I'm not a golfer. I don't play the game, but I know of the term because it comes in discussion of college football one loss teams and various other sports related contexts. To get the Civ meat of the matter, I'm talking about reloading from a previous save point to get a do-over.
Obviously, the abuse of such a practice does and should receive criticism. Due to the nature of the game, it's like time traveling. I don't think Sid had Hiro Nakomora* in mind when he developed the game. However, I do believe at times it is indeed called for.
He's an extremely obvious example: in 2300 BC, during a game on Marathon/Noble, I'm in the process of founding my second city. Taking the appropriate precaution, I send my settler out with an armed escort, a warrior (hey, it' still 2300BC!). There are wild animals roaming the vicinity. Knowing this, I prudently choose a course along hilltops and forest to gain defensive bonuses. Then once my my settler and warrior arrive on the hilltop site of the new city, a bear eats them. I have 3 choices:
I don't know about yall, but the point of me buying the game, learning it's dynamics and spending time playing it is to have fun. Rules and fairness are important, but statistical anomalies at crucial times defeat the fun factor. As a player, I've developed the intestinal fortitude to swallow the loss of a Great General attacking with a 97% victory rate and take it in stride (the knowledge that it would neither prevent nor prolong my inevitable victory certainly helped).The delay in expansion would be the civilization equivalent to having Downe's Syndrome.
I'd like to read other Civilization Fanatics' options and personal guidelines about Mulligans. When is it acceptable to do it? When does it become a cheap cop-out?
* Hiro Nakomora [spelling off?] := dude from the ...<Snip>... show, Heroes who has the ability to alter the space-time continuum, vise-a-vie teleportation and time travel.
Moderator Action: The language isn't want, nor is the comment regarding Downe's Syndrome.
Obviously, the abuse of such a practice does and should receive criticism. Due to the nature of the game, it's like time traveling. I don't think Sid had Hiro Nakomora* in mind when he developed the game. However, I do believe at times it is indeed called for.
He's an extremely obvious example: in 2300 BC, during a game on Marathon/Noble, I'm in the process of founding my second city. Taking the appropriate precaution, I send my settler out with an armed escort, a warrior (hey, it' still 2300BC!). There are wild animals roaming the vicinity. Knowing this, I prudently choose a course along hilltops and forest to gain defensive bonuses. Then once my my settler and warrior arrive on the hilltop site of the new city, a bear eats them. I have 3 choices:
- Continue playing, knowing this early setback will be magnified into such a disadvantage that I'm screwed... (I'm just starting to play on Noble).
- Rinse and repeat: but I've spent a while doing scout recon and planning land use.
- Load from a turn before, pause and wait a turn for the bear to attack them on the adjacent forest hilltop (instead of the bare hilltop).
I don't know about yall, but the point of me buying the game, learning it's dynamics and spending time playing it is to have fun. Rules and fairness are important, but statistical anomalies at crucial times defeat the fun factor. As a player, I've developed the intestinal fortitude to swallow the loss of a Great General attacking with a 97% victory rate and take it in stride (the knowledge that it would neither prevent nor prolong my inevitable victory certainly helped).
I'd like to read other Civilization Fanatics' options and personal guidelines about Mulligans. When is it acceptable to do it? When does it become a cheap cop-out?
* Hiro Nakomora [spelling off?] := dude from the ...<Snip>... show, Heroes who has the ability to alter the space-time continuum, vise-a-vie teleportation and time travel.
Moderator Action: The language isn't want, nor is the comment regarding Downe's Syndrome.