The Average Guy Thread
- Thread starter opticaljim
- Start date
Marcus_Aurelius
The True Emporer
"It's against my programming to impersonate a deity" -C3PO
opticaljim
Warlord
Yeah, what's with the zoo creatures?
I'm trying to survive out there against barbarians and other aggresive civs early on and I get jumped by the animal kingdom.
Seriously, I get it. It's realistic and representative of the reality during early human civilization. It's just frustrating when you're out there trying to explore and learn the landscape and you get munched by a bear.
Sometimes I play to lose just to learn something. Once I put the game on the highest difficulty setting and created just one city and waited for them to come get me.
On that level it didn't take long.
I'm trying to survive out there against barbarians and other aggresive civs early on and I get jumped by the animal kingdom.
Seriously, I get it. It's realistic and representative of the reality during early human civilization. It's just frustrating when you're out there trying to explore and learn the landscape and you get munched by a bear.
Sometimes I play to lose just to learn something. Once I put the game on the highest difficulty setting and created just one city and waited for them to come get me.
On that level it didn't take long.
EdCase
Defender of the Faithless
Sobsob said:
Well he's evil when I DON'T play as him...... agreed
opticaljim
Warlord
In Civ III I used to pad things in my favor. For instance, I loved playing the Byzantines on an island map. I got the Dromon and the Scientific advances each era.
Awhile ago I played CIV IV on Monarch level just for kicks. I figure I'd go in as the Malinese and get Archery real quick. Their specific unit is the Skirmisher which is supposed to be a badass Archer.
Well, first of all, they dump me on the same continent with every other Civ that gets a scout to start off with. The Americans, the Mongols, etc. So I'm screwed in the early exploration. Which, it turns out, is academic because my warrior strayed two squares away from my territory and got jacked by a lion.
So I get this "awsome" skirmisher and the first thing he does is get mugged by the first vagrant barbarian that crawls out of the jungle.
Meanwhile I got 4-5 Civs surrounding me putting up cities like mushrooms. I was pathetic.
Awhile ago I played CIV IV on Monarch level just for kicks. I figure I'd go in as the Malinese and get Archery real quick. Their specific unit is the Skirmisher which is supposed to be a badass Archer.
Well, first of all, they dump me on the same continent with every other Civ that gets a scout to start off with. The Americans, the Mongols, etc. So I'm screwed in the early exploration. Which, it turns out, is academic because my warrior strayed two squares away from my territory and got jacked by a lion.
So I get this "awsome" skirmisher and the first thing he does is get mugged by the first vagrant barbarian that crawls out of the jungle.
Meanwhile I got 4-5 Civs surrounding me putting up cities like mushrooms. I was pathetic.
cleverhandle
King
I was thoroughly "average" at Civ3 for quite a long time, but eventually moved up. I'm only in the middle of my third game of CIV at the moment (darn RL), but I hope over time to move up to solid Emperor-level play, at least. My experience in Civ3 was that you really have to take learning the game seriously to improve past the middle levels. Not just playing seriously, but learning it - you have to have a plan to get better and follow it. I think dh_epic was right on about having specific goals - pick one mechanic or victory condition or map type and focus on getting better at that. Then move on to another one. Also, you need to study just like you would for an academic course - find a good thread or strategy article or SG, read it carefully, and then apply that knowledge. Start a new game with the express purpose of putting a newly learned idea to use. Then come back to the forum and ask questions about how things went. Finally, much like school, don't let yourself take the easy road. Don't always play a Financial civ, don't reroll difficult starts, don't always go for the easiest VC. I learned the most about the game by accepting a difficult position and then asking about it on the forums - more experienced players could easily point out solution to problems that seemed hopeless to me, and those lessons stuck with me.
I guess I'd emphasize that (again, like school) natural talent is only a small part of being a good Civ player. You're "average" because you haven't had the same learning experiences as a "good" player, not because you were born into a specific level of some kind of Civ caste system. You can make choices that increase your abilities. All that being said, it's still just a game. You bought the game - if you have fun playing at Settler and don't care to move up, more power to you. That's a perfectly fine choice. But it is a choice, and not your destiny.
I guess I'd emphasize that (again, like school) natural talent is only a small part of being a good Civ player. You're "average" because you haven't had the same learning experiences as a "good" player, not because you were born into a specific level of some kind of Civ caste system. You can make choices that increase your abilities. All that being said, it's still just a game. You bought the game - if you have fun playing at Settler and don't care to move up, more power to you. That's a perfectly fine choice. But it is a choice, and not your destiny.
Alphawolf
Basileus, Founding Father
opticaljim said:
Do tell, what happened?
-the Wolf
This would be my "problem", which of course I don't really think is a problem.cleverhandle said:
You have to study it and take it seriously? Agh. I have a hard enough time taking my actual studies seriously
.I haven't lost yet though. I've been playing Civ games for so long that some edumacation has overwhelmed my natural ignorance. I guess I should move up to Monarch and see what it's like to be losing, but I just don't care enough. Some day I will feel like a real challenge and try it out, maybe over vacation.
Marcus_Aurelius said:
Here, here.
Although winning is nice, I have never been obsessed by winning in Civ. Every game is really enjoyable, even when I am being badly beaten. I just love to see the virtual history unfold, and see the virtual civilizations develop, and to observe how they behave. The game is endlessly fascinating.
When I am losing I love the challenge of staging a heroic comeback, or putting up heroic resistance until the bitter end.
It's not whethether you win or lose, but how you play the game! Hmmm ... maybe I should always play as the English.
FraggyFragbait
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2005
- Messages
- 55
When it comes to computer games im not average at them in general, im normally pretty good. When it comes to Civ im definately average, its great! I've been playing since Civ1 (rock on civnet...one of my fav games of all time). I love taking my time learning this game, its just so addictive. i spent about 7 games on warlord difficulty before finally braving noble and im glad i did, it was a challange but now i can win most of the games on noble, even if it is only just! I love the challange and soon thinkin about upping the ante again. I tried once but failed miserably, but hopefully with abit of practice and learning more ideas (i seem to learn loads with every game i play...it took me ages to realise just how useful trading resources is!) ill get to grips. Anyway...best get back to my game.
george_manet
Chieftain
I played civ III since it first came out and could never win on anything higher than regent, but I think I'm making good progress in civ IV (wrapped up a cultural victory on Noble last night!) Still, I can't picture myself ever winning on Deity- I don't even understand how it's possible.
I failed cal III because of civ III (no joke!).
opticaljim said:
I failed cal III because of civ III (no joke!).
I consider myself an average guy with a major problem...I love a challenge.
This means that I feel the need to play at the higher diff levels, and always loose. *sigh*
It's a sign of a good game, though, that you can keep loosing while still coming back for more!
This means that I feel the need to play at the higher diff levels, and always loose. *sigh*
It's a sign of a good game, though, that you can keep loosing while still coming back for more!
I'm average because I just don't have the patience to sit around and grind through every tiny detail of the game just to squeak out a meager victory over a collection of rampant cheaters. I'll probably just stick with the Prince difficulty and doing some modding. I like having fun when I play games and being slaughtered in 3000BC isn't fun.
butlerj1982
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2004
- Messages
- 54
I think Civ4 really plays into people like us with the many new starting options. I like to play noble, random personalities, eight civs, small world, no space race, no time victory. With the world size, you can reasonably only settle 3-4 cities before you hit borders on all sides. Its so much more fun than civ III's founding of 1000 cities everywhere. All my city choices matter, and since there are so many civs losing a unit with 10-15 exp that would take forever to replace is a huge blow (just like it probably would be in real life). But for those who want huge map and colonization and tons of barbs theres that too. Just a great game to play to unwind after a long day.
ye im a average guy too
6 '2" 40 years old divorced with 2 kids, mortgage, student loans, lots of bill
I cooked a mean stew last night using short ribs, reductions, pinion noir deglazing, brown stock
Got a good deal on a helli hansen jacket for my brother he has shizophrenia and doesnt go out--helly hansen fleece jacket 100 bucks--xxl--black
Played half the tutorial this week and this game is way to complex for me.
I wonder why all resources are shown: gold, hammers, and bread when you hit a button ? should it be more intuitive ?
seems to me that the best part of the game is mastering the complexities
6 '2" 40 years old divorced with 2 kids, mortgage, student loans, lots of bill
I cooked a mean stew last night using short ribs, reductions, pinion noir deglazing, brown stock
Got a good deal on a helli hansen jacket for my brother he has shizophrenia and doesnt go out--helly hansen fleece jacket 100 bucks--xxl--black
Played half the tutorial this week and this game is way to complex for me.
I wonder why all resources are shown: gold, hammers, and bread when you hit a button ? should it be more intuitive ?
seems to me that the best part of the game is mastering the complexities
I want to play the game the way I think it ought to be played, not to learn every nuance and exploit. So I never get much above the medium levels. I am for the most part satisfied with the AI's ability to give a challenge without having to give it all the bonuses, for now anyway.
Oh they've finally gotten over that broken record for me and have moved on to such new reasons as "We don't want to trade this yet" and my personal favorite, "Try again later". I have nothing to offer the ones ahead of me, and the ones behind me that are pleased or friendly just won't trade.
I went and sent missionaries and converted every city but one (failed twice) and then got Egpyt to convert to my religion for a tech, and then 5 turns later she converts right back. Great.
opticaljim said:
Oh they've finally gotten over that broken record for me and have moved on to such new reasons as "We don't want to trade this yet" and my personal favorite, "Try again later". I have nothing to offer the ones ahead of me, and the ones behind me that are pleased or friendly just won't trade.
I went and sent missionaries and converted every city but one (failed twice) and then got Egpyt to convert to my religion for a tech, and then 5 turns later she converts right back. Great.
