Things you thought when you were a noob

[Deepsix]

Double post

 

[nfw]

When I first got a great general, I thought it was some superhero unit (I mean, look at his sword) and rushed him to the front line, where he died a quick death.

 

[civverguy]

I used to not build artillery because they always died. I whipped cities because I thought that would stop the "its too crowded!" problem

 

[s.bernbaum]

I used to not build artillery because they always died. I whipped cities because I thought that would stop the "its too crowded!" problem

Well, it does make it less crowded!

 

[W|M]

I whipped cities because I thought that would stop the "its too crowded!" problem

It does usually put cities back under the happiness limit...

 

[civvver]

I thought that using the whip was bad because population was good and unhappiness was evil.

I also thought that it was good to keep forests so I could build lumber mills on them later.

And I thought that who would ever build a workshop with the minus 1 food? (I didn't really understand state property)

 

[Optical]

Thought the Great Wall worked on every continent, that Chichen Itza was useful and Diplo wins would be easy.

Never used Slavery or Nationhood and still leave Police State at armslength... still a "noob" I guess...

Always used the last civics on the list and autoswitched when the message came up 'cause I didn't know about the Civics Screen.

 

[DroopyTofu]

I used to avoid whipping while in slavery because I thought that the unhappiness it gave me was a horrible idea, and I couldn't figure out why I would want to kill the population I had worked so hard to build up to the next level.

 

[W|M]

On the contrast, I always used to whip as much as possible, possible to take my revenge after I couldn't do nearly enough whipping in Civ III!

 

[ORION11380]

I had thought that railroads gave you +1 hammer for every 2 hammers on the tile, like Civ2 did. So I railroad spammed my entire empire for several games, until I realized that it doesn't.

And slightly off topic...in Civ3, the unit description said that caravans would give "higher returns the further they traveled from the city of origin." So I would spend turns having them do laps around my empire, thinking that it increased their "distance of travel," and then have them set up a trade route with a nearby city.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Well I am a nice guy, so do I think, so how could I sacrifice population to build something if I only need to wait a bit longer?
The great wall thing...
I used to think that attaching great general and attacking at 99% odds at his FIRST fight I cant loose that unit.

 

[Riflin'Joe]

I thought Montezuma was amusing.

 

[PreLynMax]

I thought Montezuma was amusing.

I thought Montezuma was sane. And intelligent.
I used to avoid slavery and the whip.
I used to expand to 12-14 cities before 1 AD and destroy my ecomony.
And used to think I could rebuild fast enough to catch up.
And focused on my ecomony, not my army.
And only had 1-2 units per city. 10 archers cannot sucessfully defend 14 cities.

 

[Terrance888]

I lost against Ghandi's Axe Rush.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I once rushed Gandhi with everything I had, and then watched astonished as Ragnar swept in behind me and finished me off.

 

[Bei1052]

I thought cottages used to help with "It's too crowded!".

 

[need my speed]

I thought that too. And sending Settles out.

 

[Nicol.Bolas]

I got a good one:

When I first played civilitzation 2 as a kid I played it civ5 style: i put units around cities one at a time and kept wondering while my cities keep rebelling and beying conquered.
it took my some time to realise that i can stack units and even stack them INSIDE cities