I was curious as to the consensus among better players than I. 
I tend to prefer Marth length games, as it means I have the time to march troops around and actually conduct a war. However, my suspicion is that I am using game speed to conceal inefficiency in my play-style. I'm also not sure how this extended timeline maps to the games 'real time' as I find myself with informational era techs in the 1700's quite often. Granted, I never play with Christianity, so no dark age to slow me* but surely this is still a bit much? Do faster games map better?
I am currently trying to get good enough to beat Emperor, and default to Prince when I just want to relax. Is my experience more the result of playing on those difficulties, the speed, or some combination of both?
* I kid, I kid.
I tend to prefer Marth length games, as it means I have the time to march troops around and actually conduct a war. However, my suspicion is that I am using game speed to conceal inefficiency in my play-style. I'm also not sure how this extended timeline maps to the games 'real time' as I find myself with informational era techs in the 1700's quite often. Granted, I never play with Christianity, so no dark age to slow me* but surely this is still a bit much? Do faster games map better?
I am currently trying to get good enough to beat Emperor, and default to Prince when I just want to relax. Is my experience more the result of playing on those difficulties, the speed, or some combination of both?
* I kid, I kid.
