Why I like QM more than Elite QM

[pholtz]

I thought I would start an obvious inflammatory thread for some fun. And it will be interesting to see some other opinions.

- There is just one QM. I can easily see how (poorly) I rank and what I could do to improve my score. If I get on EQM I could, let's say, get on the Prince level. Then if I decide to try for Monarch, none of my Prince level games would even show up, and I would have to start all over. In QM all my prince level games would still count as I slowly improved my overall score with some Monarch games. EQM has a disincentive to improve. Once you get a level done, you don't want to start all over.

- Way to many 200's on the EQM. A score of 200 should be that holy grail unobtainable for all but the god's among us. Perfection has become the norm, not the ultimate goal.

- third and most important, I am now a QM member, but am nowhere to be seen on any EQM list

 

[Perfection]

- Way to many 200's on the EQM. A score of 200 should be that holy grail unobtainable for all but the god's among us. Perfection has become the norm, not the ultimate goal.

Perfection should neither be the norm nor the ultimate goal. Perfection cannot be obtained by anyone ever.

 

[Ozbenno]

Well I look at it from the perspective that EQM is harder to achieve than QM and am working towards the elusive Deity EQM but having said that, if I ever get there, I'll start working on the QM score again.

 

[azzaman333]

My main problem with EQM is that the Rock of Ages games aren't fun.

 

[Hsinchu]

My main problem with EQM is that the Rock of Ages games aren't fun.

Lol. I think Ancient Era is a habit that is hard to quit. I don't think it is the end all and be all of Civ though.

 

[pholtz]

Well I look at it from the perspective that EQM is harder to achieve than QM and am working towards the elusive Deity EQM but having said that, if I ever get there, I'll start working on the QM score again.

There are two aspects of the QM/EQM. It is a goal, and then it is a "ladder" to attempt to climb up. QM is more the ladder, EQM more the goal. Or in other words, QM is more the trip, while EQM is more the destination. I've always enjoyed the trip more.

My main problem with EQM is that the Rock of Ages games aren't fun.

I haven't done non ancient era starts until recently. I am finding that they can be fun myself.

 

[WastinTime]

I haven't done non ancient era starts until recently. I am finding that they can be fun myself.

They are fun. What makes them less fun is that whatever interesting map, leader, victory combination you chose that is interesting for that era doesn't count for anything but RoA :-( RoA could have been the perfect thing to take some of the boredom out of League of Nations. Instead, it adds to the tedious journey.

 

[pholtz]

They are fun. What makes them less fun is that whatever interesting map, leader, victory combination you chose that is interesting for that era doesn't count for anything but RoA :-( RoA could have been the perfect thing to take some of the boredom out of League of Nations. Instead, it adds to the tedious journey.

Then I'm doubly glad I don't care much about EQM and just concentrate on QM. My Era starts count there

 

[kcd_swede]

I thought I would start an obvious inflammatory thread for some fun. And it will be interesting to see some other opinions.

- There is just one QM. I can easily see how (poorly) I rank and what I could do to improve my score. If I get on EQM I could, let's say, get on the Prince level. Then if I decide to try for Monarch, none of my Prince level games would even show up, and I would have to start all over. In QM all my prince level games would still count as I slowly improved my overall score with some Monarch games. EQM has a disincentive to improve. Once you get a level done, you don't want to start all over.

- Way to many 200's on the EQM. A score of 200 should be that holy grail unobtainable for all but the god's among us. Perfection has become the norm, not the ultimate goal.

- third and most important, I am now a QM member, but am nowhere to be seen on any EQM list

200's are the norm if the HoF tables are empty. If you think there are too many 200's, all you have to do is go beat the best finish for the game at the top. You'll knock'em down that way.

Don't worry, as time goes on few if any of my "1 games will last, and it will become a more meaningful measure of one's skill. (I'm hoping Civ5 comes out before too many of my sneaky 100's get knocked down. )

 

[kcd_swede]

Then I'm doubly glad I don't care much about EQM and just concentrate on QM. My Era starts count there

You can work your EQM score upwards, too. I have a MOnarch EQM, but as I embark on emperor games, these will improve my monarch scores. Generally, people qualify for EQM looooong before they get two games in League of Nations or Map Quest. Still lots of room for climbing the ladder.

 

[kcd_swede]

- third and most important, I am now a QM member, but am nowhere to be seen on any EQM list

BTW- I did my EQM without ever even looking at my QM score. Its not elite, you know. (Perhaps it needs better marketting. Change name to Supreme QM and you might be able to sell it better. )

 

[Tiimmy]

I just quit playing World of Warcraft and came back to Civ4. I have played 3 or 4 games on Prince/Noble difficulty. My main question is:

How quick do you think it would take me to get EQM (Deity)? While I have never actually dove into a game on Deity, the resources available simplify taking the head first dive.

What would be a reasonable time frame? Am I that out of my mind? :/

 

[Ozbenno]

Essentially, its a minimum 39 games (assuming you only play one of each civilization and cover all the other categories in these games plus 6 extra games for each era), so depends how long you think playing 39 games will take.