Most/least flexible player!

[absimiliard]

Okay, I blame CivCorpse for this. (and it's totally tongue-in-cheek)

Just as we've been discussing the most flexible leader, and gods help us the least flexible leader, I'd like to discuss player-flexibitity!

And no, go away those who think this is my way of making a pass at KMad. I didn't mean that kind of flexibility, and I'm happily married.

I mean who amongst us seems the least wedded to a particular play-style. Whether it's an early war, cottage-cheese, SEs, SSEs (Settled Specialist Econ, think Obsolete), or anything else we all surely have our tricks. Some of us can be quite vehement in defending our own styles, others seem to care less. But who do we think uses the most, or would be best at using the most?

Chalk my vote for either MadScientist or Sisiuitl so far. Between the ALC and RPC threads they've both done several different playstyles and seem to be fairly flexible. Let's just say they've done their Civ-Yoga well.

For least flexible let's consider who are our super-specialists. I think we can fairly say that Obsolete is a good example of an expert in his play-style, but I've never seen him try another style. Dave would probably come in as a cottage-cheese specialist. I'm sure we could find equally strong proponents of other specialized styles as well. But who amongst those luminaries seems most wedded to their own style? Who do you think might not do so well if required to play in another style?

In this case I'll toss Obsolete out for my choice, he seems so strongly wedded to his innovative play-style that I wonder if he'd know how to bulb a GP, or build a cottage.

Now having stirred the pot a bit, and probably boiled up a mess 'o trouble, let me toss in this caveat. Being a flexible player isn't particularly virtuous if you're not good at any of the strategies. And the fact that a player doesn't post a variety of game-types or defend all play-styles equally does NOT mean they may not be masters of those styles. Obsolete could be a cottage-master, or DaveMcW the best SE player ever, all we can judge them by what they do post. So please don't post "I think so and so is a great player, how can you say they aren't flexible," or "But so and so is totally a worse player than this-other-dude, so what if he does a lot of styles."

I don't care who's best or worst. I'm just curious who people think are most and least flexible. (though I admit to a flexibility bias myself, I usually play all random)

-abs

 

[Hereditary Rule]

"Cottages!"

 

[Darth Meanie]

KMad is probably the most flexible as she basically tries everything in the game, whether or not it will be succesful *giggle*

I would call DaveMcW as the least flexible, as he seems to really really hate not cottages, Obsolete at least has more variety in his cities, if the same strategy. Also, Obsolete has converted me from cottages, so there is some bias.

 

[Kennigit]

Dave is right about cottages though. Futurehermit probably gets my vote: he seems to have really learned to split his games evenly between CE/SE for dominations, conquests, space races, and maybe some diplos while still having high success @ emperorish. Plus I think he does a good job in the game of deciding which economy to use by looking at his land. If I ever get around to playing SE's, I'd decide to play that way beforehand and not in the game (nor would I be able to resist a traditional cottage economy with say, floodplains nearby, rather than try to farm them and do an SE).

edit- Plus he seems to play a lot of civ, but isn't in the GOTM forum nor the LHC's

 

[absimiliard]

Good point Spock, FutureHermit does indeed offer excellent advice on a variety of games. Maybe a third contender for most flexible.

I would actually disagree w. saying KMad is the most flexible though. She does have a laudable bias towards learning through trying, and has tried a lot of stuff. Despite her contant claiming to be a permanoob, she is clearly not one. She also has a fairly deep grasp of some of the mechanics of the game.

But if you listen to her posts you'll hear a fairly constant refrain from her. It goes something like, "I'm not really into warfare, a war with riflemen is an early war for me, I'd rather war in the Modern era."

KMadCandy is clearly a strong thinker, and knows a lot about how the game works. But her lack of early warfare proficiency makes her a specialist. Because she says she doesn't like and isn't good at early warfare she lacks a major play-style. It sounds like she makes up for it, but a generalist really should be up to an early war if the game warrants it.

I'll bet FutureHermit could do an early war. We know Sisiutl and MadScientist both can.

Her play sounds good, and her advice is excellent, and her grasp of facts incredible. If KMad says something works someway you can bet she's tested it out and knows she's right. But she's a specialist, not a generalist.

-abs

 

[KMadCandy]

KMad is probably the most flexible as she basically tries everything in the game, whether or not it will be succesful *giggle*

craziest is not the same as most flexible ! i'm pretty stubborn about the "i don't wanna go to war early" thing. war is dangerous, especially before i have cannons. they're shiny, they make me feel stronger. so no, tons of folks are more flexible than i am, i guarantee it! that's how i was going to reply to you even before i saw absimiliard's post saying the same thing. so it's gotta be true !

Despite her contant claiming to be a permanoob, she is clearly not one.

i just want to say one word to you. just one word: pshaw!

But if you listen to her posts you'll hear a fairly constant refrain from her. It goes something like, "I'm not really into warfare, a war with riflemen is an early war for me, I'd rather war in the Modern era."

it's actually "i'm terrible at early rushes, and for me, early is pre-steel." *giggle*

edit in respose to oyzar below: i'm a combination of flexible/inflexible as far as attitude towards playing. if i'm having fun with a game, i don't mind losing. but if i'm frustrated as all get out, and truly not having fun, then i'm not flexible to roll with the situation right then. often i'll save it and go back to it later when i'm in a better mood, but i'm really stubborn about my "this is a game, i have to be having fun of some sort" rule. even when the fun would make no sense to sane people.

 

[oyzar]

I am pretty inflexible.. I play to win

 

[Hereditary Rule]

I am pretty inflexible.. I play to win

Ditto - but one day I wanna play a game where I Capitulate or become someone's vassal and see if I can pull through and get a win (or at least get into the top 3 among CIVS when someone wins).

 

[madscientist]

Chalk my vote for either MadScientist or Sisiuitl so far. Between the ALC and RPC threads they've both done several different playstyles and seem to be fairly flexible. Let's just say they've done their Civ-Yoga well.


-abs

WOW!, Being mentioned in the same beathe as the great Sisiutl

Seriously I cannot hold a candle to how well Sis plays these ALC games, he gets my vote as the most flexible players.

The RPC's I play (whcih I did not origionate, slobbering bear introduced the idea) are more of a play style I used and thought it would be great to post with a unique and interesting twist. Call it the comic relief of posted games

I am just glad people find them interesting and follow them. I am surprized but pleased

 

[CivCorpse]

I vote for myself( cuz noone else will) I can misplay any scenario, lose with any leader and have made every bad choice available in the game at all difficuly levels without ever learning from my mistake. I am willing to build any wonder regardless of how ill suited for my needs it may be. I am flexible...my incompetence knows no bounds. Financial leader? I won't research pottery until after CoL...Philosphical? I won't have decent GP farm. I am more than likely to switch civics one turn after my golden age ends. I NEVER check for defensive pacts before declaring war. I almost always send settlers unescorted through barbarian lands to found a city. I will immediately switch to slavery and not crack the whip for 10000 years. All you stubborn players that insist on logical and effective gameplay should be banned from these boards. I have spoken, now I must go build some wonders and research Theocracy even though i never run that civic.

 

[Winston Hughes]

From what we see of him on the boards, Snaaty tends to refine a single strat to the point of near-perfection. Not sure if that counts as inflexible, though, since I imagine if he played on lower levels (like Immortal!?) he could win in just about any way he fancied.

Though Sisiutil is undoubtedly a very flexible player, to my mind aelf was the guy who most often showed a real flair for adapting to his environment. Check out his EMC and IMC games - you won't be disappointed. (I still hold out a hope that he'll return to us, and give Sis a bit of competition...)

 

[Cer]

In this case I'll toss Obsolete out for my choice, he seems so strongly wedded to his innovative play-style that I wonder if he'd know how to bulb a GP, or build a cottage.

I never knew what i wanted do with great people until i looked at obsolete's posted settled-specialist game... save them up until I have enough for a golden age was really all I knew how to do.

I still don't know how to bulb a great person. (what I mean by that is, how to research the right techs so that my great person isn't bulbing something like drama in the modern age or mysticism in the industrial age.)

 

[madscientist]

I never knew what i wanted do with great people until i looked at obsolete's posted settled-specialist game... save them up until I have enough for a golden age was really all I knew how to do.

I still don't know how to bulb a great person. (what I mean by that is, how to research the right techs so that my great person isn't bulbing something like drama in the modern age or mysticism in the industrial age.)

I rarely bulb but it can be very powerful in the right place. Also think about bulbing techs that have more beakers than what you competitors are teching..

Some Good examples

1) Philosophy. Very big with a GS. You can get ALOT of techs for this. Look at my RPC washington game to see how it faired in trade value. I got 2000 gold and about 4 good techs with it, plus initiated a vital peace.

2) Theology. Immediately helps with warring and has high trade value. More than currency, calander, monarchy, CoL, etc... Plus gets you first crack at the important AP>

3) Education. Bulb a good part of the expensive education tech and research the remainder. This opens up economics (free GM), liberalism (free tech), and universities (a big scientifics edge sinc ethe AI greatly delays education). Once you are one turn from economics AND liberalism (if you have not lost either) trade it arround and get as much as you can, AIs will overpay. The finish off the 2 techs in research.

Some medium examples

1) An early GM for metal casting. A soso deal but if the winner of the oracle race did not take MC, you have a decent shot at early forges and the colossus. Plus extremely profitable trade value

2) Printing Press. If you took nationalism from liberlaism, this is not a bad bulb. Tech the rest and then you are likely only two techs from rifling and 3 from cavalry.

I willr arely bulb anything else. Generally I will build academies, shrines, settle, culture bomb (still a very good use of a GA), or golden age.

 

[absimiliard]

*laughs with CivCorpse*

I know the feeling dude. Because I play most games as all random I'm pretty flexible myself. I'm just not very good. (To prove that assertion I'll note that I play almost all my games on Monarch, mostly because I can pursue all the play-styles without the laser-guided focus you need to compete on the higher levels.)

As for Great People, I'm still trying to figure out exactly what to do with them. Some games I'll try an Obsolete-style SSE and settle them all, others I'll go for massive bulbing to try to keep up with the Jones's, a few have even had me focussing on using them for their special abilities. The only constant I've found is that with further experimentation I think I undervalued them for a long, long, time.

A kind of fun thing for me was to play a Suleiman game that focussed on generating GGs and GPs. (any type of GP) I settled them and built buildings, used one GG on a super-medic, and generally made more of the two than I'd ever had before. It was a lot of fun, and kind of instructional.

Winston, I'll have to go check Aelf's stuff. I'd forgotten him. (been lurking here since forever, years, but only recently started posting here in addition to my posting regularly on Apolyton)

By the way, I've had to rethink my opinion on someone. DaveMcW surprised me in a post recently. In response to a "How do I win a culture game" he advocated not only cottages with a culture-oriented slider, but also running multiple GP farms for GAs. Guess he's more flexible than I'd thought. That sort of mixed econ can be very nice when well done. Probably says that despite his concise advocacy of cottage-cheese he uses other strategies when the occasion warrants.

-abs

 

[xanadux]

I vote for xanadux as one of the 'more flexible' players. I am not conceited enough to vote myself as the 'most flexible' player. I like to cottage spam, I like to wonder spam. I like to run a SE. I like to run an EE. I'll play the warmonger and I'll play the peacemonger. The only things I don't do are draft units and go for diplo victory.

 

[madscientist]

I vote for xanadux as one of the 'more flexible' players. I am not conceited enough to vote myself as the 'most flexible' player. I like to cottage spam, I like to wonder spam. I like to run a SE. I like to run an EE. I'll play the warmonger and I'll play the peacemonger. The only things I don't do are draft units and go for diplo victory.

I am the most flexible leader. However, for twenty dollars I'll vote for you as the most flexible. See how flexible I can be

 

[absimiliard]

I see MadScientist has moved from game-strategy flexibility to moral flexibility . . . . . .

Wasn't quite what I'd envisioned.

-abs

 

[Iranon]

I'm clawing my way towards becoming more flexible, but usually fail... and I applaud the many people here who post detailed accounts of their strategies so we peons can learn from them. KMadCandy and madscientist are veritable fonts of wisdom and opened my eyes for many aspects of the game that previously went right over my head.

***

I for one can't manage heavy warfare. I'll often bash a few heads in to keep an opponent off balance and slow their development, or to buddy up with an ally... but whenever I try to wage lengthy wars of expansion I ruin my carefully managed economy and end up regretting it even if I win.

I also can't seem to be nice to my fellow leaders:
If at all possible, I like to trade tech for gold: Selling a 1000 beaker tech for 500 gold means equal benefits for both; the AI is often willing to pay far more, accepting a net loss while funding my deficit research which repeats the cycle.
If they have nothing useful, I'll use techs as bargaining chips to provide long-term diplomatic benefits or stir up a war to slow down competitors. Best thing is, many AIs love me despite my best attempts to keep them down.

Whenever I deviate from that and use too much brute force, or when I try to actually help my so-called allies in the hope to depend on them in the future, it backfires. Should I be concerned that being a coward and a jerk comes too easily to me?

 

[KMadCandy]

Should I be concerned that being a coward and a jerk comes too easily to me?

not a bit! as long as your real life potential enemies have visible attitude modifiers and give warning signs like saying "We Have Enough On Our Hands Right Now" that is *giggle*.

 

[CivCorpse]

Whenever I deviate from that and use too much brute force, or when I try to actually help my so-called allies in the hope to depend on them in the future, it backfires. Should I be concerned that being a coward and a jerk comes too easily to me?

A. Don't worry about being a coward, someone may bribe you into goinf to war anyway....even as her privateers sit off your coast blockading your cities with a feline crew that looks like a floating off-broadway production of Cats. (not naming names here, but we know who you are)
B. In hopes they can be depended on in the future? In my experience, to get the AI to attack someone with 2 troops left in some remote ice city...I have to give them 3 cities with wonders, 2expensive techs and a partridge in a pear tree.