Searching for the most challenging teamers?

[CanuckSoldier]

The problem here is that the league is an open group. In open groups there will always be quitters no matter what.
.

True, having rules doesn't change human nature, but it does give us a method to get rid of people that don't get the picture. The problem with being a closed group though is that it makes it harder to grow and keep a "critical mass" of active players.

CS

 

[uigaw423]

I guess the consequence of these settings is that the best doesn't always win. But for me, that's good. Imo, it opens the game up more, making civ more like poker than chess. (poker is way more luck dependent than chess). Since there is no ranking system, the best players shouldn't be afraid to join.

Even though you don't like it, many players seem to like these settings, which is why NQ was created.

Why should the best always win? That takes all the fun out of the GAME, after all it is a game.

That being said, how does taking out the aspect of diplomacy make someone the best? Pretty much just bending the rules so that it fits you most conveniently. Just like other versions of Civ multiplayer were predominantly pangea based very rarely (except a few small unorganized groups).

Seeing this group pop up as someone who has been great because I feel that it emphasizes the way the game should be played, including diplomacy This is obviously just my opinion (which I hope I am entitled to).

I really feel that when you claim to be the best at a game that has a diplomacy involved you should have to use that diplomacy to be the best. I know this is more relevant in larger games. A 6 man ffa can start to have some diplomatic aspects. If the standard / large / huge maps worked with more stability (or at all). Diplomacy becomes more and more of a factor.

Enjoy this off topic conversation, and it should tell you how I really feel about this topic being as I have been playing Civ since Civ was Civ and been reading this forum pretty much since its existance and this is my first post.

As you can tell I support the No Quitters group.



Uigaw423

All of my links to the same organization I have been pushing for years

More links to an outdated organization that has served its purpose

Oh, you don't have enough links to my group? Here are more

Moderator Action: Please don't troll around. These 3 lines were completely unnecessary.

 

[Tabarnak]

Welcome uigaw423

We got some interesting games so far, i hope we will play another soon(been a while i think).

 

[Silverfuturist]

Why should the best always win? That takes all the fun out of the GAME, after all it is a game.

That being said, how does taking out the aspect of diplomacy make someone the best? Pretty much just bending the rules so that it fits you most conveniently. Just like other versions of Civ multiplayer were predominantly pangea based very rarely (except a few small unorganized groups).

Seeing this group pop up as someone who has been great because I feel that it emphasizes the way the game should be played, including diplomacy This is obviously just my opinion (which I hope I am entitled to).

I really feel that when you claim to be the best at a game that has a diplomacy involved you should have to use that diplomacy to be the best. I know this is more relevant in larger games. A 6 man ffa can start to have some diplomatic aspects. If the standard / large / huge maps worked with more stability (or at all). Diplomacy becomes more and more of a factor.

Enjoy this off topic conversation, and it should tell you how I really feel about this topic being as I have been playing Civ since Civ was Civ and been reading this forum pretty much since its existance and this is my first post.

As you can tell I support the No Quitters group.



Uigaw423

All of my links to the same organization I have been pushing for years

More links to an outdated organization that has served its purpose

Oh, you don't have enough links to my group? Here are more

I would like to hear people who have been playing league since before Civ V what happened with FFAs that included diplo. I do find the diplo aspect fun in non-league games. Did people gang up on the highest ranked person, eliminating them first, so everybody could enjoy a ranking boost?

 

[Kyp Durron]

Last time I played a NQ game, I was 3v1, had a huge tech lead, make a diplo move to make it 2v1, killed the guy who backed out of attacking me, and eventually lost because I didnt have uranium or coal in my entire empire or within any reasonable range to receive it.

No one would trade with me, I had to hold a large army sucking up my gold the entire game. I have no strong desire to play in games with everyone teaming against me because im ahead. Hence, cton or teamers are my thing, where I dont get the full focus of the rest of the map.

 

[KM]

Last time I played a NQ game, I was 3v1, had a huge tech lead, make a diplo move to make it 2v1, killed the guy who backed out of attacking me, and eventually lost because I didnt have uranium or coal in my entire empire or within any reasonable range to receive it.

No one would trade with me, I had to hold a large army sucking up my gold the entire game. I have no strong desire to play in games with everyone teaming against me because im ahead. Hence, cton or teamers are my thing, where I dont get the full focus of the rest of the map.

the exsact same thing has happned to me a couple of times. And that in games where I got all the players teaming up against me on my friendlist. Andactually talking in the game with them about it and my chanses of survival and win against all 3 of them. That kind of games turn into.. whats the name in starcraft, onslought? Where you have to hold out againsta superior force. And of course since its humans a quite intricate one. I enjoy those games to. But of course. I wouldnt like a game like that affect any ranking system.

 

[KiffeLesBiffles]

Last time I played a NQ game, I was 3v1, had a huge tech lead, make a diplo move to make it 2v1, killed the guy who backed out of attacking me, and eventually lost because I didnt have uranium or coal in my entire empire or within any reasonable range to receive it.

No one would trade with me, I had to hold a large army sucking up my gold the entire game. I have no strong desire to play in games with everyone teaming against me because im ahead. Hence, cton or teamers are my thing, where I dont get the full focus of the rest of the map.

+1

Spoiler :

 

[MasterMishi]

in that 3 v1 or any diplo war, the fallout of war must be considered, in that case china will surely come out best and be an easy win for them after france is gone.

So unless france was the aggressor, unlikely due to potential of china exploiting the situation, I dont see how this is a positive move for usa and iro, unless they made a deal to sit back and build for space after kiffe's nose was bloodied.

 

[KiffeLesBiffles]

In this situation, I was way stronger than everyone. I start expanding but I was stop by a 3-some coalition and a difficult field. I Spend all my prod building units. Therefore, i can't develop more.
I had arty like 25 turns before them but tactical mistakes, coalition and field prevent me for breaking the front. They kill me in this screenshot. I was disgusted so I gave all my money (2000 gold) and some units to China to unbalanced more the game. I think China won the game.

I have notice, in different games, that NQ people are more likely to help admins of the group, because they are admins.

 

[KiffeLesBiffles]

I would like to hear people who have been playing league since before Civ V what happened with FFAs that included diplo. I do find the diplo aspect fun in non-league games. Did people gang up on the highest ranked person, eliminating them first, so everybody could enjoy a ranking boost?

I played a FFA in Civ V leagues. A guy (Sugar maybe) was about to kill another guy (merle a really strong player). Merle say : "ok, i am dead, but i can help you being your vassal". They ally. Merle gave all is units, lux and gold to Sugar. Then, I was gang up.

So sugar won (logical) BUT merle was 2nd. He should have been last but he diplo well.

 

[donhenriko]

In this situation, I was way stronger than everyone. I start expanding but I was stop by a 3-some coalition and a difficult field. I Spend all my prod building units. Therefore, i can't develop more.
I had arty like 25 turns before them but tactical mistakes, coalition and field prevent me for breaking the front. They kill me in this screenshot. I was disgusted so I gave all my money (2000 gold) and some units to China to unbalanced more the game. I think China won the game.

I have notice, in different games, that NQ people are more likely to help admins of the group, because they are admins.

it's unfortunate that you feel that way. but trust me, that's not our intentions. We just want good games with to preferential treatment to any player.

However, that feeling you have can be explained. NQ admins play alot. They will not allow a single player to become too strong in a game. They are therefore more prone than the average player to attempt to mount an alliance against any civ with huge tech and/ or army advantages.

 

[Silverfuturist]

I played a FFA in Civ V leagues. A guy (Sugar maybe) was about to kill another guy (merle a really strong player). Merle say : "ok, i am dead, but i can help you being your vassal". They ally. Merle gave all is units, lux and gold to Sugar. Then, I was gang up.

So sugar won (logical) BUT merle was 2nd. He should have been last but he diplo well.

Wow, haven't come across that yet. I was under the impression that if you gift cities, and the other player accepts, that is considered resigning for both because they broke the "rules." Another "rule" is that when a team rolls India, they restart the game until nobody has India. I am discovering on these mad skirmish maps that being unable to expand means you will get production rushed and lose.

 

[uigaw423]

Last time I played a NQ game, I was 3v1, had a huge tech lead, make a diplo move to make it 2v1, killed the guy who backed out of attacking me, and eventually lost because I didnt have uranium or coal in my entire empire or within any reasonable range to receive it.

No one would trade with me, I had to hold a large army sucking up my gold the entire game. I have no strong desire to play in games with everyone teaming against me because im ahead. Hence, cton or teamers are my thing, where I dont get the full focus of the rest of the map.

To me this is a situtation that is exactly what the point of diplomacy is supposed to be there for. Taking out the run away civ by working together should be a challenge for both sides. Sometimes, if I am that run away civ (Rarely happens because I am awful), I will declare war and make myself have a multi front war just to make it more difficult.

I have even done this after working with one of the other players to put down one of the runaway civs, then I figured since my dominating Unique Unit was now in full force it was time to make it 2v1 the other direction and I declared war on my previous ally.

Maybe the solution to "League" would be individual rewards for winning the game. (MONEY? - I would love to gamble with some civ as long as actual collusion was regulated, but that is because they took away my internet poker). I also feel that a model similar to the way those poker sites ran would increase someone like Steam's ability to make their networks more dependable because they would have a constant invflux of money. But, that is even Furthur off topic.

I mean have you guys in league ever sat and played a board game like Risk, or even Civilization board games with people you know? That whole idea of temporary alliances should be relevant in a game like Civ that has diplomacy as an option (even if that diplomacy involves nuking someone into the ground). Yet another thing I do not feel is that big of a deal. Nukes, as strong as they are, are not game ending in Civ V like in Civ IV. I have won many games in multiplayer after being nuked.

By the way I am using the war icon for my post b/c I have been at war with Civ Leagues pretty much since its beginning!

 

[uigaw423]

Wow, haven't come across that yet. I was under the impression that if you gift cities, and the other player accepts, that is considered resigning for both because they broke the "rules." Another "rule" is that when a team rolls India, they restart the game until nobody has India. I am discovering on these mad skirmish maps that being unable to expand means you will get production rushed and lose.

Yet another issue I have with the "League" is most of the games are these types of maps like skirmish and teamer. These take out a lot of the fun aspects of the game especially in Civ V. I get in previous verisions that naval war was not that great but in V it is great in multiplayer. And keeping up with a small civ is more possible now than ever.

 

[KiffeLesBiffles]

Yet another issue I have with the "League" is most of the games are these types of maps like skirmish and teamer. These take out a lot of the fun aspects of the game especially in Civ V. I get in previous verisions that naval war was not that great but in V it is great in multiplayer. And keeping up with a small civ is more possible now than ever.

Naval combat is just a huge clickfest! For instance a combat, between 2 army of 3 submarines each can finish by 3 submarines kill on one side or 3 submarines kill on the other side just with clickfest ability. with frigate, it can be the same, if you double attack (end turn/ beginning of next turn). And because naval units are fast, you can really exploit double moves/clickfest.

 

[uigaw423]

Naval combat is just a huge clickfest! For instance a combat, between 2 army of 3 submarines each can finish by 3 submarines kill on one side or 3 submarines kill on the other side just with clickfest ability. with frigate, it can be the same, if you double attack (end turn/ beginning of next turn). And because naval units are fast, you can really exploit double moves/clickfest.

Ya, that is definitely the only place where click fest's happen. Large naval, just like large land war prevents a click fest domination. Also, if you are a person who waits til the end of turn to try to get the double move, then quit wasting my time. That is gimmicky and not chivalrus. Have some pride in your brain and skill set. Don't turn it into a waiting game.

 

[CanuckSoldier]

Wow, haven't come across that yet. I was under the impression that if you gift cities, and the other player accepts, that is considered resigning for both because they broke the "rules." Another "rule" is that when a team rolls India, they restart the game until nobody has India. I am discovering on these mad skirmish maps that being unable to expand means you will get production rushed and lose.

I don't know what "rules" the NQ group has but CivPlayers has no rules for FFA's, other than the generic league rules that apply all the time. FFA's are just that Free For All's. Always War Ctons of course have a detailed rule set on the league.

Like I've stated before, the league does not tell players how to play the game, we just provide a ranking and rules about how to basically get along, and how the league functions. Short of cheating somehow an FFA would not have any limitations at all.

CS

Moderator Action: One post after this one here is currently in the moderation queue.

 

[uigaw423]

I don't know what "rules" the NQ group has but CivPlayers has no rules for FFA's, other than the generic league rules that apply all the time. FFA's are just that Free For All's. Always War Ctons of course have a detailed rule set on the league.

Like I've stated before, the league does not tell players how to play the game, we just provide a ranking and rules about how to basically get along, and how the league functions. Short of cheating somehow an FFA would not have any limitations at all.

CS

Moderator Action: One post after this one here is currently in the moderation queue.

The "rules" as you put it for the NQ group are outlined quite well on their page.

Glad to know you don't have to follow the rules. Moderator Action: How the rules are evaluated is up to the moderators, not to the users. I am deeply offended that you can imply that their group has no rules and your post remains.

 

[CanuckSoldier]

Well I am not a moderator here, just another member, so I have no idea what yopur post said or how it may have broken the ToS here at CFC.

But I deny your statement that I said anything negative about the NQ group, saying "I don't know..." Is not a negative comment. Maybe you should just educate myself and the other posters here, if you see an oppurtunity to do so. That puts a positive spin on your group and is good PR.

I talk about Civplayers in a positive fashion because I know what we do well, and I do this without knocking other fansites. We all have roles top play in the Civ community to make this a better place for everyone.

CS

 

[CanuckSoldier]

The "rules" as you put it for the NQ group are outlined quite well on their page.

Glad to know you don't have to follow the rules. I am deeply offended that you can imply that their group has no rules and your post remains.

I did not imply anything, I simply stated that I did not know what the NQ rules were for FFA's. And no the league has no mandate to follow NQ rules for game settings anymore than than NQ has to follow any league rules. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make....

But I think this discussion is not leading anywere particularly productive.

CS