To All Whom it May Concern

[Heraclius]

As a relative newcomer to the world of CivFanatics, I have something I wish to come forward with.

And, in addition, some constructive feedback for the fellow (to whom I will assign the pseudonym of Mr. X, to respect privacy) who, in the readme of a WWII scenario posted on this site, writes "Play on Deity... that's how real civ'ers play."

There's no dignified way of saying this, so I'm going to just say it. I prefer playing Civ II at the Warlord or Prince levels. I've played it a number of times on Deity and actually won once or twice, but I found it too nerve-wracking for it to be fun, and I finally said to myself, "Isn't the whole point of a computer game to have fun, without feeling like some kind of wimp because I don't play at the highest level?"

Then there are the scenarios where you're required to play at Emperor/Deity level. Here I have three choifces: One: not to play and feeling like I'm missing out on something which could be fun. Two: to play at Deity or Emperor and end up tearing out my hair when my civ ends up like Russia in its WWI or Russo-Japanese war effort. Three: to play at Warlord and wondering what will go wrong if I don't play at the required level.

I feel that scenarios should be playable at all difficulty levels. Unless someone out there, when they read, here, that I like playing at Warlord or Prince levels, would, just on reflex, exclaim, "Oh that's the kindergarten baby level!" (of CivII difficulty).

As for Mr. X out there (you know who you are) I was a little bit upset by your remark that Deity is the level at which all "real" Civvers play, for I perceived condescension. I play at the level at which I have the most fun. A Civ II game takes hours typically, and if I'm to expend that kind of effort, I want to be sure I'm getting some kind of return, like being the next Caesar or Alexander the Great, as opposed to ending up like Mussolini or Saddam Hussein.

Anyway, I was hoping there are those out there who see where I'm coming from.

 

[Smash]

Play the game as you like.Its thats cheiftan or diety..so be it.

Scenarios are generally designed with a particular level in mind.Deity or Emperor are usually the defaults.Many have improvements/wonders that cause unhappy citizens to become content or happy.At a lower level,some of these things will/may not be needed.

That may change the way the scenario plays a touch.That doesn't mean it can't be played at a lower difficulty level and thoroughly enjoyed.

bottomline-its your game.Play as you see fit...just make sure you play.

 

[Ace]

Remember, everyone started out as a newbie, even the experienced civ I players. The whole idea is to have fun and enjoy the game, and as a level gets "too easy" for you, move up to the next level. Thats why some players have developed the "One City Challange" and the diety plus 1 or 2 levels.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

... who, in the readme of a WWII scenario posted on this site, writes "Play on Deity... that's how real civ'ers play."

I am an experienced Civ2 player and I rarely play on Deity. My preferred level is Emperor. It started out that way because I was an experienced Civ1 player before and in Civ1 Emperor was the highest level. Initially I did not try Deity because I wanted to master the game first. Now that I have mastered the game I still prefer Emperor because I have played so many games at this level that my intuition works best at this level.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Nobody should ever make fun of someone who doesn't play at the same level as another. I've tried everything from Chieftain to Deity (I knew I couldn't beat it; I just wanted to see how long I'd live).

My comfort zone right now is Chieftain or Warlord (depending on which scenario I play). As I gain more insight into strategy, I will undoubtedly progress. But I would prefer to do so at my rate, not someone else's. So let's respect each other's comfort levels--that is what a good gamer does.

 

[Ace]

I usually play on the diety level now, but the real reason I switched to that level years ago was the fact that on diety, you start out with two settlers, and that extra settler convinced me to stay on that level.

On the other hand, its fun to play at different levels. And its more difficult than you would expect because planning and strategy that works at diety, is somewhat ill-suited for prince. For example, happiness is not as big a factor at prince, so the rush to build happiness enhancing improvements and wonders is not nearly as important as it is on diety.

 

[ElephantU]

On levels below King the game gives some extra helps to the human players versus AI and Barbs. Levels above King it works the other way - AI cities can build things quicker, Barbs are more aggressive and have stronger defense and offense ratings, etc. Play at the level you are comfortable with, but if you get bored consider trying a higher level.

 

[Drakan]

Heraclius, post the link to the thread you're refering to. There are heaps of WWII scenarios.

 

[BlackAdder60]

Baaah! Disregard all those that try to impose on you THEIR view of how to play.
Play *ANY* game the way you derive the most pleasure from it. If you like to tinker with the setings then do so and when a game no longer amuses you, delete it. You can use the disc space for a game more to your liking. This goes even for Civ2! Though I'll *ALWAYS* have a copy of this game on *MY* HD.

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

Meh, play how you want to play, no one's going to hold it against you.

When I was a young civer I had to play scenarios on the lower levels. It was still a challenge for me (and fun)...if it wasn't, then I cranked the difficulty up a level or two. Now that I feel experienced, I can handle the levels I'm supposed to be playing the scenario at.