While giving the AI no numerical advantage is certainly desirable, in reality computer players aren't actually intelligent. I think adhering to certain principles can damage a design. Sure, no one has to use it, but it's possible to learn a few things about game design, even at the mod level, if you're willing to listen and digest what players have to say. I think criticism is valuable, even for a freely available mod. If you have communication problems, maybe you should consider the idea that you're viewing everything that people have said to Chris through a filter? Very few here seem to see things as they appear to you. Even I, who suck at communication, couldve been more clear on that. GreenGoo wrote:You should have said that then. I thought I had a record high score in the bag. That UN loss really pissed me off, though. That is the challenge level that I like: when victory is rare, it's especially sweet. I very seldom win by any method (I always disable the space race victory condition). This means building more farms that conventional wisdom advises. So I've started going for big populations and lots of specialists. I recently discovered that specialist citizens pump up your score pretty seriously - not to mention generating more great people. I guess I neglected the diplomatic game while I was exterminating my neighbors. I thought I was going to do it in my last game - I had a 300-point lead in the early 20th century and was just securing my continent, when somebody on the other continent won the UN vote. What are some of the things you do to improve your score on Prince? I can win sometimes, but my scores always suck. Ironrod wrote:I'm happy with the challenge level at Prince. With Civ 4, I haven't ventured above Emperor. With Civ 3 I found Deity too hard to be really fun, though I did win now and then. With Civ 1 and 2 I had no trouble getting ridiculous wins on the hardest difficulty. I do know they made the hardest levels much, much harder. A proper test would require someone who had never played Civ before. For that matter, I'll never recapture the fumbling naiveté of my first game of Civ 1. I'm pretty sure they eased things back a bit on the lowest difficulty with Civ 4, but I know the game too well to honestly assess that. By extrapolation, I imagine there are people out there who might have difficulty with the lowest setting of Civ 4. I remember Civ 3 was a surprise for me, how quite challenging it was even on the lowest difficulty setting. I was actually more worried I'd find out he couldn't beat the game on Settler, and felt defensive about that. I just did not see why he thought it important to do so, or why he expected there would be an audience. He's certainly entitled to do whatever he likes to his copy. I knew it was going to be tricky questioning his decision to do this, since people can be awfully defensive. I'm still trying to digest his nasty response to Zurai.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |