What is the RB's view of premature retiring? Are you ordered to finish every game NO MATTER WHAT, or can you retire early if it's too late in the game and you're too far behind?
|
Premature Retiring
|
Mike Lemmer Wrote:What is the RB's view of premature retiring? Are you ordered to finish every game NO MATTER WHAT, or can you retire early if it's too late in the game and you're too far behind? It's not liked, but a partial report is better than no report. Only a very few select games have a reporting mandate. Plus, nobody will really ever know. The goal is "fun", not torture. If a game requires reporting, it will be very clearly stated. And, even then, not having time to finish happens. Don't worry about. If you have something to report, great. If not...well, we'll miss hearing what happened, but that's about it. Note, this is all from an "As I understand it", not gospel truth. For example, barring an anamoly in the time-space continuum, I'm not going to finish Adventure 2 on time. I'll probably still report what I did to, though. Arathorn Mike Lemmer Wrote:What is the RB's view of premature retiring? Are you ordered to finish every game NO MATTER WHAT, or can you retire early if it's too late in the game and you're too far behind? Play what you enjoy. If a game stops being fun, stop playing. Games that are scored will either state or imply what an incomplete game will do to your standing. If you want your partial result to be scored, then submit your info as normal (after Closing Day). I imagine that if you get a reputation as someone who often halts games early, that your report readership may suffer some as a result, but the occasional incomplete game won't matter. Adventure Two is the first of our "Extreme Adventures" and we're not kidding about the extreme part!  - Sirian
Fortune favors the bold.
January 13th, 2006, 16:34
(This post was last modified: January 14th, 2006, 00:37 by Mike Lemmer.)
My personal opinion is "stop when the game quits being interesting". I ask myself two questions: "Do I have a reasonable chance of catching up?" and "Would I learn anything if I continued?" If the answer to both questions is no, I stop.
My motto is to usually stop when the game becomes torture
 Other wise, I try to stick it out to the end 8) (especially on multiplayer). I don't think there is any need to spend time slaving over a game that isn't fun when you could be enjoying a new game. Like Sirian said though, if you are dropping out every other game, I don't think many people will be reading any of your reports (finished or not).
C4P Ladder Player
Mike Lemmer Wrote:*snip* I'm not sure what part of "no spoilers" is not registering for you. I was happy to answer your question, but then you turn around and (again) post more spoiler info about your results from an Open event. That has got to stop! It is the number one taboo in this community. Your question was fine, but talking about an Open game is not. You are worried about the rules, but are failing to adhere to the most important rule of all. Please edit your post and remove any mention of your game results. Thank you. To everybody reading this: No Spoilers means ABSOLUTELY NO INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GAME, RESULTS, VICTORY OR DEFEAT. Nothing. Nada. Zip your lip and save it for Closing Day. If you have a question about the rules, ask it without referring to details from your game. If you cannot do that, then submit your question to the game sponsor via private means. People who are still playing deserve to enjoy their game unspoiled by your experience. The only thing you can say is whether you are playing, have finished, or have finished your report. No hint, no details, no information whatsoever is allowed to be posted prematurely. "No spoilers" means NO spoilers. I don't care whether you think your spoiler is significant or not. I don't care whether you agree with the rule or not. This is our way, and if you are participating in our events, it is your responsibility to observe and respect this boundary. We have an influx of new community membership, and I want to welcome new players to the fold. However, everybody incoming must learn not to discuss Open events. That's the first thing to learn and absorb if you are interested in hanging out with us. Thank you, and I hope that everybody is enjoying their Civ gaming. - Sirian
Fortune favors the bold.
Knupp715 Wrote:My motto is to usually stop when the game becomes torture That's a good motto. Last night in multiplayer, I did a really  move because I was not used to simultaneous turns yet. I left my capital undefended, and I thought I still had a turn to whip archers because usually in SP enemy units do not move once it is your turn. I didn't have time. Maniac wanted to play the game out, and got increasingly frustrated as this 2v2v2, myself and Maniacmarshall, 2 pubbies, and 2 ai's (humans that dropped). As the night progressed, we had more and more 'battles of thermopylae', except thewere were at St Pete founded on a hill surrounded by thick jungle. We overturned odds and counterattacked any units entering our territory. If the enemy were me or MM or sulla or anyone on this board, we'd be dead, but instead the humans were competely pitiful--barely pillaging at all, never gaining access to ivory (we made efforts to prevent that, but they should've tried harder). We had two cities (total) in face of their 4-7. They didn't expand, they barely had any science. We got axemen and eventually ivory against their stacks and stacks of swordsmen, axemen and finally catapults. Turn after turn they would attack, and turn after turn I would send reinforcements via my road network, and regular use of whip while mining a bronze mine. Morred had the honor of witnessing the final battles against Beijing (MM was Qin, I was Cathy). They ran out of gas, expending all their attacks on weakend soldiers and we had one chokonu left at .4 health (managed to build two for the final battles via teamwork--my workers, and Maniac's whip). They were afraid they were going to lose. To be honest, if I had that large of an attack force (about 4-8 stacks of 10 units each, easily over 50 units), and couldn't take one city which was defended by less than 1/4 my giant attack force, I'd be worried too. But, they were so underwhelming they didn't prioritize pillaging anything important (which were our military road networks and ivory and iron, though they pillaged ivory once, we countered and rebuilt it next turn) The humans left, and we chatted and continued. In the turns following that, we counter attacked, drove off their attack force, and took two of Spain's cities, including their capital. You know what they did? They whipped their cities down to population 1. 1! The AI actually played their civs better than the humans did. Early on, before I got my capital razed, we had 5 archers at MM's base, why I didn't ask him for a few... is a lesson learned now. I should've asked, and he would've backed me and my new settler up). If that wasn't the case, we would've easily rolled that game. We had every advantage in terms of teamwork and playing the most of your civ. We grabbed religions first, we had military techs up fast, we even popped archery from a hut... instead... Beat wave after wave of noobish axemen and swordsmen, most of which didn't even promote to City raider until Beijing.
Another thing to keep in mind when you decide whether or not to retire is the diffuculty of the game itself. In the Civ3 Epics, for example, we had only one victory in Epic 12. The point of the game wasn't even to win as much as it was to do the best you could in a difficult scenario. Certainly retire when the game is no longer fun, but don't feel like you have to post a win to be successful here, either.
I honestly tried this adventure and I got hammered so hard it's not even funny.
An early attack by ceasar was so barely beaten off but crippled my already crap start. Managed to get hindu and worked on both casar and mao much like sulla's game. Actually the way the game played out is exactly like sullas down to the gem pop on the isolated fishing town. Cept I lack the raw skill he has and failed to take anything close to irontown. I think we have similar playing styles As I used extreme missonarries to steer mao and casar to my side and cowered behind them all game. The game just devolved from there. Mao extincted mansa just like sullas game but vicky didn;t play the backstabbing game so mao and casar ate her as well. From mid game 600 AD I figured... Quote:thinking goal for this game is just LIVE much less win. that's from my partial report note tab autosaved for me. I ended up watching mao completely eat vicky then turn on alex and sally who beat him back... barely. I did manage to see al gore's face smiling at me in 1910ish and I just turned off the pc in disgust at myself and watched dodgeball again. By my goals, I won, but a phyrric victory indeed. The partial turnlog is all that's left as I was a bit overzealous cleaning out civ to be able to load up Dracas rb-10 so lost all screens etc. How that capitol was not made a costal town eludes me.. one of the first things I did was move the EFFING capitol. That game really depressed me in ways I'll not forget. A learning experience yes, fun? debatable. It really placed me in a foul mood the next day though. Again though , after reading sulla's report I'm stunned how similar my play style is to his... just without all innate skill Arathon complains about passive civs, whereas sulla and I see monster clashes between AI civs almost every game. Something about how we play the game.Anyway, after reading the basis for RB just now I ran across this line... Quote:f you want to join an RB associated game, you do NOT have to be good. But if you're looking to learn, have fun, and can respect others in the game with civil posts and playing in a timely fashion, you're welcome! RB seems like a good place to call home, if a Liq may. I'll try and be a little less hard on myself for the next adventure. Cheers! -Liq |
