The Monarchists' Cookbook Bullpen
- Thread starter Diamondeye
- Start date
OTAKUjbski
TK421
r_rolo1
King of myself
I would prefer a gentlemen's agreement in not holding to our save unless you really feel that your save is far better than the competition.... I can live with that 
I would prefer a gentlemen's agreement in not holding to our save unless you really feel that your save is far better than the competition.... I can live with that
Gentlemen's agreement - I like it.
However, I still think the aim should be to show the strength of your save in a brief summary at the end of your report.
Determining what are the key advantages of your position, so as to set them out in the simplest terms, is always a good exercise. More importantly, though, it will make comparison of the saves much easier.
r_rolo1
King of myself
^^Like it.... It is a good idea and it surely would help everyone that would pick the save to not stare to it for a hour think " WTH am I going to do with this?" ( it already happened once to me in a SG, so it is not that unlikely )
Diamondeye
So Happy I Could Die
Agree on Winston and Rolos proposals. One should not vote for ones' own save unless really sure that there is a major difference (to the good side).
Also, the brief summary sounds fine. I think I did fairly well on my save for round2 with that, report, and then a small explanation of why I think my save was good (in this case, because I thought my economy was excellent and I had some tech advantages (Alpha)).
Should I add this to the OP?
Also, the brief summary sounds fine. I think I did fairly well on my save for round2 with that, report, and then a small explanation of why I think my save was good (in this case, because I thought my economy was excellent and I had some tech advantages (Alpha)).
Should I add this to the OP?
OTAKUjbski
TK421
Maybe I misinterpreted them, but these are the two comments which struck a dissonant chord with me:
Though it seems to have a slightly snide tone, this comment in itself is pretty harmless. We have a playing style he doesn't enjoy ... no big deal.
I'm a little bummed he's writing off the whole series after just two Rounds of play, but that's his prerogative, and nobody should judge him ill for it.
But, combine this comment with the first one, and the interpretation becomes an affront.
It's as if to say because we're comfortable playing at Monarch and not for Emperor our efforts have no instructional merit.
Those comments are welcomed.
Dismissing the entire series is going a little far.
@ Nares:
If we've misinterpreted your comments, please clear the air, because I'd much rather be wrong in this case.
Bleys
Deity
Moved from other thread:
Finished my round, but before I post my report, I wanted to respond to this comment:
Also, I respect your opinion about Wonders, but even you have to admit that building Wonders has a pretty big FUN factor applied to it. I think most of the players following this thread, roster and non-roster, are able to compete effectively on Emperor and even Immortal. But you just seem destined to condescend and talk about "your" game as if that somehow matters. It doesnt. This is a group game, and your failure to even attempt to be "part of the group concept" is what has people down on you. We ALL played from the chosen saves, even Vale did so, and then went back and replayed from scratch, but still, he played from the chosen save. You didnt do a single "report" from a "Best-Ball", as if it was almost beneath you to do so.
You dissmiss a Wonder-based strategy as if its going to cost us the game or something, well as far as I can see, every single one of us is in the lead in both points, land, and techs. I keep waiting for the Wonder thing to crash . . . well not really, but to listen to you we should already be losing baddly, and YOUR sytem is superior. Well, mate, sorry to inform you of some simple facts of life regarding games like this, YOUR way isnt the ONLY way. At Monarch, you can still build LOTS of Wonders with an IND leader and expand into crazy
places with an EXP leader, and STILL win easily. This is WHY some of us play at Monarch, and dont bother moving up in difficulty despite an ability to do so, because whupping Monarch by piling up Wonders and expanding like crazy is FUN.
Maybe if you were more willing to conform to the format as we have laid it out, you would be able to be more instructive and less abrasive. But you dont. You have yet to do a "report" based on another players save, period. If are arent willing to play this series as we have decided it will be played, then feel free to move on and kibitz someone else's games. There must be a dozen games going on that you can be just as condescending and annoyingly critical in.
The bottom line here is simple. We are playing Monarch level. Will the techniques and strategies we are using work on all levels? Are they the "best" plays at any level". Probably not. But there are a LOT of players out there who struggle on Monarch, and we are trying to give them some idea of what works and what doesnt, thats all. We are trying to have FUN, mate, what are you trying to do? If its "annoy us by telling us how stupid we are", then you have succeeded.
No one likes to be talked down too, and thats what he does, his tone is TOTALLY condescending. Constructive criticism is more than welcome, but he doenst seem to be able to pull that off without sounding superior and picking apart every detail of our game.
I agree he has a lot of strong ideas, and I appreciate his input, but if he isnt willing to conform to the basic principle of the format (choose a save, then play from THAT save), then frankly, I dont need to hear it. Not speaking for the others, but I get a sense that they are kind of tired of his tone as well.
I play Monarch because I LOVE building Wonders, and this is the last level where I can effectively get a LOT of the ones I "want". I play Monarch because I LOVE REXing, and this is the level where you arent punished as baddly as long as you have some kind of system to sustain it. In this case, its the GLH. But we didnt even do THAT right, because we didnt make enough cities on enough landmasses and we built the Oracle, ToA and Colossus which obviously suck.
Personally, I would WELCOME Nares to our games if he showed even the tiniest hint of conforming to our format from a positive standpoint, but every post the guy makes is negative and dismissive. This is the 3rd round and he didnt do a single report on a single "Best Ball" at all. Even if he had picked up OTAKs save, and said "First thing I did was load that settler on that galley and move him to the Fish island so I could chop the forest first, then I settled that GProphet in Berlin instantly, then I switched 3 queues and 2 civics to my own tastes . . ." fine. Instead, he started in on his OWN GAME again, as if that even matters at this point. NONE of us are playing their "own" game, and even if we were, we arent bothering to try and compare them to the Best Ball games, because thats NOT the format here.
Whatever. Thats not constructive. Thats not educational. Theres a difference between being instructional and being condescending.
I learned from him. I freely admit we need more cities on more landmasses to make the GLH work better. I learned from Vales powerful handling of Slavery in a very food-rich city. I dont need someone saying that we shouldnt have picked this save or that save and his own full-game is better than any of these best-ball games, etc etc.
Finished my round, but before I post my report, I wanted to respond to this comment:
Nares, no offense man, because you are a strong player with very solid ideas and strategies in this game, but I think your failure to adjust to the format is what is driving you away. I am experiencing a similar problem, and I suspect that MANY of us are, and that is not being able to mold my style into the chosen save effectively.
Also, I respect your opinion about Wonders, but even you have to admit that building Wonders has a pretty big FUN factor applied to it. I think most of the players following this thread, roster and non-roster, are able to compete effectively on Emperor and even Immortal. But you just seem destined to condescend and talk about "your" game as if that somehow matters. It doesnt. This is a group game, and your failure to even attempt to be "part of the group concept" is what has people down on you. We ALL played from the chosen saves, even Vale did so, and then went back and replayed from scratch, but still, he played from the chosen save. You didnt do a single "report" from a "Best-Ball", as if it was almost beneath you to do so.
You dissmiss a Wonder-based strategy as if its going to cost us the game or something, well as far as I can see, every single one of us is in the lead in both points, land, and techs. I keep waiting for the Wonder thing to crash . . . well not really, but to listen to you we should already be losing baddly, and YOUR sytem is superior. Well, mate, sorry to inform you of some simple facts of life regarding games like this, YOUR way isnt the ONLY way. At Monarch, you can still build LOTS of Wonders with an IND leader and expand into crazy
places with an EXP leader, and STILL win easily. This is WHY some of us play at Monarch, and dont bother moving up in difficulty despite an ability to do so, because whupping Monarch by piling up Wonders and expanding like crazy is FUN. Maybe if you were more willing to conform to the format as we have laid it out, you would be able to be more instructive and less abrasive. But you dont. You have yet to do a "report" based on another players save, period. If are arent willing to play this series as we have decided it will be played, then feel free to move on and kibitz someone else's games. There must be a dozen games going on that you can be just as condescending and annoyingly critical in.
The bottom line here is simple. We are playing Monarch level. Will the techniques and strategies we are using work on all levels? Are they the "best" plays at any level". Probably not. But there are a LOT of players out there who struggle on Monarch, and we are trying to give them some idea of what works and what doesnt, thats all. We are trying to have FUN, mate, what are you trying to do? If its "annoy us by telling us how stupid we are", then you have succeeded.
Its not his words, its his methods and his tone. He isnt even playing according to the format. He simply plays from his own saves, and tells us how lame our own plans are. He wont even consider some of our plans and ideas, despite this being a level where such plans tend to actually still work (especially regarding Wonders).
No one likes to be talked down too, and thats what he does, his tone is TOTALLY condescending. Constructive criticism is more than welcome, but he doenst seem to be able to pull that off without sounding superior and picking apart every detail of our game.
I agree he has a lot of strong ideas, and I appreciate his input, but if he isnt willing to conform to the basic principle of the format (choose a save, then play from THAT save), then frankly, I dont need to hear it. Not speaking for the others, but I get a sense that they are kind of tired of his tone as well.
I play Monarch because I LOVE building Wonders, and this is the last level where I can effectively get a LOT of the ones I "want". I play Monarch because I LOVE REXing, and this is the level where you arent punished as baddly as long as you have some kind of system to sustain it. In this case, its the GLH. But we didnt even do THAT right, because we didnt make enough cities on enough landmasses and we built the Oracle, ToA and Colossus which obviously suck.
Personally, I would WELCOME Nares to our games if he showed even the tiniest hint of conforming to our format from a positive standpoint, but every post the guy makes is negative and dismissive. This is the 3rd round and he didnt do a single report on a single "Best Ball" at all. Even if he had picked up OTAKs save, and said "First thing I did was load that settler on that galley and move him to the Fish island so I could chop the forest first, then I settled that GProphet in Berlin instantly, then I switched 3 queues and 2 civics to my own tastes . . ." fine. Instead, he started in on his OWN GAME again, as if that even matters at this point. NONE of us are playing their "own" game, and even if we were, we arent bothering to try and compare them to the Best Ball games, because thats NOT the format here.
This is the heart of the matter. Did you play the game from 4000 or take OTAKs save and do your game from there, like everyone else? Let me quote Nares response to this round, ok?
What good is that? Its now 2 rounds in a row where he didnt follow the format, and he is still cutting down our approach?Nares said:
Whatever. Thats not constructive. Thats not educational. Theres a difference between being instructional and being condescending.
I learned from him. I freely admit we need more cities on more landmasses to make the GLH work better. I learned from Vales powerful handling of Slavery in a very food-rich city. I dont need someone saying that we shouldnt have picked this save or that save and his own full-game is better than any of these best-ball games, etc etc.
Calm down Bleys, it's just a game.
And that's why I didn't play anyone else's save.
You're overly sensitive, but if you think I'm condescending now, imagine how I would be if I was offering an assessment of someone else's game which I was actively playing.
And that's why I didn't play anyone else's save.
You're overly sensitive, but if you think I'm condescending now, imagine how I would be if I was offering an assessment of someone else's game which I was actively playing.
Bleys
Deity
I am plenty calm, Nares. I have been playing games and posting on boards for many many years, and I have seen dozens, if not hundreds, of folks just like you. "Its just a game" is the ultimate cop-out for your type, your own personal carte blanch to act the way you do. You didnt play the best-ball saves because . . . "its just a game"? LOL, what does that even mean? That you can do as you please because "its just a game"? That you dont have to follow any form of message board protocol because "its just a game"? Seriously, what does that MEAN?
And by the way, for the record, the format doesnt ask for your assessment of the save you just picked up to play (other than to vote for the Best-Ball itself), it asks for you to report on the round you play from that save. But I dont doubt for a minute you would avoid that snide, condescending tone in your reports, so once again, feel free to find other games to criticize, we are looking for folks with open minds and positive attitudes.
Diamondeye
So Happy I Could Die
Games have rules too, Nares, and boards do as well.
Also, this "game series" is, basically, our idea and project, and we like it to focus on Monarch level play. Which doesn't rule out constructive advice from people better than us, but the rest of the comment with a tone in, we can live without
Also, this "game series" is, basically, our idea and project, and we like it to focus on Monarch level play. Which doesn't rule out constructive advice from people better than us, but the rest of the comment with a tone in, we can live without
Feel free to point out where I was condescending or non-constructive.
After re-reading the game thread, I'm really interested to see what you come up with.
As opposed to some players, I can actually handle criticism.
What I did see was someone practically crying about 3S of Berlin, to the point where I think the issue was dropped because no one wanted to push him over the edge again.
As much as that's the worst attitude he exhibited, there were other negative or self-serving comments, to the point where futurehermit requested that players not be allowed to vote for their own save specifically in response to this player's self-gratification.
He continually provoked me with negative comments and accusations, yet somehow his behavior is totally acceptable because he's a "roster player." Or maybe it's because I "broke the rules," despite specifically asking for and receiving confirmation that playing my own save as a declared unofficial shadow was acceptable.
Please, forgive me for attempting to help all of you become better players. Frankly, I think you're all capable of handling emperor. Only you hold yourselves back, and I think it's largely due to some sort of perceived barrier between monarch and emperor that no longer exists in the wake of BTS.
After re-reading the game thread, I'm really interested to see what you come up with.
As opposed to some players, I can actually handle criticism.
What I did see was someone practically crying about 3S of Berlin, to the point where I think the issue was dropped because no one wanted to push him over the edge again.
As much as that's the worst attitude he exhibited, there were other negative or self-serving comments, to the point where futurehermit requested that players not be allowed to vote for their own save specifically in response to this player's self-gratification.
He continually provoked me with negative comments and accusations, yet somehow his behavior is totally acceptable because he's a "roster player." Or maybe it's because I "broke the rules," despite specifically asking for and receiving confirmation that playing my own save as a declared unofficial shadow was acceptable.
Please, forgive me for attempting to help all of you become better players. Frankly, I think you're all capable of handling emperor. Only you hold yourselves back, and I think it's largely due to some sort of perceived barrier between monarch and emperor that no longer exists in the wake of BTS.
Bleys
Deity
The negative comments and alleged accusations were born directly from you not even having the decency to attempt to follow the format we laid out. I readily admit I developed an attitude after that 2nd round, when you jumped right into the thread with talk of "your own game", while none of us except rolo played "there own game". If you wanted to have a shadow CSG, I think we mentioned it belonged in its own thread, since comparisons to our game were irrelevant in so many ways.
And my behavior isnt totally acceptable either. I fully take the blame for causing a lot of controversy, unnecessarily. Apologized for it a couple times, as well, but even my pissy attitude didnt seem to wake you up to the simple fact that you were NOT being constructive in the thread, you were being condescending and acting superior about "your" game, a game which wasnt even qualified to be discussed.
Yeah, I also got overly critical of the 3S spot, and I still say it sucks, because too much overlap bites later in the game. Yeah, I got overly argumentitive about my position after round 2, because I truly felt that there wasnt nearly enough attention being paid to leveraging our traits with fast Forges which shaves hammers off every single build in the queue from that moment forward. And Nares, despite your opinion, Wonders dont suck.
But I followed the format, I played the best-ball, I did my best to take someone elses game and add my own layer of spice to it. You wouldnt be bothered with such trivialities, and thus constantly brought up "your save" when discussing that round, your save, which WASNT played from the best-ball. Then, you did it again! I think thats the point where some others grew weary of taking your criticisms and comparisons as well.
If you want quotes I will be happy to provide them. The line I quoted up above sums your attitude up in a nutshell, to be honest. Its an affront to those of us who are actually trying to make this format work, because playing off someone elses game is NOT easy.
And my behavior isnt totally acceptable either. I fully take the blame for causing a lot of controversy, unnecessarily. Apologized for it a couple times, as well, but even my pissy attitude didnt seem to wake you up to the simple fact that you were NOT being constructive in the thread, you were being condescending and acting superior about "your" game, a game which wasnt even qualified to be discussed.
Yeah, I also got overly critical of the 3S spot, and I still say it sucks, because too much overlap bites later in the game. Yeah, I got overly argumentitive about my position after round 2, because I truly felt that there wasnt nearly enough attention being paid to leveraging our traits with fast Forges which shaves hammers off every single build in the queue from that moment forward. And Nares, despite your opinion, Wonders dont suck.
But I followed the format, I played the best-ball, I did my best to take someone elses game and add my own layer of spice to it. You wouldnt be bothered with such trivialities, and thus constantly brought up "your save" when discussing that round, your save, which WASNT played from the best-ball. Then, you did it again! I think thats the point where some others grew weary of taking your criticisms and comparisons as well.
If you want quotes I will be happy to provide them. The line I quoted up above sums your attitude up in a nutshell, to be honest. Its an affront to those of us who are actually trying to make this format work, because playing off someone elses game is NOT easy.
Bleys
Deity
I want to add one more thing, then I am going to drop this whole affair and get on with playing the game.
Nares, I actually like you. I actually like your style of play. You are an asset to our thread. But man, do you not see how totally ignoring our format sticks in our craws? Can you not understand how talking about your own game from 4000 when none of us played that way bugs people?
Take another look at the thread, and be more objective. Ignore my petty whining and ranting (and I freely admit, it was PETTY BULLCRAP, I was WRONG) and try to gain a better understanding of the people playing by the rules, according to a format, and see if you can get to the heart of the problem. The heart of the problem isnt me, it isnt the other Roster players, heck even Vale mentioned something about you ignoring the format. THATS where the problem lies.
Have a go from OTAKs save. Play and post a report. I really want you to be a part of this series, because your GOOD, and you will keep Wonder-Addicts like me honest. You truly make us all play BETTER, and thats a strong thing.
We all know we can play Emperor. Part of the point of playing at this level is it ALLOWS like WOnderspam and Crazy REX and you can still win. Thats adds a very intangible fun-factor that the Roster players have in common. I think thats why we are all playing this series, to be honest, because we all share that intangible "Fun First" thing that keeps us from grinding out the wins at levels where it starts becoming less fun.
Nares, I actually like you. I actually like your style of play. You are an asset to our thread. But man, do you not see how totally ignoring our format sticks in our craws? Can you not understand how talking about your own game from 4000 when none of us played that way bugs people?
Take another look at the thread, and be more objective. Ignore my petty whining and ranting (and I freely admit, it was PETTY BULLCRAP, I was WRONG) and try to gain a better understanding of the people playing by the rules, according to a format, and see if you can get to the heart of the problem. The heart of the problem isnt me, it isnt the other Roster players, heck even Vale mentioned something about you ignoring the format. THATS where the problem lies.
Have a go from OTAKs save. Play and post a report. I really want you to be a part of this series, because your GOOD, and you will keep Wonder-Addicts like me honest. You truly make us all play BETTER, and thats a strong thing.
We all know we can play Emperor. Part of the point of playing at this level is it ALLOWS
like WOnderspam and Crazy REX and you can still win. Thats adds a very intangible fun-factor that the Roster players have in common. I think thats why we are all playing this series, to be honest, because we all share that intangible "Fun First" thing that keeps us from grinding out the wins at levels where it starts becoming less fun.
OTAKUjbski
TK421
Alt-S (10 chars)
futurehermit
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 5,724
The thing is, I don't think that we as a group said "Please, Nares, help us become better players". I'm not opposed to constructive criticism and I've learned everything I know about civ from these boards. But what I don't like is when higher level players exhibit some chauvinism toward lower levels/lower level players. "OMG that won't work at XXX level" doesn't appeal to me. That's why I like these boards, there are games dedicated to the different skill levels. I learn a lot from higher level games, but one thing I learn is that higher levels provide less strategic options. You can't go for certain wonders because the risk of losing them or getting boxed in or getting attacked is too high (or getting overrun by barbs). You can't go for an early religion because you will usually lose it. You can't X and you can't Y. Personally, I don't enjoy that. That's why I've settled in to Monarch. I could play on Emperor full time and win some and lose some. If I really put my mind to it and played earlier than 10pm I could probably play on Immortal and win a % of games. But I like the variety afforded by playing on Monarch.
I do think that we have been too defensive as well, but it can be a bit intimidating having higher level players contributing to a thread, especially when the concept is new and still being worked out. I also think we were too competitive earlier on, but we worked that out as a team.
Things are still being ironed out, but I do think that the quotes that OTAKU highlighted illustrate the chauvinism I am talking about and it just isn't helpful imo.
Diamondeye
So Happy I Could Die
10CHARS
Neither of these is true. Just because some people say it, doesn't make it so.
I can't help but wonder if some of you guys have been given an unnecessary fear of Emperor+ games by people who express opinion as fact, and say things like "never do blah, blah, blah" as if they've discovered the one true formula for victory in civ.
The real difference on higher levels is that everything gets more expensive*, so you have to be more deliberate and discriminating in your strategic choices.
Early wonders and religions are already quite expensive on Monarch**, so on Emperor+ you have to be very careful when making the choice to go for them. And, to some extent, either choice is always a bit of a gamble.
But, regardless of the level, the key to victory is always to play the map. In some cases, gambling on a handful of early wonders or an early religion is playing the map.
Obviously, we all play the map to some extent. But too many of us have a tendency to focus on playing the leader/civ instead (which, in the absence of variant rules, is roleplay rather than strategy imo). Using the bonuses you get from your chosen leader is always important, of course. But it's only a very small part of winning the game.
More damagingly, many people seem to to play the theory, paying greater attention to the received wisdom on these boards than to the emergent circumstances on the map. That, rather than early wonder building or religion founding per se, is the more likely thing to restrict your options and to lose you the game.
(That's not to say the theory isn't very useful. But it should only form a background understanding, not provide a pre-determined recipe for success.)
*Either literally, relative to the AI, or in terms of the less tangible costs involved (eg. the dangers of a low power rating). Sometimes all three.
**Take a look at my warlike shadow game to see what we could've done if we had taken only the GLh. Was the cost of building those other wonders in the best ball games a worthwhile investment? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on how you read the situation.
futurehermit
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 5,724
Well, I generally play the map, but if you are telling me that it is not more of a gamble to gun for wonders in higher levels at the risk of being boxed in/attacked I simply don't believe you. I have played some emperor games and the need for military (to avoid being attacked/overrun by barbs) and expansion (to avoid being boxed in) is generally much higher.
Sure, I can accept that some games (e.g., you are isolated; you have stone in capital; etc.) you could still strategically gun for certain wonders, but I am speaking generally that the strategic options diminish somewhat compared to monarch because of the greater needs of military and expansion.
Sure, I can accept that some games (e.g., you are isolated; you have stone in capital; etc.) you could still strategically gun for certain wonders, but I am speaking generally that the strategic options diminish somewhat compared to monarch because of the greater needs of military and expansion.
Similar threads
