Vox Populi very very hard after update?

[pandasnail]

Is my hearing deteriorating or am I hearing what sounds like PC has reached this wonderful Gazebo-bastion of good old school "I like my victories when they come hard" line of thinking?

Please no. Just no.

Well, first of all, being 'PC' is really just treating people with kindness, decency, and respect, not being an *******. I generally find that people who complain about are the type that don't like acknowledging their responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Secondly, what does that have to do with this dude deciding he'd rather play the version he's used to? Maybe he didn't need to announce it; but come on, let people live.

 

[ElliotS]

Maybe he didn't need to announce it

Nice try guys. Better luck next time...

Yeah not like he was bringing any of this on himself...

What was that about people that don't like acknowledging their responsibility for the consequences of their actions?

 

[pandasnail]

Yeah not like he was bringing any of this on himself...

What was that about people that don't like acknowledging their responsibility for the consequences of their actions?

In the very sentence you're quoting, I agreed that announcing was a weird choice...Still don't think he needs to be dogpiled and still don't see what this has to do at all with being PC.

 

[Moi Magnus]

still don't see what this has to do at all with being PC.

I think it is a reference to the stereotype "PC vs Console/Mobile" were PC players are supposed to be elitist jerk nostalgic from the good old time of impossible games while Console/Mobile players are supposed to be casual noobs not able to understand what is a good game.
(I'm exagerating, but I think you get the idea of the kind of toxic debate we could reach if things degenerate).

 

[pandasnail]

I think it is a reference to the stereotype "PC vs Console/Mobile" were PC players are supposed to be elitist jerk nostalgic from the good old time of impossible games while Console/Mobile players are supposed to be casual noobs not able to understand what is a good game.
(I'm exagerating, but I think you get the idea of the kind of toxic debate we could reach if things degenerate).

If that were the definition of PC Aristos meant, wouldn't he think more PC is a good thing? He used PC in opposition to the idea of earned victories, not in favor of it, not supporting 'console' noobs. Either he miswrote his post or he meant the other definition of PC.

 

[tu_79]

Is my hearing deteriorating or am I hearing what sounds like PC has reached this wonderful Gazebo-bastion of good old school "I like my victories when they come hard" line of thinking?

Please no. Just no.

I don't know what you are exactly saying by PC (personal computer?). If you are accusing us of elitists, you are missing the shoot (Well, ElliotS is a bit elitist, but we pardon him). The issue here started by OP and some other players disliking that VP had become harder. I complained about it too, but for different reasons. I've simply changed my difficulty and now I'm happy again.

Now, we could discuss if deity has to be so hard that no one has ever beaten it yet. Apparently Gazebo like it this way, but Civ has always been beatable at its hardest. So, do we go as the lead developer wants to or do we claim him in mass to lower difficulty to something more reasonable? On one hand this is CBO, it is Gazebo's beast so he can do as he likes, on the other hand, being so difficult at the hardest level may turn some players away. Personally, I think that it is better when the best players can beat the hardest level 50% of times, but I respect G decision, as this does not affect my ego (too much).

What really turns people away, is expecting a hard game, but finding it too easy for their expectations in the early game, then finding that they are not able to win in their usual difficulty level, not finding the correct strategies for late game (those are too common complaints in reddit). If there's a disclaimer so no new players get fooled, then they would have more realistic expectations and we'll receive fewer critics.

Particulary in this thread, we might have been rude to OP, but he wasn't very constructive to begin with. He was just complaining of difficulty, in rather despective or dismissive terms. Then he tried some easier games up to warlord, where he still failed, but instead of asking what he can do to improve, he just stated that the game was ruined for him, after putting 4000 hours in it (BNW or VP? he does not specify). At least he tried again.
We are quite open to criticism, when it comes with a reasoning. It could really be that the late game is too hard, but we need something more specific to work with. Specially when we asked for this behaviour in the first place to avoid boring endings.

About specifics. I still don't know why all AI banged against OP. Was it because they found him weak? Was it because OP was about to win, triggering 'despair' mode? Was it because he bullied everyone and failed at diplomacy? Without knowing this, we can't give advice on how to overcome the problem.

 

[ScooterDWiebels]

I really doubt that relabeling difficulties will help in any meaningful way. Vox Populi is simply more complex and harder to master, and that’s true regardless of what difficulty you play at.

The problem I have in showing new people the game is that the game is complicated. Casinos learned this a long time ago, people gravitate to what they can understand, it's why slot machines are more popular than table games. Even if the table game is completely braindead like baccarat (it's why craps isn't as popular even though the game is simple even this simple game is beyond many people and they will gravitate to the simpler slot machines.)

The game needs a good tutorial to get people started(I know the OP stated he had experience with Civ V the new features aren't well explained). There needs to be basic help and don't let the newbie be overwhelmed start out on simple task, and a game level that will ensure success if following the tutorial. There are also 2 types 1.) those completely new to the Civ experience (they need everything explained) and 2.) those migrating from BNW who already are familiar with basic game concepts but need to be told about the new features and some strategies they might consider.

 

[Aristos]

You got it all wrong. PC = Political Correctness virus. I was referring to the posts that were talking about re-labeling the diff levels because "they are rude" and "hurt people's egos/feelings"... that is PC. Accusing you of elitists??? Those who know me would probably also laugh... being one myself, mind you.

Yes, VP is harder. Good. Yes, the AI can hand us our "egos" in a silver plate if we don't play well. Good. Yes, Deity vanilla is equivalent to VP what? Settler? Super good.

That hurts your feelings? Well... that's on you. No need to re-label diff levels because if a game can hurt your feelings, sorry, but you need another type of help.

 

[civplayer33]

I'm pretty sure what both Aristos and pandasnail meant by 'PC' is political correctness (a more entertaining, less propagandized explanation by Steven Fry); i.e. the ideology that will silence anyone, including upstanding scientists, from speaking out under threat of violence if the person trying to express their thoughts does not conform to radical left wing world views and these days goes as far as trying to completely demolish the foundational principles of western society including our legal systems.

@pandasnail has made a good example of his own hypocrisy on the subject with his own post:

Well, first of all, being 'PC' is really just treating people with kindness, decency, and respect, not being an *******

So you're treating people with kindness, decency and respect when you're calling them ******* are you?

I generally find that people who complain about are the type that don't like acknowledging their responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

And here we go preemptively stereotyping people who don't agree with your twisted world view and calling them irresponsible; why don't you fix your own manners first before criticizing others?


Back on topic, I'm pretty sure this whole thing about egos and names was meant as a joke and we all had fun with it. Aristos maybe took it a bit too seriously but it was all fine until @pandasnail had to come in to virtue signal:

Maybe he didn't need to announce it; but come on, let people live.

Oh thank you great savior for standing in for the oppressed!

Jeez...times we live in...

 

[Aristos]

The problem I have in showing new people the game is that the game is complicated. Casinos learned this a long time ago, people gravitate to what they can understand, it's why slot machines are more popular than table games. Even if the table game is completely braindead like baccarat (it's why craps isn't as popular even though the game is simple even this simple game is beyond many people and they will gravitate to the simpler slot machines.)

The game needs a good tutorial to get people started(I know the OP stated he had experience with Civ V the new features aren't well explained). There needs to be basic help and don't let the newbie be overwhelmed start out on simple task, and a game level that will ensure success if following the tutorial. There are also 2 types 1.) those completely new to the Civ experience (they need everything explained) and 2.) those migrating from BNW who already are familiar with basic game concepts but need to be told about the new features and some strategies they might consider.

But why? There was a time when a new game meant the player had to discover almost everything. And guess what? Half of the fun was that discovery, that sense of going against huge odds (in part due to the learning curve), and a slowly increasing sense of "accomplishment" (if such thing can be defined in gaming)... nowadays, in this Age of Instant Gratification, everything has to be immediate, easy, "polite"... boring.

Let this bastion of "elitism" (?) be. This is the refuge of those who cannot stand the "win-button-like" philosophy of the latest civ versions... let it be hard, let the difficulty levels be "insulting" and "rude" to all our egos... let the AI beat us, and let it "mock" us with diff labels that remind us why we are here:

To loose once in a while.

 

[ElliotS]

In the very sentence you're quoting, I agreed that announcing was a weird choice...

I more meant the arrogant tone. I felt you were understating it.

(Well, ElliotS is a bit elitist, but we pardon him)

...That's fair.

You got it all wrong. PC = Political Correctness virus. I was referring to the posts that were talking about re-labeling the diff levels because "they are rude" and "hurt people's egos/feelings"... that is PC. Accusing you of elitists??? Those who know me would probably also laugh... being one myself, mind you.

Yes, VP is harder. Good. Yes, the AI can hand us our "egos" in a silver plate if we don't play well. Good. Yes, Deity VP is equivalent to vanilla what? Settler? Super good.

That hurts your feelings? Well... that's on you. No need to re-label diff levels because if a game can hurt your feelings, sorry, but you need another type of help.

I think it's less about feelings and more about expectations.

I'm extremely anti-PC culture, but also a marketer. That means that my intuitive response of "Don't be an idiot, moron." needs to be sidelined in the interests of not losing all our sales and getting fired.

So while you can argue all day about PC culture being dumb, I think changing difficulty labels is a good idea because it would properly set expectations. If people heard this mod was harder and wanted to play it for that, wouldn't it be cool if you could "progress beyond deity to 'Old Deep One'!"?

It would work well for more casual players because they'd have expectations set correctly and not feel punished for playing at "settler" or "Chieftain" level instead of the warlord or prince they're used to.

It would also work well for hardcore players both because it would feel better to play Old Deep One difficulty and because it would be easier to explain to other people why you playing VP on 7 is harder than Deity in vanilla if you needed to.

I'm totally down for the change. I would like to see it go like this: (No mechanical changes here obviously)

1. Prince
2. King
3. Emperor
4. Immortal
5. Deity
6. Demon
7. Devil
8. Old Deep One

 

[tu_79]

Ok, then next time be politically correct, and don't use the acronym.

I'm totally down for the change. I would like to see it go like this:

1. Prince
2. King
3. Emperor
4. Immortal
5. Deity
6. Demon
7. Devil
8. Old Deep One

An argument against this: When we say we play at emperor, we'll have to ask continuously if that's referring to 3 or 6.

 

[ElliotS]

Ok, then next time be politically correct, and don't use the acronym.


An argument against this: When we say we play at emperor, we'll have to ask continuously if that's referring to 3 or 6.

If Emperor is 3, then Emperor is 3. I don't think it would lead to many miscommunications. Difficulty terms aren't that hard to change.

 

[tu_79]

If Emperor is 3, then Emperor is 3. I don't think it would lead to many miscommunications. Difficulty terms aren't that hard to change.

People coming from vanilla will still say Emperor for referring 6. "Hello, I'm an emperor player... but I can't win anymore at emperor difficulty", "Number 3 or 6?"
How many players do still say Honor policies?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Let's just call the difficulty settings more appropriately:

1. SSJ3 Goku fused with SSJ3 Vegeta and SSBBQ Geese Howard
2. Three Riders of Apocalypse
3. Block of Lego (touched by god)
4. Nightmare Fred Flintstone
5. Super Saiyan Blue Shaggy
6. The Fungus
7. Finnish Khan
8. Devil Possessed George Jetson

 

[civplayer33]

I think the biggest problem would be to agree on the labels themselves.

While I appreciate ElliotS's enthusiasm, I'm definitely not in favor of the occultist twist in his list

 

[pandasnail]

You got it all wrong. PC = Political Correctness virus. .

Yes, that evil and terrible virus of treating people who need kindness with kindness.

(Which I still don't see what it has to with any of this)

I'm pretty sure what both Aristos and pandasnail meant by 'PC' is political correctness (a more entertaining, less propagandized explanation by Steven Fry); i.e. the ideology that will silence anyone, including upstanding scientists, from speaking out under threat of violence if the person trying to express their thoughts does not conform to radical left wing world views and these days goes as far as trying to completely demolish the foundational principles of western society including our legal systems.

@pandasnail has made a good example of his own hypocrisy on the subject with his own post:



So you're treating people with kindness, decency and respect when you're calling them ******* are you?

And here we go preemptively stereotyping people who don't agree with your twisted world view and calling them irresponsible; why don't you fix your own manners first before criticizing others?


Back on topic, I'm pretty sure this whole thing about egos and names was meant as a joke and we all had fun with it. Aristos maybe took it a bit too seriously but it was all fine until @pandasnail had to come in to virtue signal:



Oh thank you great savior for standing in for the oppressed!

Jeez...times we live in...

Calling someone as ******* is criticizing their behavior. Most of the time when people complain about having to be PC, they are wanting to be able to mock people for who they are, to make sexist, racist, homophobic 'jokes.' No hypocrisy at all. And who do you think I'm 'virtue signaling' for? I'm on a gamer forum, I don't expect the majority to agree with me.

LOL at citing a Jordan Peterson video tho. There's no one who whines about having their safe spaces disturbed more than right wing gamers. The whole gamergate movement is solely about how much gamers don't like having in women in their precious space.

Anyway, to be on topic, I too thought all the difficulty name changing stuff was a joke. If its a serious suggestion, I don't care one way or the other.

 

[ScooterDWiebels]

But why? There was a time when a new game meant the player had to discover almost everything. And guess what? Half of the fun was that discovery, that sense of going against huge odds (in part due to the learning curve), and a slowly increasing sense of "accomplishment" (if such thing can be defined in gaming)... nowadays, in this Age of Instant Gratification, everything has to be immediate, easy, "polite"... boring.

Let this bastion of "elitism" (?) be. This is the refuge of those who cannot stand the "win-button-like" philosophy of the latest civ versions... let it be hard, let the difficulty levels be "insulting" and "rude" to all our egos... let the AI beat us, and let it "mock" us with diff labels that remind us why we are here:

To loose once in a while.

I'm not getting into the elitist vs egalitarian around here. All I was saying is VP is daunting to someone new to it. Is this mod only for advanced players or can someone new to Civ come to VP and play an enjoyable game. A basic function of marketing is who is you target market. If it's advance players then it's fine the way it is. If you want new players you need to do a little hand holding just to get them started.

 

[civplayer33]

Yes, that evil and terrible virus of treating people who need kindness with kindness.

And of course it will be you, the wise one, who tells us who needs kindness and what kindness is in the first place (while you don't seem to know it yourself).

Calling someone as ******* is criticizing their behavior.

No, honey, that's called insulting someone, didn't your mother teach you that? Criticism is what SorenL and you got.

Most of the time when people complain about having to be PC, they are wanting to be able to mock people for who they are, to make sexist, racist, homophobic 'jokes.'

Again...anyone who criticizes you or PC madness is #litterallyHitler
God forbid you make an actual argument to defend your deranged views.

LOL at citing a Jordan Peterson video tho. There's no one who whines about having their safe spaces disturbed more than right wing gamers.

I wasn't whining I was destroying your ridiculous utterance; I doubt anyone who plays VP and stays here is in need of any sort of safe space, but yeah go ahead and project your childish safe space BS on us, it's not like this idiocy came out of your camp or anything (/s).

The whole gamergate movement is solely about how much gamers don't like having in women in their precious space.

It was the women who were whining because they found themselves in a semi-competitive environment (i.e. outside of their safe spaces) and then white knights and manginas like you rode in to save them (which was pathetic but certainly not misogynistic) and the normal people made fun of them both (because that's what people who don't need safe spaces do...hint: this is how you grow out of your 'big boy pants').

 

[Aristos]

I'm not getting into the elitist vs egalitarian around here. All I was saying is VP is daunting to someone new to it. Is this mod only for advanced players or can someone new to Civ come to VP and play an enjoyable game. A basic function of marketing is who is you target market. If it's advance players then it's fine the way it is. If you want new players you need to do a little hand holding just to get them started.

Marketing? This is not a product on sale. I cannot talk for Gazebo, but as far as I understand, this all started with the idea of making the AI better (already an "elitist" goal for PCers). He recently stated that he wants Deity to be basically unbeatable, which tends to confirm his vision for his mod. Nowhere can I find a reference from the mod owner to a goal that even gets close to "making his mod more popular" or something like that...

There is no market here, simply because he is not selling anything, and on top of that, he is not even trying to make his mod for the "masses".

Oh, and no, someone new to Civ should not be able to come to VP and play it and win. He should be defeated in the first 50 turns. That is the whole idea.