New Opinion Demographic...Take 2

[Shafi-is-back]

Civ IV - emperor level player. but like said ^ i agree that immortal + should be termed as expert. Us Monarch / Emperor level players should be skilled.

Anyways i voted. Civ V is ok, not addicting. cautious optimism.

And BTW - how long someone has been on the forum is not a good indicator of how good a player they are.

 

[jimmywat]

I am a noble/price player who plays for entertainment. I am extremely disappointed in Civ5. Boring. No stacking so the battles are even more simplistic. In all CIV versions the time scales of battles, movements, building/improvements, and population growth are not really compatible. I found this game tó be the worst of those in that respect.
Actually, CIV III is my favorite - more fun to play though less realistic.

 

[JudgeDeath]

Okay, I think this poll might show some stronger correlations between play level and happiness with Civ 5.

I think that all this will show is that those who are most opinionated will consider themselves expert.

 

[DarkSchneider]

Considering the range for voting, there probably should have been a higher category than the current expert. I could generally play Monarch without excessive restarts, but no higher. However, I heard a number of people were able to beat Immortal.

On the other hand in the earlier Civs I found that beating the game on higher difficulties required tricks that felt like they were outside the scope of the game. For example, in Civ I the best way to beat it on the highest difficulty was to conquer the ancient world with Chariots.

 

[Abegweit]

On the other hand in the earlier Civs I found that beating the game on higher difficulties required tricks that felt like they were outside the scope of the game. For example, in Civ I the best way to beat it on the highest difficulty was to conquer the ancient world with Chariots.

Now you don't even need the chariot. Just the horse.

 

[Hawaiian]

Considering the range for voting, there probably should have been a higher category than the current expert. I could generally play Monarch without excessive restarts, but no higher. However, I heard a number of people were able to beat Immortal.

On the other hand in the earlier Civs I found that beating the game on higher difficulties required tricks that felt like they were outside the scope of the game. For example, in Civ I the best way to beat it on the highest difficulty was to conquer the ancient world with Chariots.

I think you're right, I probably could have just included monarch with noble and prince for "skilled", and maybe Emperor+ would have sufficed for "expert". In any event, it's interesting to see the results thus far.

 

[Hawaiian]

Not too many new to Civ, though.

 

[ChaplainDMK]

Not too many new to Civ, though.

Probably because this poll is insanely biased...
The haters or blind fanboys obviously ain't gonna go say "i'm new and i love/hate this game, i need atention", so thats why there are so many expert players compared to evreyone else.

 

[SuperJay]

Interesting results so far.

It'd also be interesting to run a similar poll with virtually identical options, except focus on quantity of time spent playing Civ 5 so far. Like 0-10 hours, 10-20 hours, 20-30 hours, and so on. Unfortunately the poll answers would be ridiculously numerous unless the time descriptions were highly condensed. Still, I'd be interested to see how total time spent playing Civ5 correlates to overall satisfaction with Civ5.

 

[Hawaiian]

It will be interesting to see if people change their minds in any way after having played it longer.

 

[Jharii]

Probably because this poll is insanely biased...
The haters or blind fanboys obviously ain't gonna go say "i'm new and i love/hate this game, i need atention", so thats why there are so many expert players compared to evreyone else.

Actually, it would be more accurate to make the assessment that new players to Civ would be less likely to be aware of the CivFanatics website. The people that haunt these halls have typically been around awhile.

But hey, Negative Nancies can vote, too.

 

[Vordeo]

Very well done poll!

 

[Surgeon]

Also go to steam and look at the % of players with immortal achievement or better. It's less than 1% last time I looked.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

This is a biased poll.

Since when has "monarch+" been the same thing as being "expert"? There are people who beat IV on monarch that had trouble discerning between commerce and gold and didn't make intentional use of GPP at all.

When the forum polled difficulty long ago, the noble-monarch range represented the single largest clump of player distribution. Consistent immortal players were rare-ish, deity players around 1%.

"Expert" is immortal+, not monarch+ where people in that skill bracket don't always know how to pull a chariot rush, manipulate a vast majority of situations such that AI declarations are literally impossible, how every AI works, etc etc etc.

A lot of monarch players never even realized that liberalism before 1000AD was consistently possible, when the reality is liberalism before 500 AD is consistently possible (and usually if you needlessly push it more like 200 AD if you optimize every single micro decision painstakingly).

Maybe OP wanted to be in the "expert" bracket, I don't know, but based on earlier forum poll results these denominations do not make sense.

At the "skilled" difficulty it was often possible to warrior rush 2 civs to death, based on this poll. Attack...OH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

 

[PickledDictator]

Emp/Immortal player now on CIV IV BTS (embarrassed and frustrated haha, love it) Deity in all other versions of civ...... including ciV. It does not mean I win every game on Deity, but I win my share, too many for only a month into the game

This game is rubbish in its current state, a huge disappointment.... I haven't dl the new patch yet b/c I have been immersed in games with more depth

HOWEVER, although I do not think it will get fixed by 2k, I remain hopeful that the MOD community can at least make the game enjoyable to the point where deity whoops my butt

 

[Hawaiian]

This is a biased poll.

Since when has "monarch+" been the same thing as being "expert"? There are people who beat IV on monarch that had trouble discerning between commerce and gold and didn't make intentional use of GPP at all.

LOL! I HIGHLY doubt anyone who beats Monarch regularly doesn't understand the difference between commerce and gold!!!

But yeah, I should have just clumped Monarch in with Noble and Prince and then I think it would have been fine for the purposes of the poll. My idea of the "top tier" of this poll are really just those who understand most of the deeper intricacies of the game. And I think that any regular Monarch player is good enough to be considered someone who understands many of the deep intricacies of the game, enough so that they should be considered at least a veteran. (yes, it is a mislabel as "expert", though) I just had to make 3 basic groups to simplify the poll. For those of us who do quite well in CIV (I play Emperor myself) I think we all understand the great difference between the nine difficulty levels. And the Monarch to Emperor jump is a larger one than Prince to Monarch. But, ah, well. I think we've seen in CiV there isn't much difference between the difficulty levels because there isn't really too much intricacy. It's pretty straightforward how to do well and win quite easily. If only the higher difficulty levels meant understanding deeper intricacies like it did in CIV!!! More intricacies please!!!

And I don't think people will lie about their skill level as the poll is anonymous. I'm sure there aren't many newbies to Civilization stalking these boards like all of us old timers do, as has been mentioned by others in this thread.

 

[eireksten]

It looks like the problem is no one wants to admit they're anything but an expert...

Or the poll shows that Civ5 simply isn't hard enough.

 

[Knut_Are_M]

anyone can beat civ 4/5 at monarch/king.
almost everyone can beat it at emperor/immortal.
you can beat deity quite easily once you learn it has huge holes in its programming.

exspert should be rated as a player that can beat other skilled players on a consistent basis in an ffa.
so far the online gameing experience has been rather lackluster because i have not played alot of games, and the competition has refused to attack me. Ps i am an online beginner with 2 wins and a draw where i had to leave. basically a mop up job since i had 2x as much as anyone else.
i guess i will reach my first loss pretty soon though once i face some skilled opposistion. I just hope players are skilled at civ 5, the AI seems to have seriously hurt human player war skills.