SGOTM 01 - Rat Pack

:goodjob: to preserve our honor....


Also civ4 is too complex for a simple SG.
Too many possibilities,too many choices.
I think the issue with SG's in CIV is that your teams needs to play very coherent, but with the multiple choice to MM cities, it's very tough.

I know Greebley is a cottage fan, so when we played the Rat series, we were sticking to the plan of expansion with economic built up then followed by mil campaigns.

In the acid/mutineer SG's, we went for whipping/axe rushes etc. This worked as well.

The games that do not work out are the one were people have a different mindset and this here is a good example. It was also not wise in retrospect to attack Russia that early.

Anyway, overall, SG's that were so fun in C3C because people have different styles is so counterproductive in CIV. It's best to play a SG like a SP game, but what's the point then. The only reason I still play a few of them is merely the fact that I can't play CIV much longer than 10 turns without severe fatigue (too slow and laggy really)
 
Yay for the win. Learned a powerful new strategy too. Thanks Tatran :D

I have a feeling that if we had each played this game as single player we would have all done much better. This particular game seemed especially lacking a coherent strategy. It is interesting how playing an SG in Civ3 means you are can play at a higher difficulty than normal, while in Civ4 you can struggle at a difficulty all players could win at single player. The problem is that different strategies just don't complement each other.

ThERat, do you play at lowest graphic settings? It makes a huge difference on lagginess without affecting gameplay.

I will probably get the expansion pack. I think I like vanilla civ4 more than vanilla civ3 (which I never have liked much). PTW was pretty decent and Conquests was great. I would love civ4 to go the same way - they polish the gameplay and remove the weaknesses over time.

I still haven't decided if I want to get into a SG with the new expansion pack however. I will probably try it SP first.
 
congrats guys...I started reading this after the always peace turned into an always war. I'm impressed with how you turned it around and won anyway.
 
I will probably get the expansion pack. I think I like vanilla civ4 more than vanilla civ3 (which I never have liked much). PTW was pretty decent and Conquests was great. I would love civ4 to go the same way - they polish the gameplay and remove the weaknesses over time.

I still haven't decided if I want to get into a SG with the new expansion pack however. I will probably try it SP first.
I hope so too, I feel the same about vanilla Civ3. Si, if Civ warlords provides the same quantum leap as conquests did for Civ3, then there is real hope.
Greebley, you keep me informed how it plays, then I will decide...

to me the barb scenario looks kind of interesting. AW without WW is always good :)
 
Greebley said:
I have a feeling that if we had each played this game as single player we would have all done much better. This particular game seemed especially lacking a coherent strategy. It is interesting how playing an SG in Civ3 means you are can play at a higher difficulty than normal, while in Civ4 you can struggle at a difficulty all players could win at single player. The problem is that different strategies just don't complement each other.
First off, congrats to the team on turning the game around. I thought you were dead and buried. :lol:

As far as your comments above go I disagree. I still haven't got the hang of Monarch at SP but playing in this game it seemed so easy. Perhaps it's more a matter of how the team works together? :confused:
 
Sam_Yeager said:
First off, congrats to the team on turning the game around. I thought you were dead and buried. :lol:

As far as your comments above go I disagree. I still haven't got the hang of Monarch at SP but playing in this game it seemed so easy. Perhaps it's more a matter of how the team works together? :confused:

Ya, it totally depends on how well a team plays together and how much discussion is done.

I guess my point was that it is possible for one to play worse, not that it happens all the time. With good discussion and planning you can play at a higher difficulty as a team than you could solo as with civ3.

In civ3 even with no discussion or limited discussion you never do worse than you would solo.
 
Tatran would be a good candidate to write since he came up with a game saver...
 
"Some people believe the word was spread first.
Others say they saw the light first."

This SG was a good lesson and I'm not gonna rewrite history.
 
excellent game!
well done everyone, sorry I wasn't of much help here...
I thought we were dead for sure.
 
just to check since SGOTM2 has a sign up. I guess this team will not compete again? Or am I wrong?
 
I was thinking of joining but not specifying team on the assumption we weren't going to play the team again.

I am willing to try though if ppl want. It is likely the only direction we can go is up :D

ThERat, I am always willing to play with you. If you want to do the rat pack again, we can probably get our team filled if we are short (which we probably would be). That would work even if it was just the two of us I think.
 
If there's any fun to have with civ4, it is through playing with you folks. Count me in, if you are in yourselves.
 
If there's any fun to have with civ4, it is through playing with you folks. Count me in, if you are in yourselves
Maybe we can just register at the sign up thread and indicate the team, the rest would be filled with other people I guess...if you are alright with that.
 
i wish i could play but i have rl kicking in, and 3 gf to take care of, lol. yes im going to hell for sure..
 
ThERat said:
Maybe we can just register at the sign up thread and indicate the team, the rest would be filled with other people I guess...if you are alright with that.

Ok, lets just register as the rat pack again...

edit: Ok, I just signed up with the Rat Pack.
 
Back
Top Bottom