What might define the Intermediate level player?

[Olson]

On non-gaming forums posters tend to define themselves as "beginner", "intermediate", or "advanced" with some regularity and with some semblance of equal frequency. It doesn't take long to figure out what the general consensus of how each level is loosely defined and it can be important to know what one is when it comes to offering advice and 'how to's.

But, on CFC and other (lesser) gaming forums it seems one is often, if at all, (self-)defined as either a "noobie" (a new boob..."hopelessly clueless" on non-gaming forums) or "I'm so darn good only the highest difficulty level or multi-player begins to challenge me".

With such apparent polarization of definitions it can make one wonder, "what might define the 'Intermediate' level player?"

 

[Seraiel]

I know this is not the answer you asked for, but it might still help:

"The only thing worse than getting bad attention, is getting no attention" .

Saying one's a n00b, means someone is new, lacking skill, but at least courageous enough to admit it, and admitting something is the 1st step to changing something.

Being a pro, is something one doesn't say, but that others say, one cannot choose it, because others have to, and it's ambivalent, because everyobdy knows that for getting a pro, one must make sacrifices, but that's also what people adore about it, that someone was willing to make a commitment without feeling the losses on the way.

Being average however, is like being nothing, it means you're neither courageous enough to admit your're bad, nor willing to make that commitment. To me, that'd be the worst thing possible, it'd mean I was "normal" , like "everybody else" , not outstanding, just somebody with the name... yer, well, who cares what that name is.

This btw. disagrees with your perception, that a n00b is a bob (not boob) , n00bs come from "new by" , bob however is a term for someone being stupid and playing badly because of it.

 

[JoeyB98]

It's a difficult distinction to make, both because of people being too hard on themselves, and people being overconfident. I almost think it would have to be done as a person-to-person basis.

For example, to use Seraiel here /\ as an example, is clearly what you would call "pro", in that he gets HoF high scores on Deity and is always very eager to offer his opinion to those less experienced on the forum. I, on the other hand, only regularly beat Monarch and rarely Emperor, so I couldn't be classed on the same level, despite the fact that both levels are above the "middle" level Noble.

So in answer to your question, I don't think there really is an answer.

 

[Seraiel]

@ JoayB98: Just admit that you're a n00b ^^ Just do ^^ . Think of what I said about n00bs just being new to something, and n00bs not being bobs ^^ .

Honestly: What you say is true, Monarch and Emperor are the intermediate levels of CIV, anyhow, you can still play on an intermediate lvl and be a n00b, then you're a pro-n00b. FYI, I admitted being a n00b still when playing (and winning) on Deity. In general, namecalling itself is very stupid and impolite, so it's best to be the own to call onesself names, so again, just say you're a n00b. Say you're an intermediately advanced pro-n00b, but say it ^^ .

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I would define an intermediate player as someone who can win on higher levels than they choose to play on. They know enough to enjoy the game, but aren't really interested in getting better at it.

So I call myself an intermediate player. I have won on immortal, can win fairly regularly on emperor, know where to go to learn what I would need to 'improve' into diety...and I play on monarch, losing more often than not.

So, as an intermediate player I don't offer advice, even when it is asked for and certainly when it has not been. When it is asked for I let the self proclaimed advanced players handle it. I also don't ask for strategy help because I undoubtedly won't follow any advice I get, which is obvious from the fact I'm not even doing what I already know would be 'better'.

 

[JoeyB98]

namecalling itself is very stupid and impolite

What is the purpose of your post?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What is the purpose of your post?

While it might look like his intent was to call you a noob over and over, I'm pretty sure that really wasn't his intent. After going a few rounds with him myself I've actually concluded that he means well, it just gets lost in translation sometimes.

 

[Seraiel]

What I wanted to say is, that namecalling cannot be prevented from stopping, so better call yourself names, because then others won't, so it was ment helpful . There was also some fun in it, maybe the post was too subjective, but I generally find people acting like "CONFESS!" very funny, because it's so extreme ^^ .

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What I wanted to say is, that namecalling cannot be prevented from stopping, so better call yourself names, because then others won't, so it was ment helpful . There was also some fun in it, maybe the post was too subjective, but I generally find people acting like "CONFESS!" very funny, because it's so extreme ^^ .

I think I'm starting to recognize your humor...I did have a flash of Sam Kinison screaming "Say it!!! Say it!!!" when I read your post.

 

[Seraiel]

I think I'm starting to recognize your humor...I did have a flash of Sam Kinison screaming "Say it!!! Say it!!!" when I read your post.

You understood it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You understood it.

It was easier for me because it wasn't directed at me.

 

[Rusty Edge]

I'm not sure what the answer is, beyond the desire and ability to win at intermediate levels.

I'm not even sure you're asking the right question.

For example, I get a lot of enjoyment from reading. I could learn to read much faster, and I could learn to memorize as I read, but I have reached a balance that makes me want to read more and more. Changing my reading style would reduce my consumption of print as well as my enjoyment.


Civilization is a lot like reading for me, it's something I've done for decades, and is a pleasurable way of breathing life into history.

I'm no beginner. I'm no Hall of Famer, nor do I aspire to become one. I don't play optimally, I play for the love of the game. I'm a Civilization Enthusiast.

 

[Seraiel]

Come on, you have HoF genes in you. Your profile says you live in cheeseland, you were born for HoF :> .

P.S.: Very nice post.

 

[Rusty Edge]

Come on, you have HoF genes in you. Your profile says you live in cheeseland, you were born for HoF :> .

P.S.: Very nice post.

I liked yours, too. There's a lot to be said for striving to be outstanding, personally and professionally. I've gone that route in a hobby, too. Civ was my way to de-stress from all of that.

 

[Seraiel]

Nice to meet someone to have things in common with (I'm assuming you're listening to the same sort of music that I like, because of the way you write) .

To help at defining an intermediate player: To me, intermediate players are that have generally accepted that they are playing a game, but they're neither far advanced enough to simply pull things of, nor are they so new, that they don't know about the basics. I think intermediate players can be found on all levels and in all games. What makes them hard to find in CIV, is that Deity is just so much above all other levels, that everybody winning that level says things like "everything below that was nothing" . I think there are generally 3 lvls in CIV, and those are "below Prince" , "up to and including Immortal" , and then Deity.
Those jumps are from pure personal perspective, because when giving back what people in these forums think, the levels would be "anything up to monarch" , "Monarch + Emperor" and then "IMM + Deity" , because Monarch is the first level where the AI starts with Archers, making Warrior rushes impossible, and IMM + Deity are often mentioned the same, however, I don't find that true from personal experience. My experience is telling me, that Noble can still be won without any real knowledge about game mechanics, Prince however, doesn't allow that anymore, even though some people say so, on Prince, one loses if one doesn't know that trees can be chopped, that slavery converts population to hammers, and that everything Sid (or the game) is suggesting, is stupid. Once one has found out those things, it's a straight way up to Immortal, because it's until that level, that certain tactics almost always garantuee a win, i. e. Worker-stealing, Axe-Rushes, REX, building the Mids, getting Oracle, or whatever.
But then, comes Deity, and Deity is simply the level where a player gets confronted with the uggliest and most ridiculous things he ever has experienced. He's forced to refrain himself from wanting, he's refrained from wishing, he's refrained from relying on something, but it's that level, where he finds out that there's a layer past wanting, it's math, that the layer behind wishing is doing, and that everything he thought being necessary, was something hurting him. He'll get to know that what he knows is truely good, or AI will show him the opposite.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

I would define an intermediate level player as someone who enjoys the game, knows more than the basic mechanics, and can win at a medium skill level. S/he may not want to progress to higher levels, or s/he may want to, but the current skill level is not enough to take on high level play.

I qualify myself as an intermedio-noob-ette, and I have no real desire to progress above Monarch, though that might just be the Estrogen talking...

 

[paulcarri]

I would define an intermediate player as someone who can win on higher levels than they choose to play on. They know enough to enjoy the game, but aren't really interested in getting better at it.

So I call myself an intermediate player. I have won on immortal, can win fairly regularly on emperor, know where to go to learn what I would need to 'improve' into diety...and I play on monarch, losing more often than not.

So, as an intermediate player I don't offer advice, even when it is asked for and certainly when it has not been. When it is asked for I let the self proclaimed advanced players handle it. I also don't ask for strategy help because I undoubtedly won't follow any advice I get, which is obvious from the fact I'm not even doing what I already know would be 'better'.

Thats me to a tee, i have won on imm, but didnt enjoy the game at all on imm..and mainly played emp.

I may start playing iv again though- i havent been able to get into V at all and in the 6 weeks since i bought it have finished 2 games and clocked 30 odd hours...

 

[Drakarska]

Similar to myself as well. I also can play at the higher levels, but seem to enjoy MON-EMP (depending on mod) the most. So I would consider that as an intermediate player.

Concerning Civ V, I just can't seem to really get into it that much, and I've really tried (especially since the youngest got it for my Bday ). I've been a huge and loyal fan of Civ ever since Civ I came out, and until V showed up, would never have considered me from not playing a particular version of it. But with V, there is something that just "feels" off about the entire game that doesn't entice me to want to continuously want to play it. Maybe it's because I'm old, lol.

 

[Rusty Edge]

Similar to myself as well. I also can play at the higher levels, but seem to enjoy MON-EMP (depending on mod) the most. So I would consider that as an intermediate player.

Concerning Civ V, I just can't seem to really get into it that much, and I've really tried (especially since the youngest got it for my Bday ). I've been a huge and loyal fan of Civ ever since Civ I came out, and until V showed up, would never have considered me from not playing a particular version of it. But with V, there is something that just "feels" off about the entire game that doesn't entice me to want to continuously want to play it. Maybe it's because I'm old, lol.

My theory is that for people such as ourselves, the series has always held the "one... more.. turn" factor , because there was some suspense as to the outcome of one of my decisions, so I wanted to see what happened next. I think something was lost in the streamlining in Civ V to make it accessible to a broader audience. Maybe it was fewer decisions per turn, or maybe there was less uncertainty as to the end results.
But I didn't have that same compulsion whenever I played V.

 

[paulcarri]

Similar to myself as well. I also can play at the higher levels, but seem to enjoy MON-EMP (depending on mod) the most. So I would consider that as an intermediate player.

Concerning Civ V, I just can't seem to really get into it that much, and I've really tried (especially since the youngest got it for my Bday ). I've been a huge and loyal fan of Civ ever since Civ I came out, and until V showed up, would never have considered me from not playing a particular version of it. But with V, there is something that just "feels" off about the entire game that doesn't entice me to want to continuously want to play it. Maybe it's because I'm old, lol.

Its silly things for me, i miss the excitement of rolling a double gold and food or whatever, now every start is pretty much the same

and i miss the feel of 'knowing' the opponents, iv bts they had character.

anyway sorry for offtopic