What is your overall *goal* when playing Civ 4?

[Beerchugger]

I have noticed that while having fun is probably why we all play the game, we tend to have different goals to achieve for playing. For example, some challenges reward finish dates while others score.

So my question to you is what is most important to you when you play Civ 4?

 

[King Pluto]

A combination of:

-To achieve victory (no matter how or when)
-That said, better date and score are goals
-To improve my play/level
-To build a Civilization (BUT I do care about winning)

 

[tdy99]

Probably an almost even mixture of winning and building a civilization that I like. By like, I mean, at least two or three world class cities, tons of cottages, healthy economy.

 

[pob]

Winning doesn't matter to me, I'd prefer to play well and lose than play badly and win by fluke. I chose "to improve my play/level" as I don't know what level I am comfortable at yet.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Pretty much a tossup between winning and conquering my enemies. I don't feel I've built an empire unless I'm a dominant power. I suppose my peculiar ego makes me prefer earth maps for this.

A variant I like is trying to achieve a domination victory in RFC. Domination limit is only 25% but you have to be reasonably historic in which territory you take due to stability.

 

[MilesBeyond]

Building a civilization, for me. I love just being able to create this free, highly cultured, well educated utopia. I DO usually win the game as well (through either Space Race or late CV, since I like to experience the whole game), but I don't play to win.

That being said, I do enjoy the occasional CV game and seeing how early I can win them.

 

[Manco Capac]

Pure competition reason. Making my play more efficient.

Of course, in competition, early win dates are tied to play better.

 

[plasmacannon]

I checked, "To conquer all my enemies".
I would include to Improve my game play and build a civilization too though.

I'm not obsessed with getting a max score and I don't like cheesy quick victories, like AP.
I've done the Space vic and was satisfied that I can do that again. So no need to repeat it.
Culture vic would bore me to death just sitting there and building culture buildings. yawn.

"Always war" games with "Unrestricted Leaders" and not choosing a Top Teir leader are the most fun. Raging Barbs rock! I've had games where I have something like 130 barbs killed and only 4 cities, before I break out and expand. It makes the game challanging and at times a little stressful, which is fun in it's own way.
It might be why I play at Monarch level too. I can't imagine all of that on Deity.

 

[Cristoval]

I play to be the very best that no one ever was.

 

[UnforcedError]

I checked to achieve victory, since that is possibly the main goal with every game I play. But it's obviously a mixture between wanting to improve my play and fulfilling a victory condition meaning I either want to conquer my enemies or build the spaceship (and build up an empire in the process). I'm not so much into culture so that part probably doesn't apply. I almost fell asleep last time I went for it.

 

[digitalcraft]

To kill all human.



But seriously, mainly to waste time. I play for fun, sometimes that's trying to play a certain way, like playing as a religious warmonger as justinian or try a new strategy with some other leader, or sometimes just see how I can win.

 

[s.bernbaum]

Play for fun. Play the long game, build up a highly cultured empire that dominates the world in the end and interacts with the rest of the civilizations over time. If the tech tree isn't completed to the end or nearly so, then the game was not long enough! Play for a variety of victories and stick to "house rules" (which vary) for any given game.

 

[midget_roxx]

I play to have fun, which is winning

 

[TheWilltoAct]

I play to be the very best that no one ever was.

To kill all human.

I play to have fun, which is winning

My own kind.

 

[Iranon]

"Improve my play/level" is the closest.

I play to grow as a player, and while I like to understand the concepts behind everyday optimisation I like trying offbeat things to keep the game from becoming stale. Many things that seemed weird at first turned out to be perfectly playable:

Passive-aggressive warfare to make AIs waste their resources and stabilise diplomacy. Directing allies or vassals and riding their coattails. Disregarding production and focusing entirely on rushbuy. Repeated pillaging campaigns although conquest was possible. Gratuitous colonies. Crippling AIs with food corporations and a war on happiness. Total focus on espionage and playing to cripple competitors with it. Global thermonuclear war and a post-vegetation economy.

So much fun to be had...

 

[ferros]

I play to win, which results in me trying to improve while I play but I'm doing my best to build a Civ that I like while doing so. I rarely do the normal "cheesy" rushes to conquer most of the world like HA-rush or Elepults, I simply don't enjoy that way of winning a game and it gets boring after a while to just do the same thing which pretty much guarantees a win. Of course I can take out a neighbor early, especially if they're annoying but most of the time I leave it at that and countine to build my empire.

But I'd say winning, why else would you play a game?, and building/conquering a Civ that I like are the two most important things to me.

 

[i_imperator]

To improve my play level, in my first year of playing civ iv i went from a very bad warlord player to emperor/attempting immortal, right now im trying to learn the basics of immortal.
I do enjoy winning, however we must remember that at the end of the day civ iv is just a game, so don't worry if you dont win or loose to redicioulas crap. For instance i have lost two immortal games this week, Nobles club shaka and IU Mao, but i have learnt from those losses and im going to adapt in my next attempt. Its the same with starcraft II, your playing to learn and get better, because at the end of the day its just a game.

 

[happyturtle]

I play for fun. When a game stops being fun, I usually quit playing, which leads to a lot of games getting abandoned at the point where the win is inevitable but still many many turns away.

I also play to improve my abilities, or to win, but the primary reason is fun.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Passive-aggressive warfare to make AIs waste their resources and stabilise diplomacy. Directing allies or vassals and riding their coattails.

I sniped a reasonably hard deity map doing this recently (ALF Toku)...I think I'm still the only person who's posted an update with victory...using CULTURE while sandwiched between different religions...one of them belonging to a rather militant AI. That +4 mutual military struggle boost (and the extra city or two) made a difference along the way and was pretty much the only reason a switch into hard culture focus was possible. Perhaps just as amusing is that thanks to city flips and AP I nearly won UN also .

 

[gps]

Most imprtant reasons for me are to win and to improve. The rest is very situational. Sometimes I start a game with a specific victory condition in mind, sometimes I chose a Civ with the intent of playing and winnig the way the would in real life (kind of roleplaying - but I am careful with this word because for some people this implies not wanting to win or not wanting to play "competitively"), sometimes I just start a game trying to do my best and see what happens. I think this is the cool thing about this kind of game(s): there's o much you can do and so much that can happen, I would be kind of silly to limit myself to just one way.