New Developer Interview SA-Games

[Ryika]

In regard to your other statement, I am sorry but not all opinions were created equally. That's why we have scientists, doctors and politicians. Their opinions matter far more than the average Joe in their field. This should be true of civ. The opinion of a successful player who can beat other clever humans should carry much more weight than that of some role player who has not even invested any time or effort into attempting to understand the game. It's a matter of experience and self education. The guy with 6000 hours in MP is far more likely to have the correct information than the guy with 100 hours in SP.

As much as I agree that there are way too many people voicing their opinion as "Well, that's my opinion and I'll state it as fact, your statistics don't interest me."...

...when it comes to discussions about SP, then your 6000 hours of MP don't mean much. You're basically a doctor talking about politics, complaining about the people who just started studying politics voicing their opinions.

 

[Galgus]

There is also a big distinction between discussing what should/ could be in the game and what is.

The former doesn't require deep game knowledge unless the suggestion or opinion is claimed to have finely tuned balance.

That is the big difference between talking about minor tweaks to optimize balance vs more extensive changes to make the game more fun.

 

[CraigMak]

As much as I agree that there are way too many people voicing their opinion as "Well, that's my opinion and I'll state it as fact, your statistics don't interest me."...

...when it comes to discussions about SP, then your 6000 hours of MP don't mean much. You're basically a doctor talking about politics, complaining about the people who just started studying politics voicing their opinions.

The only SP tactics one in MP will miss out on is exploiting the AI. If the tactic or strategy being discussed does not involve exploiting the AI's stupidity in some form then the MP's experience will definitely be valid. The MP's input will most likely be valuable as well since MP players make a marked effort to dissect and understand game mechanics.

You have already admitted that many SP players do not give a hoot about playing optimally and thus are not attempting to understand the game and develop solid fundamentals/strategies. This alone is enough to dismiss their opinions as having no basis on fact.

 

[rastak]

The only SP tactics one in MP will miss out on is exploiting the AI. If the tactic or strategy being discussed does not involve exploiting the AI's stupidity in some form then the MP's experience will definitely be valid. The MP's input will most likely be valuable as well since MP players make a marked effort to dissect and understand game mechanics.

You have already admitted that many SP players do not give a hoot about playing optimally and thus are not attempting to understand the game and develop solid fundamentals/strategies. This alone is enough to dismiss their opinions as having no basis on fact.

Dude, playing optimally. I won the game but could have done so one turn earlier. I am a failure, I must get better.

I play board games and I have seen on a popular board game website a certain subsection of people who literally setup a train based stock game and sit there with furrowed brow and beads of sweat as each and every move must be the perfect one. Any deviation is cause for heartburn.

Look, if that's you then whatever, I can't relate. I try and get better within the context of what I am trying to do in a particular game. If the absolute best move is to bum rush some civ and that isn't in my plans then oh well. Sorry I don't do things as purely a math equation. That sounds like getting a tooth pulled instead of relaxing.

 

[Ryika]

The only SP tactics one in MP will miss out on is exploiting the AI. If the tactic or strategy being discussed does not involve exploiting the AI's stupidity in some form then the MP's experience will definitely be valid. The MP's input will most likely be valuable as well since MP players make a marked effort to dissect and understand game mechanics.

Abusing the AIs stupidity and dealing with the enormous bonuses it gets is part of each and every aspect of single-player strategies, be it tech choices, city placement, the amount of army needed, army composition, how ideologies are chosen, the importance of religion, diplomacy, etc. etc.

MP-Strategies don't translate into efficient SP-victories.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

In a PvP setting, there are good and reliable approaches, but the -best- way to play is "that manner which defeats the opponent you are actually facing". Deep games with, say, transitive mechanics involve trying to get a read on your opponent, because it's all well and good to play a strong game all around - tight aggressive in poker, for example - but the greats who move up are able to quickly determine, via risk-taking, what the limits of their opponent are. They've learned how not just to win, but how to destroy opponents. You learn how to pounce on people, this is the aim.

I'm not sure to what extent this kind of skill ascent is specific to intransitive games like fighting games. It is in those where you get to see cool things like players changing how they play midfight, or players doing "bad" moves which are applauded because they're better than the other guy, or the best players learning how to play below their true ability in a feat of daring to counter this ability. Mindgames. Yet 4Xs are definitely transitive, you do well because some things are better period, and you do more of those. But a game that is just large enough, once they're big enough, I think, they are able to 'fit' the essential mindgame core of PvP and the entire thing manifests in full. Something like mathematical proof systems becoming incomplete, if you know the reference.

So if someone who is learning to exploit his opponents is -really- doing it right, he'll pick up how to beat an AI too. There's just the trouble of the undocumented handicaps, and weird things like how the extra workers means that stealing workers is possible when it otherwise wouldn't be - a handicap becomes an opportunity.

 

[CraigMak]

Abusing the AIs stupidity and dealing with the enormous bonuses it gets is part of each and every aspect of single-player strategies, be it tech choices, city placement, the amount of army needed, army composition, how ideologies are chosen, the importance of religion, diplomacy, etc. etc.

MP-Strategies don't translate into efficient SP-victories.

Actually I can play almost exactly the same way in a SP Deity game as I do in MP and win handily. All I do is take my normal strategy and add in stealing workers from neighbors and trading iron/junk for loads of gold.

Religion is very important in MP I am not sure where you're getting that it wouldn't be. MP isn't all in unit spam. A good FFA involves war as late as possible because early war leads to nothing but you and the guy you attack not winning.

The AI gets big bonuses to begin but you catch up around late renaissance. If you save up your scientists until labs you sky rocket past them alot.

 

[AriochIV]

Ah FFS what the hell is wrong with this forum lately? Correction, what the hell is wrong with this forum?

I share your dissatisfaction, but let's be fair: there's very little that's Civilization-related to talk about recently. And specifically to CivBERT: the recent news "reveals" have been extremely and deliberately void of much real information. There's very little to post about other than wild speculation and people's gripes about Civ:BE. So most of what you're seeing right now is just a rehash of the discontents vs. the fanboys, regurgitating the same tired arguments you've seen before.

As we get farther along in the development cycle, there will probably be more substance to talk about.

And then after release, there will again be nothing of substance to talk about. That's how the cycle goes.

 

[Gort]

The AI gets big bonuses to begin but you catch up around late renaissance. If you save up your scientists until labs you sky rocket past them alot.

I hate this. Is it really so hard to give the AI bonuses that are spread out across the eras rather than front-loading the lot?

 

[Ryika]

Actually I can play almost exactly the same way in a SP Deity game as I do in MP and win handily.

Yeah, and your Victory times will be nowhere near to what people who've played a ton of Deity can do. Being good at SP is not just about winning, it's about winning fast. But if you really think you have mastered singleplayer by playing multiplayer... well, then you're just as ignorant as the people you were talking about earlier.

 

[bite]

Moderator Action: The Personal attacks in this thread have to stop now, do not continue along this line any further or the thread will be closed
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Westwall]

I share your dissatisfaction, but let's be fair: there's very little that's Civilization-related to talk about recently. And specifically to CivBERT: the recent news "reveals" have been extremely and deliberately void of much real information.

And what we have seen suggests many of the annoying problems with the base game (samey victory conditions, boring stations, passive aliens that are all but irrelevant by mid-game, etc.) will still be around after this expansion.

I definitely don't want the devs flogging themselves over the shortcomings of BE, but neither do I think they should start patting themselves on the back just yet. And if that seems unfair, it's kind of their fault for telling us so little thus far.

Unless they've already given us the gist of things to expect, in which case we have every right to temper our excitement somewhat. Basically any expansion over the current content is a good thing. The question then becomes how much of a good thing.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I definitely don't want the devs flogging themselves over the shortcomings of BE, but neither do I think they should start patting themselves on the back just yet. And if that seems unfair, it's kind of their fault for telling us so little thus far.

Well, I think there are 2 different audiences that the devs need to speak to. There is the audience of casual civ gamers and players new to civ, who will be interested in hearing about cool new units and new water graphics and moving cities. And then there is the audience of hardcore civ players (most people on this forum) who care more about the nitty gritty of whether +1 culture for a quest is balanced or not. Right now, the devs have spoken mostly to the first audience because they want to sell Rising Tide to new players. But as we get closer to release and we see some live streams about specific gameplay elements, I think we will get more info that we care about.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

I've been trying to find a video clip from The West Wing where Josh Lyman is yelling "I want the numbers" to express this but I can't find it.

 

[Gorbles]

Ahh, the thread moved on. Edited.

 

[Galgus]

I hate this. Is it really so hard to give the AI bonuses that are spread out across the eras rather than front-loading the lot?

I hugely agree with this, just giving the AI some bonuses when they usually taper off would help.

I'd kind of like AI's that were behind to get stronger bonuses, so the game doesn't turn into player vs maybe a single runaway.

Most of the civs just aren't a factor and never will be come mid-game.