1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Spiritual Trait

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by JLH Fans, Sep 5, 2006.

  1. drkodos

    drkodos Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,861
    Location:
    Renting-a-tent

    Wise grasshoppers should never argue with foolish grasshoppers because the other grasshoppers cannot tell the difference.

    In essence though, the point that wiser strategy is dictated by game conditions and not personal preference is part and parcel of the working definition of strategy. So in that sense, I think yavoon is not 100 percent incorrect.

    However, his dogmatism would indicate that he is unable to discern when any particluar strategy would be better than another because of his belief that a single strategy is the only viable option. He reminds me of a friend that has worn the same hairstyle since the 1950's. Lucky for him, every 30 years, it comes back into vogue.

    There are some games conditions that allow for multiple strategies that will work to acheive a goal, and there are other conditions that suggest a single particluar strategy will yield the best results.
     
  2. yavoon

    yavoon King

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    720
    funny u would consider something objective like strategy and compare it to hairstyle, shows the depth, or lack thereof of ur understanding.
     
  3. drkodos

    drkodos Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,861
    Location:
    Renting-a-tent

    You miss the mark. I am not comparing strategies to hairstyes.

    If you spent some time developing better reading comprehension skills you would realize I am comparing your infantile-like level of dogmatism with the same level of dogmatism shared by my friend over his hairtsyle.

    It is a donuts to donuts comparison, yavoon.


    I suggest that when you eventually grow up and enter adulthood you should spend some time expanding your reading, garner some actual life experiences outside the gaming world, and expose yourself to other ways of thinking besides being linear and two dimensional all the time.


    I have confidence that you can do it and one day become a decent person that realizes not every interaction and communication with other human beings need be so vitriolic, contradictory and laden with angst.

    And when you demonstrate a better ability to comprehend what people are actually saying, perhaps we will interact again.

    Until that point in the future, I wish you good luck and happy civing!
     
  4. yavoon

    yavoon King

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    720
    u wasted an entire post on an ad-hominem attempt to boost ur ego? how sad.

    after all ur arguments are shot down, it is often best for the weak to go after the person instead of the argument. this is what u have proved.
     
  5. Holycannoli

    Holycannoli Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,406
    Lol I know I said I wouldn't continue this, but it's just too fun.

    Listen, it's true that effective strategies aren't totally based on preference. But preference does play a part. It's preference of playstyle usually. Preference is a broad term. It encompasses everything from type of victory (in civ games at least), types of units used, research paths, battlefield tactics etc. It differs from game to game and it reflects how each person enjoys playing the game. And that's the very heart and essence of a strategy game. If it wasn't, it couldn't be called a strategy game. We aren't competing for money or anything, so a fast, decisive victory isn't what's most important. At least for me. I can't enjoy the full scope of a game when I play like that.

    See yavoon, you're falsely assuming that only the fastest strategy can possibly be considered viable since nothing matters but the win and anything less that the most effective strategy isn't worth it (that's a whole different argument btw). That's what you seem to be saying. In that case, no, preference does not play a part. All that would matter is what works best and there's no room for adding personal touches to a strategy. To you that's what's fun about a strategy game, the quick decisive victory. That suits you best. And it can't be argued that your playstyle would produce the fastest victories possible if true.

    What I'm saying is that playing a strategy game that way defeats the whole purpose of playing a strategy game. When I play Civ, I prefer not to wage an enormous early war and win the game as quickly as possible (considered by many to be the best and even only way to win), in favor of a long lasting game that takes me through the ages. That's my 'preference'. Is a strategy that isn't designed to achieve an early victory less effective? Yes, if you think that quick victories are the best (I'm not saying they aren't. I'm saying they're not as fun). It takes me longer to win. But that's what I want. It suits me and the enjoyment I get out of the game. When I play Age of Empires I prefer not to flush in favor of fast castling. Is that less effective? Pretty much (a good flush secures an early victory).

    In all honesty everyone's been arguing about two separate things as if they were the same. Effectiveness of a strategy is different that preference in strategy, which reflects preference in playstyle. To say that preference cannot play a part in determining strategies is naive, because you're assuming that only your playstyle is acceptable. And to say that not wanting the quickest victory possible is wrong is also naive (you use more colorful terms than that when belittling people for not wanting quick victories). It's agreed that effective strategies are based more on what works best than what's preferred (because sometimes what's preferred just won't work; if I preferred to wage early wars in CivIV with just longbows I'd be using a very ineffective strategy), but it can't be agreed that preference plays no part at all, unless your only goal is a quick victory.

    You see the difference? Everyone's arguing about two different things here as if they were the same thing.
     
  6. yavoon

    yavoon King

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    720
    at no time have I talked about whats fun. which is a completely different issue. and I agree my opponents have largely confused their desire for what the game should be, their personal preference of playing and several other factors w/ the cold hard truth of my posts.

    the factual nature of my argument has never changed. I have always maintained that the effectiveness of a particular strategy is not, nor has it ever been decided by preference. and that this is a basic tennet of a strategy game.
     
  7. bassist2119

    bassist2119 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    218
    WOW! I'm awestruck that this is still going on! I think I posted around page 4 or so and even at that point, the OP's original propostion (check the post-header... spiritual trait) had been completely lost. I'd like to apologize on behalf of others to JLH Fans for utterly dismantling his thread - If you're still reading this (your own thread),I bet if you make a proposition to an admin, you shouldn't have any problems removing 5 or 6 pages of bigger-penis debates.
    The rest of you can keep banging your heads against a wall. I'm sure you'll find a different result from doing so sooner or later.
     
  8. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    So man,Hhow is the book??aDid you already start??

    Whathabout the title?? I was thinking "Ultimate strategy for all Civs. By Yavoon", whatayou think??

    I tihnk it will sell a lotnot :D

    AH to attend the guy up here, herre it goes my opnion:

    Cultural Trait > All traits
     
  9. karr1255

    karr1255 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    238
    Even if you for example like financial and think it's the best trait, will you only play leaders with that trait? God I hope not.
    For me chosing a random or less "powerful" trait combination is part of the fun. Try to make the best out of it and maybe you will even learn something new about the game.

    My favorites are: Spiritual, Philosophical and the new Charismatic
     
  10. yavoon

    yavoon King

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    720
    I do all sorts of things in civ. I just also recognize ideas of strategy and am not living in a fantasy world where my preference is an indication of effectiveness.

    =D
     
  11. Wodan

    Wodan Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,867
    Location:
    In transit
    At this point it might be a good idea to define some things in terms of Civ. Answer these questions/definitions, even if just to yourself if not in a post: I'll do the same. It'll be interesting to what answers there are from the people who post.

    Define (in terms of Civ):
    --Effectiveness
    --Strategy
    --Preference

    Wodan
     
  12. Wodan

    Wodan Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,867
    Location:
    In transit
    --Effectiveness
    Webster's says, "causing or capable of causing a desired or decisive result".
    To me, "effectiveness" is part hindsight, part "what if" a la alternate universes, part foresight.

    The very definition of the term requires determining results, which means you have to evaluate your success after the fact. Thus hindsight. You have to look back and ask yourself, "well, I did X and I can now see what happened; did I get a desired/decisive result"?

    The "what if" comes in in a qualitative sense. In order to do any sort of comparison, we have to imagine what would happen if all circumstances were the same but we did Y instead of X. One way to do that would be to go back to a saved game right before doing X. However, the random nature of the game will change the result, so it's probably better to simply admit that we can try different things and compare in a general way from game to game, but to some extent we will have to use judgement in doing a comparison to determine which strategy was most effective. In addition, we need to admit that there are always potential things we don't take into consideration. I see people all the time in Civ taking a small sample set (in a Statistical sense) and drawing conclusions. That doesn't mean the conclusion was wrong, but it means it is suspect. Let's admit that fact.

    Foresight comes in from three things: past experience, our knowledge of game settings, and our knowledge of the way the game is programmed (from the manual and Civopedia if nothing else). Using these things, we make decisions. e.g., "I'd better start building up my military a bit, if I don't want Toku to attack." This is a guessing game, and is where good players distinguish themselves from mediocre players. (Note: your skill level has nothing to do with your enjoyment factor, nor should it.) In addition, this is determined in part by how well you did #1 hindsight and #2 what if from previous games.


    --Strategy
    Webster's says, "the science and art of conducting a military campaign in its large-scale and long-term aspects."
    In Civ, everyone tacitly replaces "military campaign" with "Civ game", I'm sure we'll all agree.

    So what's a strategy? What you build and when you build it, what improvements you do and when, what you do with your units, the techs you research and what order, what negotiations you do and when.

    "Science" implies utilization of knowledge acquired by careful observation and deduction of laws which govern changes and conditions of Civ and of a particular Civ game.

    "Art" implies utilization of imagination and creative skill.

    A strategy is defined without consideration for the effectiveness of it. You choose between strategies based on your perception of effectiveness.


    --Preference
    Webster's says, "the right to choose" and "to like better"

    By definition, this has nothing to do with the definitions of effectiveness and strategy.

    It will affect your selection of a strategy, however, because strategy is defined in part by imagination and creativity, and of course you might choose a strategy simply because you prefer at that moment to "take the path less traveled".

    I think in Civ that preference could also cover other things you might have control over in the game. Game settings, for example.


    I think I might add another term:
    -- Circumstances
    Webster's says, "an essential fact or detail / the elements of a total situation" and "the particular elements affecting a situation"

    This, to me, includes game settings, results of previously generated game "die rolls" (combats, barb spawning, forest/jungle growth), the map, the AI leaders selected, etc.

    This can drastically affect effectiveness. Especially if one or more of the circumstances are not taken into account. An evaluation of Berserks, for example, on an archipelago map is not a complete/comprehensive evaluation unless you also include data from other map types.

    Wodan
     
  13. Older than Dirt

    Older than Dirt King

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    874
    Location:
    Swamps of Houston
    I don't like playing a leader with a spiritual trait because as an anarchist I enjoy the 4 or more turns of anarchy when switching governments so that my citizens can steal and rape to their hearts delight - it always leads to such progess and happiness after they get it out of their system.
     
  14. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    LOL :D Best opnion so far!!! :crazyeye:
     

Share This Page