on and on. In order for Civ4 SGs to work all players must be on the same plan. How can that be accomplished?


There is difference between Civ3 and Civ4 for me. Civ3 was thrown in the trash from such severe burnout. I still plan to explore Civ4, but the difference is via solo play. To bring SGs back to life for me requires a new way to organizes SGs. I have zero desire to work on that.

 

[LKendter]

I also find it more frustrating trying to make good reports - the pause is so huge switching back and forth. I have tried using the Alt-E in the logger but that only works occasionally and I lose my notes.

I suffered the same problem until I learned to play in windowed mode.