WOTM 31 Final Spoiler

leif erikson

Game of the Month Fanatic
Administrator
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
31,644
Location
Plymouth, MA

WOTM 31 Final Spoiler



So how did your game go after 1AD? Please tell everyone and discuss it in this thread, subject to...

Reading Requirements

Stop! If you are participating in WOTM 31, then you MUST NOT read this thread unless
  • You have submitted your entry

Posting Restrictions
  • Please do not post any savegame file from the game. Discussions and screenshots are fine but not actual game saves.


How did you progress after 1 AD?
What did you learn?
 
2080BC conquest defeat. Chose deity save just for giggles and thought about going for a peaceful VC. Once I met the neighbors, I should have just DoW all of them and hit <enter> repeatedly to see how fast I could end it.

Settled 1N. Looking back, maybe I should have stole workers to chop faster immortals. Or maybe I should have waited a bit longer to DoW on Hannibal with a larger stack. Or maybe it wouldn't have mattered with bad RNG.

Lost my first immortal attacking Hannibal archer/settler in a forest at 78% odds. That pretty much summed up the game from there. Couldn't get enough immortals out fast enough to do anything of consequence.

Shaka DoW while I was at war with Hannibal and took my worker in the process. He had two archers next to my capital. Hannibal moved a archer to the horse to pillage and I attacked with an immortal out of my capital because without immortals the game would be over anyway. Not sure what the odds were, but immortal against archer on open terrain...across river. The archer survived with 0.1hp left. With only a solo warrior in the capital (my army was too far away) Shaka took me out with his two archers.

Oh well, less than 10 min wasted on the game.

edit: wanted to thank you for getting the spoiler thread up early. I can actually remember what happened in the game.

cas
 
Well, I fought to the bitter end, but was very disappointed that I wasted my excellent start.

After conquering Brennus & Shaka before 500BC, and seeing that I had some amazing GP farm sites, I decided to go for a specialist economy and go for space.

After trying it out, I am not sure if this combination works very well at all. I produced 4 GM, all used for trade missions. The 7-8 GS I produced went into 2 Academies, 3 settled and the rest were bulbed.

In the end, Bismarck had just learnt Fusion, while I was learning robotics, with only Ecology to go. Bismarck had already built everything except the engine, and I new I was stuffed. Made a desperate last minute lunge with my tanks for his Aluminium, but I got absolutely flogged by a huge force of fighters/bombers/advanced armor. What amazed me is that Bismarck took all but one of my cities in 2 turns, then seemed to lose interest. His spaceship launched 2-3 turns later.

I think I now know that spaceship victories require cottages, and lots of them. 1 GP farm producing some Merchants is a great idea, but specialists can't power the tech pace fast enough. This was the one highlight of my game, I think I ran 100% research for nearly the whole game.

Some dates:
CS in about 300BC, without Oracle.
Education reached about 400AD.
 
Well, I took my lucky start (see first spoiler)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9531750&postcount=2

I had wiped out the orange team with Immortal rush, and just continued on to Shaka before he gets metal. After marginalizing Shaka to one 1-tile city, took all his tech for peace. Then I went for Feudalism to vassal Bismark, and this also went very smoothly. But Roosi and Ragnar are running away with tech, sort of. I whip a big force of HA's and swords and more and more catapults, thinking I'd take on Ragnar next, but he got Civil Service and instantly had tons of Berserkers which always frighten me. So I stay in Hered Rule and adopt Bhuda to keep Ragnar pleased, even Friendly for a while, and took on Roosi.

I took 4 cities (2 good, 2 crap) and all was well, except I thought I could split my stack and get bot Philadelphia and Washington. I came up short on both cities, by just a unit or two. :mad: Bad decision. So I accept Code of Laws for peace, and start whipping courts to get my economy afloat again. I had Pyramids from Berlin, but am stuck using HR for happiness + relations, so can't enjoy Police State or Repr as much as I could have liked to. But size matters... and I am able to beat Roosi to Rifles/Cavs, and my prodcution is double the rest of the world put together... so I take all Roosi's cities except the islands (I only built 1 trireme and 1 frigate, neither of which ever saw any action), and make another vassal.

This puts me at 62% in land, and I can't get dom without fighting Ragnar, who is at tech parity (and showing higher power than me, but that is a lie). He's got all rifles and cavs and cannons, but I can jump on two of his cities quickly (before counterattack can organize) and go over dom limit at 1610AD.

My first Warlords victory above Emperor level!:D And a military one at that! I'm impressed.

Love the early UU in this one with a crowded map!
Thanks for a fun one!

Slavery is really rather overpowered, I think. It appears to be the key to any military victory, at least at high difficulty levels. Maybe more balance in Civ5?

Edit to add: Aiming for Civil Service before Code of laws is almost always a BAD IDEA. Sure, I wanted mace upgrades, even had my vassal tech Machinery for me... but Bismark won't trade "We don't want to start trading this technology just yet" C'mon, our enemies have maces and you want to hold on to Monotheism and Machinery for youself? Grrr... Anyhow, you get a certain size withouit CoL you will stall, as I did. Fortunately I was far enough ahead by then to be able to recover. But it was dicey for a while there.

Shaka was useful, because any time he had any cash, I would extort it from him. Thanks, Shaka!

Edit to add: I bulbed Chemistry with a GSci, built an academy with another, and the rest of the GSci were settled. Fortunately, I was able to farm a good number of GM's for cash missions. GM's seem to me to be the most usefulo GPersons in a military game. But maybe that's just because of my inexperience with them.
 
I rarely play Warlord and this is a fresh learning play in 2 years. Spamming Immortals, HAs, cats, WEs and achieved a 880AD domination win, hope this is not too bad.

I noticed that there was no deity GOTM last month. Is there a deity WOTM next?
 
I rarely play Warlord and this is a fresh learning play in 2 years. Spamming Immortals, HAs, cats, WEs and achieved a 880AD domination win, hope this is not too bad.

I noticed that there was no deity GOTM last month. Is there a deity WOTM next?
Congrats on you're win. :thumbsup:

We have not done Warlords Deity as it is considered so much more difficult than :bts: that we get few players participating in it. That is why I prepare a Deity version of the save when we have Contender as Immortal. :)
 
Congrats on you're win. :thumbsup:

We have not done Warlords Deity as it is considered so much more difficult than :bts: that we get few players participating in it. That is why I prepare a Deity version of the save when we have Contender as Immortal. :)

I already saw some players took the challenger save.;) Meanwhile, there's adventurer save for players who do not want to play deity, you could attract same number of players to play it if you let the plays from adventurer save be eligible for the award. I hope a true deity WOTM before I leave CIV4.:)
 
Not sure what you mean by a true Warlords Deity game?

I have the impression that choosing difficulty from WB save cause AI getting the same starting units as original save (i.e. 1 settler deity), but you might add those units and barbarian starting techs manually.

My feeling is that the true difficulty of a deity game varies a lot from map and setting. Warmonger sandwich start is mostly not winnable, but if human player is given a peaceful environment to develop, it's usually winnable.
 
I have the impression that choosing difficulty from WB save cause AI getting the same starting units as original save (i.e. 1 settler deity), but you might add those units and barbarian starting techs manually.
The Deity save for this game has units adjusted to deity level as I added them in WB. In future, we will be going to the system you describe as it is easier to manage for staff.

My feeling is that the true difficulty of a deity game varies a lot from map and setting. Warmonger sandwich start is mostly not winnable, but if human player is given a peaceful environment to develop, it's usually winnable.
Perhaps this is true, perhaps it depends more upon units available (UU?) and resources to build them?

Not sure the game would be a true deity if, in preparation, we have to create the conditions necessary for the possibility of a win? It seems a contradiction to me? :hmm:
 
Conquest Victory - 75 AD - Final Score: 44,233

In my previous spoiler, I am 2 cities away from a conquest victory at 1 AD (T115). My stacks of immortals finish the job in 50 AD and I'm given a conquest victory in 75 AD (T118).

In the end, I captured 2 cities and razed 15. I built 65 immortals (still had 19 when the game was over), 3 warriors, 1 worker, 1 work boat and 3 barracks all game. I killed 93 archers, 25 workers, 13 settlers, 9 axes, 7 chariots, 6 spears, 2 swords, 1 warrior, 1 crossbow and 1 horse archer.

The key to this game for me was to send 2 or 3 immortals to each of the AI as quickly as possible. The purpose of these mini stacks is to pillage all sources of copper and iron before too many spears and swords get built.

Once I had taken Hannibal out of the game (T44), I sent almost all of my immortals to the west while only keeping 2 or 3 in the north to keep Shaka in check. That way, the last few immortals built in my three cities could cruise up north in two turns and see some action before the game was over. This worked out nicely as I captured Washington's farthest city to the NW and Shaka's farthest city to the NE on the last turn of the game.

In the hands of a true war monger, this game is probably winnable before 500 BC. I had too many stops and starts in most of my wars and I didn't get my pillaging stacks out soon enough. I also ended the game with over 2,000 gold, so I could have kept one or two more cities, which would have helped crank out a few more immortals when I really needed them. With that said, 75 AD is good for me, especially since I typically struggle to get a win at Immortal.
 
First spoiler here. The aim right from the outset has been for a diplomatic victory.

1 AD -> 500 AD

At 1 AD I had learned construction, built a few catapults and axes to supplement my immortals, and I'm just ready to finish off Hannibal. I'm well prepared, and the war goes reasonably smoothly. Hannibal is gone in 200 AD.

I'm now out to 9 cities with some nicely cottaged land (thanks Hannibal :goodjob:) so time to settle down and see what I can do with the diplo situation.

In 450 AD I learn Civil Service and revolt to Bureau and Caste System. Throughout the game so far I have changed to Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism and now Judaism - always trying to befriend somebody. It seem Bismarck just can't decide what he wants to be!

500 AD -> 1000 AD

I have a pretty decent research machine going. The strategy through here is to backfill techs by targeting ones that Roosevelt doesn't already have. It kind of works, but Bis and Roos are really teching quite fast.

With regards diplomacy - things are pretty straight forward. Viking = bad. Non viking = good. Bismarck asked me into a war with Ragnar, so I obliged. I don't plan on fighting much, just lending moral support.

1000 AD -> 1500 AD

My tech situation improves a bit through here. Oxford Uni is built in the capital in 1070 AD, but I am beaten by Roos to Liberalism in this same year. I beeline towards Mass Media and manage to keep on par with the others (ignoring Ragnar who is backwards) by selling techs as I go. I traded for Gunpowder which I regret since it meant I was no longer able to GS bulb Electricity - the GS opting for Chemistry->Biology instead. No matter, I tech Chemistry and Biology also and they're useful for trade.

1500 AD -> 1760 AD

Mass Media is learned in 1575 AD, and with the help of a revolution to Universal Suffrage for cash rushing and a GE the UN is built in 1600 AD. Now my problems really begin... while I was nice and friendly with Roos and Bis - they also love eachother. Bismarck is elected SecGen on the initial vote, so I'm going to need some magic to rectify this situation.

Ideally - I would convince Bis to become non-Mercantilism and Free Religion so Roos no longer likes his civics or religion. In BtS, this sort of manipulating can be much easier for 2 reasons: 1) spies! 2) Cristo Redentor to quickly change civics to bribe AI into whatever you need. Also, once an AI gets into their favourite civic, you can't bribe them into ANY civics, which is very annoying. Right now though, Bismarck isn't using his favourite, so the plan might just work...

Bah - but of course, Bismarck is SecGen, and calls for stupid Environmentalism for global civic, so I'll get no bonus with Roosevelt for that one!

In the end, it is all for nothing. Despite a visible +2 lead with Roos affections compared to Bismarck, the hidden modifiers are such that when I call a diplo victory vote Bismarck wins the game. Very frustrating!

Final result - Diplomatic Loss to Bismarck in 1760 AD. :sad:
 
Perhaps this is true, perhaps it depends more upon units available (UU?) and resources to build them?

Not sure the game would be a true deity if, in preparation, we have to create the conditions necessary for the possibility of a win? It seems a contradiction to me? :hmm:

Warmonger sandwich start, isolated start, and semi-isolated start are tougher than others. However those starts only count for a small percent of all. My concept of a true deity refers to a common start -- Non isolated or semi-isolated. No aggressive neighbor knocks at your door with 5 Axemans before 2000BC. You have a reasonable space to settle peacefully (~6 cities). I believe >50% of randomly generated map will fall into this start. Of course, if you feel deity AIs getting too much bonus, I won't mind if you bless a gold/gem to human player's capital.:lol:

BTW, I don't think abusing overpowered UU is a true play of a deity game.
 
BTW, I don't think abusing overpowered UU is a true play of a deity game.

I agree. I think the Quechua, Immortal, War Chariot and Praetorian are at least 4 of the over-powered unique units that allow a person to play one or two levels above their heads and still win. I would have had a MUCH harder time winning this game without the Immortal.
 
WooHoo. First immortal win ever in any of the three versions. No early spoiler written, so from the beginning... I got three cities built before it got crowded. Then I built immortals and axes to take out the Oranges and Yellows. That was surprisingly easier than I expected. I stacked my units at the Grey's border to the west and kept building units, but waited too long to attack and my economy was collapsing under the unit expense. I took a couple of cities and had to rethink. Made peace and started on a cultural path. I made progress and avoided war until the late game when the Purples attacked. But, they couldn't put together a land invasion because they couldn't get to me through closed borders with the Greys. They couldn't mount any naval invasion either. A couple of transports of infantry would have torn me apart. All they did was pillage work boats and bombard cities. The Blues then decided to attack the Purples, and that took the pressure off. Made peace by giving up a very poor border city. Cultural Victory in 2013. Huzzah.
 
AI starting units are adjusted to Deity level.
I'm not a big fan of Challenger series games that are played on a different difficulty level, as it's often "cheap" to go a level up for faster teching trading partners in the AIs.

That said, I couldn't pass up the Deity-level unit adjustment.


The Deity save for this game has units adjusted to deity level as I added them in WB. In future, we will be going to the system you describe as it is easier to manage for staff.
In that case, in the future, I'll probably go back to boycotting the Challenger games again.

Honestly, my preferred Challenger games are ones that are played at the same difficulty level, so that players can't get an advantage from tech-trading with higher difficulty level AIs (and thus faster-teching AIs) or from capturing better-developed Cities from higher difficulty level AIs (and thus better City-building AIs).

Take away my starting Warrior. Burn down my Forests. Take away a Gold Resource from the start. Let me "forget" one of the starting techs. Give the AIs extra units (although it sounds like that stuff is a lot of work, so maybe just the nearby AI gets 2 extra Archers or something). Whatever. Make it harder, but make it on the same difficulty level. Then, Challenger players are still faced with an extra set of challenges to overcome, without getting potential advantages over Contender players who have "weaker-playing" AIs. It defeats the purpose to play the Challenger save if doing so means that you get advantages over the Contender level players. I made an exception in this case, though, as the extra Settler and other units for Deity-level AIs really does make for a tough challenge.


Okay, onto the game...

I decided to settle on the Plains Hills square. Pangaea... fast-built Settlers... I figured that I could get out a quick Worker, a Warrior or two, then pump out a quick Settler before all of the land was eaten up.

But, then the Scout uncovered the Gem Resource, so I settled on the OTHER Plains Hills square. Hey, it's Deity. Go big or go home. Either I'm going to die or I'd better have a strong capital so that I can tech up to Iron Working relatively quickly, should we prove not to have a nearby Horse Resource. At least I could Axeman-rush this "Ulundi built on a Copper Resource" City with the luck of having either Copper or Iron nearby, since Axemen would likely eat Shaka's Impis (as long as I could catch them!). Unfortunately, that meant that I was settling with 2 Seafood Resources in my fat cross in a City that wasn't on the Coast, but I'd live with that fact.


By the time that I was contemplating starting to build a Settler, though, the immediate surroundings were already settled. A City to the north, a City to the north-west, and even one to the south-west.

Fortunately, Leif gave us a nearby Horse Resource and that was all that we really needed. Who needs cheap Settlers, anyway?


I struck early, and struck hard. I managed to find the time to sneak in a Barracks before getting the Horse Resource online, so several Combat I and Flanking I Immortals took their wrath out on Hannibal.

I tried to always build up overwhelming odds before striking, so that I'd never lose my momentum.

I captured Hannibal's second City and then his capitol. However, he managed to settle a 3rd City somewhere before I could eliminate him completely.


Shaka had to go next, but he had built WALLS in 3 of his 4 Cities. Okay, time to get 1.5 times the number of Immortals that I'd normally attack with.

I cut Shaka's empire in half, then took his now isolated City, leaving him with 2 northern Cities. He'd keep them for ages, while I used his Archer Attack Parties as free experience and Great General points.


Germany (was it Frederick? He died so long ago that I can't remember) was tough to crack. He had Copper Mined and was just finishing up Mining his Iron. I gathered a huge stack of Shaka-Archer-promoted Immortals outside of the Iron City and struck just as the Iron was Mined, capturing the City and getting my own source of Iron in the bargain.

Then I played a lot of hit-and-run games, as the German Leader had huge stacks of 6 to 8 units running around. I razed a City and then another one, all the while whittling away at his stacks... while he kept rebuilding them.

Finally, I had enough units on the war front to field two stacks of about 8 Immortals each, and the German Leader couldn't figure out which City to defend, so one fell.

Ragnar came into the battle to help me out in taking down the German capital (I was the one to capture it), after which I turned back towards Shaka.

Ragnar could have captured the last German City, but no, he decided to raze it. Then Ragnar proceeded to "steal" Hannibal's last City out from under my nose, which had 2 Gold Resources, while I was distracted with Shaka.

This delay fighting Shaka cost me, as first Roosevelt and then Ragnar got Longbowmen.

Still, I managed to eliminate Shaka and resettled one of his Cities, settling my first self-built Settler in the game.


From then on, it was a long, drawn-out cold war. Eventually, I managed to get a tech that Ragnar didn't know and that he thought was valuable enough to be bribed into war with Roosevelt (the first two such techs that he didn't know weren't "good enough" for Ragnar to go to war).

Then the real fun began. I finally teched Construction and started pumping War Elephants like mad. Still, Ragnar beat me to the front line Cities and was able to capture a City and raze another before I could get enough forces on the war front.

Roosevelt, meanwhile, was fighting using Knights, so my Immortals that ventured into his lands would just get picked off one-by-one.

The turning point of the war came when I decided to make it an "all or nothing" push. 16 Immortals, backed by my first two War Elephants on the scene, sieged an American City. I lost most of my Immortal stack barely scratching the Longbowmen defenders, but the attacks were sufficient to let the War Elephants take down the strongest defenders and then my Immortals marched in, capturing the City right before Ragnar's amazed eyes. :eek2:

It was good that I did so, as that City proved to be a treasure-trove of Wonders, netting me 5 Wonders, including The Great Lighthouse and The Great Library, if I recall correctly. It even came complete with two Holy Shrines (although the Religions were very marginalized ones)! I couldn't have built a better City if I'd done it myself; thanks, Roosevelt!


With enough War Elephants in the field, my Immortals were becoming "safe" from counter-attacks and I was able to position myself to be able to beat Ragnar in capturing ALL of the rest of Roosevelt's continental Cities.


After that war, I saw Ragnar's tech level--Cavalry and soon-to-be Riflemen. Ummm... War Elephants, a few Macemen, the odd Trebuchet, left-over Immortals, and the occasional Catapult on my side of the battle field... well... I could PROBABLY do it, but it would have been an uphill battle. Still, I kept pumping the units, with the tentative plan of attacking.

But then, my approach of "being nice" to Ragnar paid off and I got him up to Friendly status. Wow, that would mean that he wouldn't be able to attack me! Good enough for me!

With 55% of the 66% Domination Land Limit under my control, I retired my armies and headed off to Space.

It was a nerve-wracking game from that point onwards, though, as I checked every single turn to see if Ragnar was still Friendly with me. Three times Ragnar declared war on Roosevelt (those war declaration sound effects were very scary every time that I heard them, even when I knew that Ragnar was going after Roosevelt from getting "too much on his hands" while being Friendly with me), but he couldn't manage to kill Roosevelt off. That fact could have had something to do with all of the military techs that I kept feeding to Roosevelt. :mischief:


Ragnar, at Friendly, could have made for a good tech-trading partner. That is, if he weren't about 14 techs ahead of me in the tech tree. I eventually caught up and passed him with a couple of deep beelines, but more often than not, he'd immediately research the tech that I just finished researching, on the same turn or one turn later, so that I didn't really have much of value to trade to him.


The breaking point came when I used a Great Engineer as part of a Golden Age (yes, I know, it pained me to use one in this manner, but I needed an edge--I'd already used an earlier Great Engineer on the Taj Mahal so I felt more justified by that fact) and used a Great Merchant for a splurge of Gold... with this heavy-push on tech, I eventually got enough of a deep-beeline tech lead to trade my way out of the tech deficit.

At the end of the game, I was up by about 3 Space techs.


Roosevelt even managed to stay alive until the end of the game, although Ragnar declared war on him at the end with masses of Transports, Destroyers, Infantry, Tanks, Fighters, and more against a couple of Riflemen and Grenadiers.

The Americans can thank me for launching my Spaceship and thus preventing them from being eliminated.


I even managed to sneak in The Space Elevator and had it contribute to all of my Spaceship parts. I kind of blame the fact that my late-game tech path was all over the map, mostly to try and get techs that I could use to trade with Ragnar. So, while the teching order was a bit inefficient, I finally got to play a game where I built only 1 Power Plant while managing to complete The Three Gorges Dam, AND got to complete The Space Elevator mid-way through most of my Spaceship parts, such that every Spaceship part got at least some boost from The Space Elevator.


Thanks for a fun game, Leif, and I appreciate the time that you took to pain-stakingly add the Deity-equivalent units on the map! :goodjob:
 
^Great write-up Dhoomstriker!

Amazing how you caught up from such a tech deficit to win Space on Deity level. That's a pretty tough thing to do!
 
I have the impression that choosing difficulty from WB save cause AI getting the same starting units as original save (i.e. 1 settler deity), but you might add those units and barbarian starting techs manually.
As Leif said, it was certainly a Deity-level game. No "single Settler easiness," that's for certain.

As I said, I'm not a fan of the "increased difficulty level but similar-units-as-the-lower difficulty level" Challenger games. In fact, even when the units are adjusted to match the higher difficulty, it's hard to compare the games. If you're good enough to get your game into a good position, you're often playing an easier game than the Contender players.

Although I certainly didn't get a lot of late-game tech trades in my game, I did get the benefit of piggy-backing off of Ragnar's research, which a player in an Immortal difficulty level game might not get.

As for the Barbs, my Scout ran into a Barb Warrior on turn 7. Only the fact that another AI unit killed the Barb saved my Scout. Although, now that I think about it, I can't remember what happened to my Scout, so it must have died to another Barb unit somewhere near the U.S. border.


Warmonger sandwich start... tougher than others...
BTW, I don't think abusing overpowered UU is a true play of a deity game.
Immortals helped with the "warmonger sandwich," but not really much more than Chariots or Axemen would have, at least for the initial Cities that I captured from Hannibal.

What Immortals DID allow was for the pace of the war to continue right away against the second opponent, as I probably lost 1 or 2 units less than I normally would have lost in my first war. At best, they saved about 10 turns on the pace of starting the second war. That factor helped, but most Unique Units will offer some sort of an advantage in their time. If our Unique Unit was a Redcoat or a Cossack, it, too, could have helped to speed up the war in its time.

What Immortals did poorly was have me spamming a single unit type, which meant that I was unprepared when facing Roosevelt. I had the capability of building Swordsmen, and my wars would have gone faster had I done so, but it's easy to get into the "my Unique Unit rules, your army drools" type of mentality.

A similar mistake is often made by players who spam Unique Units like Quechuas, Impis, Praetorians, etc. For example, as soon as that first Axeman shows up, you're in a bit of trouble. And Macemen will eat any of those units alive.

So, building a ton of a Unique Unit often leads to a poorly-mixed army that is vulnerable to certain counters. And the AI cheats in this regard, as it knows what kind of units you have built and it will adjust its unit-type distribution accordingly. Try it--if you build a lot of Chariots and Horse Archers (or their equivalent Unique Units), it "knows" and will build more Spearmen than normal.


I get your point about a "true Deity" game if the AIs don't have the correct number of units.

But, I think that you accidentally carried this argument over to the Unique Unit. I don't see how one game is more or less of a "true" Deity game than another one. I think that you're trying to climb a very slippery slope when you go talking that way. The fact is, whatever criteria you try to come up with for distinguishing a "true" game from a "fake" game, said criteria have nothing to do with Deity level and would be applicable to any difficulty level.


For example, consider the following. What if the map designer designed an Augustus game on a No-Fe (no Iron) map. There won't even be any Hills, so you won't be able to pop Iron. Would that kind of a game be a "true" game to you? I certainly think that we'd get more complaints about having "wasted" the potential to build Praetorians than we would get complaints about a game being "too easy" when you start with Iron in your initial fat cross as Rome.

In fact, we had such a WOTM a few years ago with Iron in our fat cross as Rome--it was even played on Marathon speed, making the Praetorians' value last for even longer--and I don't remember anyone complaining that the game was too easy.


Basically, I think that the complaining is misplaced. I think that you're more upset that you missed out on playing the Deity level because you didn't realise that the starting units were going to be equivalently adjusted for this game. I get that. It's easy to skip over reading the Challenger text and just assume that the game is like a lot of the other XOTM games. Now that you have found out that you missed out on what could be the only Deity WOTM for a while, you're upset for having missed it. I'm sorry that things turned out that way.

What I don't get is taking out your frustrations on the fact that the game had a Unique Unit that was practical and usable (as opposed to say, a Navy Seal) or actually on any other aspect of the game that we played.

If you think that a particular Civ or Unique Unit is overpowered and you don't think that you'll enjoy playing "such an easy game," then don't play the game. If you think that a map position from the initial screenshot is too overpowered to be fun for you, don't play the game (I seem to recall you playing that easy Deity-level BTS game a while back where we were that light-blue coloured Civ (was it with Darius?), though). If you think that the map conditions will be too easy (Pangaea with only 5 opponents, like this game), then don't play the game. Yet, you did play the game.


So, sure, complain that it wasn't extremely-well published that this game was your "one chance for a long period of time" to play a Deity-level WOTM. Complain that you missed out on the action. But try not to carry those complaints over to other aspects of the game. You played it, certainly you had some enjoyment out of it, so kindly thank the map designer for his efforts and try to feel happy about the game that you did get to play. :) We're here to have fun, to learn some things, and to share our knowledge with others--if you got even one of those things, then the game was clearly a success and it doesn't befit a top player like yourself to keep complaining about said game.

Instead, maybe talk about how you managed to leverage some aspect of the game (whether it was your Unique Unit or otherwise) to get yourself into a good position. Share some of your thoughts on how you played the game. We all had access to Immortals yet clearly you played a superior game--I'm sure that many of us would love to hear the details of your game. Let's keep the emphasis on sharing and learning and I think that you'll come to realise that you really did enjoy playing this game and will be more than happy to share how you pulled off such an amazing date. :cool:

I, myself, was at 1220 AD when I was finally prepared to attack Ragnar, only to realise that I did not have to do so. You'd already won the game by this point. Even I have a lot to learn and I will freely admit that fact. So, if you can find the time to do so, please teach us some of your great skills!
 
@ Dhoomstriker

I took a look at my posts again and I found nowhere I complained about the design of this game or mentioned that I did not enjoy the game. All I did is try to persuade Leif to open a deity WOTM next and I am sure there was one in WOTM history.

About your opinion on those UUs, I guess S&T sub-forum is a better place for that issue. Open a thread there, I am pretty sure you will get more feedback than from here.
 
Immortals killed Hannibal and reduced Shaka to almost nothing in my first spoiler.
After that I just rolled over the rest of Shaka, took out Bismarck's capital and most of his cities quite easily.
Then, big surprise, my lone defender in Berlin got killed by the Americans :eek:.

I saw a big army marching over me at this point, and I had almost no real defender!
Slavery is my friend, so are catapults. It took a while, but I got rid of the american stack, took back Berlin (got peace with calendar and other stuff from Bismarck before focusing on the stack) and rebuilt my stack.
America gave me peace and a bunch of gold, I then finished Bismarck, then took care of Ragnar.
Domination victory in 1420AD, for 156k. I was getting ready for cavalrying into America, but didn't need to.

This must be one of my easiest immortal victory.
Certainly due to the power of immortals and permanent wars between AIs more than to my improved skill (this is my first warlords game in ? maybe 2 years).
 
Back
Top Bottom