How is the weather up there?

---

From depths of despair awaken the Razgriz
Its raven wings ablaze in majestic light

Proud JSF General

Well...I have beaten every level of difficulty, with every civ, with every type of victory, and never ONCE used your excessively stupid "perfect" strategy. 

The definition of "perfect" is: "entirely without any flaws, defects, or shortcomings"

So....if this strategy can be beaten, by definition it is not perfect.

And....very nice YouTube video..... 

---

AGE Ambassador
"We are older and we have a lot of disposable income!"

I think the Roman megacity strategy is kind of cheap...

how can you beet the current game of the week in 13 turns or less?

---

Help grow my city

I tried the "perfect" strategy all night last night and held up a good fight until they started coming with boats and then cannons.  Could not fend them off.

 valuthor wrote:

how can you beet the current game of the week in 13 turns or less?

LMAO!

---

AGE Ambassador
"We are older and we have a lot of disposable income!"

 " I am willing to share all my strategies on this forum, but only if I can call people newbs and talk trash on the Civ Rev Dev team for the problems in the game. "

 

Was somebody "touched" as a child ?
nah jus kiddin you seem like a nice guy really...

---

Make love not war - condoms are cheaper

This thread is proof that the internet is a sadistic and terrible place to talk to people...

Who knows maybe your strategy is good, maybe you are a good player but you need to tone it down, you come off as a major jerk. No you don't 'shout' post in all caps and curse, but you are just incredibly arrogant.

 djcool345 wrote:

This thread is proof that the internet is a sadistic and terrible place to talk to people...

Who knows maybe your strategy is good, maybe you are a good player but you need to tone it down, you come off as a major jerk. No you don't 'shout' post in all caps and curse, but you are just incredibly arrogant.

+1!

---

AGE Ambassador
"We are older and we have a lot of disposable income!"

 tmoney1492 wrote:

You know, I'd like to take you seriously, but honestly, it seems like every community you join people dislike you.  As for strategies, do you have a name for the the "strategy" where you blame the fact that someone is beating your Rome mega city strategy on lag and proceed to quit the game.

Video of some awesome "strategy" and the forum I I found it in.

For those of you wondering, Mr Game Theory posted a supposedly unbeatable strategy (in the above forums) involving building a Roman mega city, the video above shows that theory getting beat, but accouding to Mr. Game Theory, it was the lag that made him lose (because he has perfect strategies so it must be the lag...).

The thing I don't get is if you hate the game so much, just trade it in and go play Civ IV.  No one is forcing you to play it...

Thank you, that was the funniest anything in a loonnngggg time. MGT good luck with Strategy Tips..

---

Adapt and Overcome or die trying

Giving advice is, in itself, an arrogant act: it shows a belief that one's knowledge is superior to the advice-seeker.  It can also be viewed like the term 'sensei', which is usually translated as 'master' or 'teacher', but actually has a meaning of 'one who has gone before' (the sensei has experienced certain things that the student has not): not necesarrily arrogant in it's connotations.  Only the ignorant will refuse advice, strategies, tips, tricks, teachings that they do not know.  To learn anything that is worth while requires that we admit our ignorance, and this thread is FULL of people who are so arrogant that, instead of accepting another person's advice (whether they use it or not is up to them), they flame him and insult him.  Always wise to reveal one's ignorance by insulting someone with information.  Is this information the ONLY way to win?  No.  Is it a way to win?  Yes.  Why refuse knowledge? 

 

I agree with the OP: this game is buggy as *** and very exploitable (especially against the AI).

I also agree that most people, when they admit that their own arrogance prohibits them from accepting the views, opinion and advice of others, will find some of these hints very helpful. 

 

One person said he didn't care how many names he was called, as long as he received helpful adivce.  Very good philosophy.  Its a sad, sad modern bleeding-heart world when people are so arrogant to think that teachers should treat them as equals and with kid-gloves, always careful to spare fragile little baby feelings.  A good teacher will never coddle a student.  Perhaps a study of Plato's Republic would help some of you. 

To Mr Game Theory:

Thank you for posting your strategy for everyone to see. Whether it works or not, I do not know, but you must believe in it, because you took the time and effort to write it out for everyone.

To everyone else:

If he thinks that he is a God, let him be. If you have something constructive to write or any additional strategies, then go ahead and post, like he did. If it's to complain about how he perceives himself, take note of the title to the post and go complain somewhere else.

 MATT TARDO wrote:

 One person said he didn't care how many names he was called, as long as he received helpful adivce.  Very good philosophy.  Its a sad, sad modern bleeding-heart world when people are so arrogant to think that teachers should treat them as equals and with kid-gloves, always careful to spare fragile little baby feelings.  A good teacher will never coddle a student.  Perhaps a study of Plato's Republic would help some of you. 

I find it hard to believe that people haven't been taught the simple lesson of 'treat others as you want to be treated yourself".  It's simple and shows a basic respect.  There's a big difference between treating someone with kid gloves/coddling them and coming across as like an idiot who does nothing but insult others. 

Not coddling people and talking down to people like children are two entirely different things that i don't think you seem to have grasped.

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.  - PLATO

Its one thing if he wanted to talk strategy with others, share his megacity idea and listen to others, but no one wants to listen to him beat his chest and feed his own ego about how good he is.  The title of his thread and several of his posts make it clear that this is his attitude. 

 Mr Game Theory wrote:

If this is a place I can have the freedom to speak my mind let me know now or else I will take my perfect strategies and my #1 on the ladder personality somewhere else :D

All negative remarks will always be backed by concrete facts :D

But don't worry, I am quite entertaining and take a full utilitarian approach when I degrade other people :D

Its a tuff compromise so think about it ;)

I thought about it, and... no thanks. Keep your perfect strategies to yourself. There's no utility in degrading people.

-- AI

 MATT TARDO wrote:

Giving advice is, in itself, an arrogant act: it shows a belief that one's knowledge is superior to the advice-seeker.  It can also be viewed like the term 'sensei', which is usually translated as 'master' or 'teacher', but actually has a meaning of 'one who has gone before' (the sensei has experienced certain things that the student has not): not necesarrily arrogant in it's connotations.  Only the ignorant will refuse advice, strategies, tips, tricks, teachings that they do not know.  To learn anything that is worth while requires that we admit our ignorance, and this thread is FULL of people who are so arrogant that, instead of accepting another person's advice (whether they use it or not is up to them), they flame him and insult him.  Always wise to reveal one's ignorance by insulting someone with information.  Is this information the ONLY way to win?  No.  Is it a way to win?  Yes.  Why refuse knowledge? 

 

I agree with the OP: this game is buggy as *** and very exploitable (especially against the AI).

I also agree that most people, when they admit that their own arrogance prohibits them from accepting the views, opinion and advice of others, will find some of these hints very helpful. 

 

One person said he didn't care how many names he was called, as long as he received helpful adivce.  Very good philosophy.  Its a sad, sad modern bleeding-heart world when people are so arrogant to think that teachers should treat them as equals and with kid-gloves, always careful to spare fragile little baby feelings.  A good teacher will never coddle a student.  Perhaps a study of Plato's Republic would help some of you. 

For any of the things you mention above to apply there would have to be a teacher-student or advisor-advisee relationship between the OP and anyone here, which I don't think there is. I don't think giving advise is an arrogant act. Yes, it implies assuming that one's knowledge in the subject at hand will be useful to the advisee, however recognizing that takes wisdom, which I think is what the OP is lacking. To be able to give helpful advise one must be aware, above of that whatever one knows, of what one doesn't know. That one who thinks who knows everything is the greatest of ignorants, and is totally unfit to give advise to anyone. As the great Solomon said: "Be careful not to eat too much honey, for you might have to vomit it".

I am sure Mr Game Theory is, to some extent, knowledgable when it comes to this game, but I in particular don't feel in need of his advise, for I only seek advise from those I perceive wiser than me :-)

-- AI

 Apolo Imagod wrote:

 MATT TARDO wrote:

Giving advice is, in itself, an arrogant act: it shows a belief that one's knowledge is superior to the advice-seeker.  It can also be viewed like the term 'sensei', which is usually translated as 'master' or 'teacher', but actually has a meaning of 'one who has gone before' (the sensei has experienced certain things that the student has not): not necesarrily arrogant in it's connotations.  Only the ignorant will refuse advice, strategies, tips, tricks, teachings that they do not know.  To learn anything that is worth while requires that we admit our ignorance, and this thread is FULL of people who are so arrogant that, instead of accepting another person's advice (whether they use it or not is up to them), they flame him and insult him.  Always wise to reveal one's ignorance by insulting someone with information.  Is this information the ONLY way to win?  No.  Is it a way to win?  Yes.  Why refuse knowledge? 

 

I agree with the OP: this game is buggy as *** and very exploitable (especially against the AI).

I also agree that most people, when they admit that their own arrogance prohibits them from accepting the views, opinion and advice of others, will find some of these hints very helpful. 

 

One person said he didn't care how many names he was called, as long as he received helpful adivce.  Very good philosophy.  Its a sad, sad modern bleeding-heart world when people are so arrogant to think that teachers should treat them as equals and with kid-gloves, always careful to spare fragile little baby feelings.  A good teacher will never coddle a student.  Perhaps a study of Plato's Republic would help some of you. 

For any of the things you mention above to apply there would have to be a teacher-student or advisor-advisee relationship between the OP and anyone here, which I don't think there is. I don't think giving advise is an arrogant act. Yes, it implies assuming that one's knowledge in the subject at hand will be useful to the advisee, however recognizing that takes wisdom, which I think is what the OP is lacking. To be able to give helpful advise one must be aware, above of that whatever one knows, of what one doesn't know. That one who thinks who knows everything is the greatest of ignorants, and is totally unfit to give advise to anyone. As the great Solomon said: "Be careful not to eat too much honey, for you might have to vomit it".

I am sure Mr Game Theory is, to some extent, knowledgable when it comes to this game, but I in particular don't feel in need of his advise, for I only seek advise from those I perceive wiser than me :-)

-- AI

And one of my points was that most people cannot get over themselves to realize that other people have something to offer them.  You don't perceive he is any wiser than yourself, so you will always refuse any advice from him or others like him.

Would you refuse knowledge from someone who is stupid even if you lack that knowledge?  It reminds me of the Chinese Story called The Bookworm in which a man spends his whole life in books with no knowledge of common sense.  When his wife finally proposes to teach him how to make babies (his funny reply was "I just don't understand how we have been sleeping next to each other in bed and have made no babies"), the only way she can convince him to learn is to basically call him stupid in the matter.  So to avoid being called stupid, he learns. 

It's more a matter of being ignorant in that story but it shows that we can learn from all kinds of people - not just people that our own possibly misguided perceptions show to be wiser than ourselves.   

 InfiniteRUSSKY wrote:

 MATT TARDO wrote:

 One person said he didn't care how many names he was called, as long as he received helpful adivce.  Very good philosophy.  Its a sad, sad modern bleeding-heart world when people are so arrogant to think that teachers should treat them as equals and with kid-gloves, always careful to spare fragile little baby feelings.  A good teacher will never coddle a student.  Perhaps a study of Plato's Republic would help some of you. 

I find it hard to believe that people haven't been taught the simple lesson of 'treat others as you want to be treated yourself".  It's simple and shows a basic respect.  There's a big difference between treating someone with kid gloves/coddling them and coming across as like an idiot who does nothing but insult others. 

Not coddling people and talking down to people like children are two entirely different things that i don't think you seem to have grasped.

Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.  - PLATO

Well, you're assuming that the Golden Rule should apply to everyone, and not just weak people who need a "Rule" to defend themselves against those who are more wily, stronger or quicker than they.  Why don't you try to play Civilization using the Golden Rule?  See how far that gets you.  I'm sure your opponents would love it.  Unfortunately, life isn't parables and nice little "rules": some of us don't like to shoot ourselves in the foot.

Plato, being our main source of information on Socrates (who was notorious for making people feel like stupid fools), did not suffer fools gladly.  He freely admitted what he thought of democracy, for example, and was not afraid to say it.  The Republic had no room for idiots in it: if you did not advance acceptably, then you were not acceptable.  He was nice to kids, but that can only last so long. 

All this complaining is the equivalant of taking a walk to a school or karate class and then telling the instructors that they are arrogant pricks for assuming you lack knowledge.  Why even go into the school?  Why go into this thread if only to whine?

...because you can't read the whole title until you enter the thread, and then you realize the OP is an armchair ***.

 

---

I play video games. Not head games.

 MATT TARDO wrote:

Well, you're assuming that the Golden Rule should apply to everyone, and not just weak people who need a "Rule" to defend themselves against those who are more wily, stronger or quicker than they.  Why don't you try to play Civilization using the Golden Rule?  See how far that gets you.  I'm sure your opponents would love it.  Unfortunately, life isn't parables and nice little "rules": some of us don't like to shoot ourselves in the foot.

Plato, being our main source of information on Socrates (who was notorious for making people feel like stupid fools), did not suffer fools gladly.  He freely admitted what he thought of democracy, for example, and was not afraid to say it.  The Republic had no room for idiots in it: if you did not advance acceptably, then you were not acceptable.  He was nice to kids, but that can only last so long. 

All this complaining is the equivalant of taking a walk to a school or karate class and then telling the instructors that they are arrogant pricks for assuming you lack knowledge.  Why even go into the school?  Why go into this thread if only to whine?

Not sure what you mean by what I put in bold. I personally think you can use the golden rule and smash your opponents because after all, it is "only a game". I would rather people I play games with not be arrogant fools. Like the OP, I too have knowledge. I know basic math, I know what wind feels like, I know how to cook food. But that doesn't mean I should go off sounding like a retard on crack because I do have that knowledge.

 

---

I play video games. Not head games.

I think it's absolutely retarded how many people wasted their time trying to argue with the OP instead of discussing strategies... All right now that my opinion of everyone in this thread is known, let's get down to business.

I am pretty new to this game, but I am a decent player. King is easy, but when I tried Emperor I got annhilated. I finished 4th. I just couldn't keep up with the A.I.'s technology and military. Plus the Japanese researched almost every single tech in the game... it was ridiculous.

I was just wondering what are some general, easy changes I can make to my game without dealing with the Mega City stuff. I start off with whatever Civ I feel like playing, I don't have a favorite, then build 3 warriors to make an army. While I'm building the 2nd and 3rd warriors, I explore with the first one and get as much gold as possible. When I reach 100 gold, I get the settlers and make another city. I use my capital to make another group of settlers and make a 3rd city. I usually just focus on these 3 cities and make them each very powerful. From here, I don't know what to really focus on and just wing it according to the situation I'm in.

What changes can I make?

 MATT TARDO wrote:

And one of my points was that most people cannot get over themselves to realize that other people have something to offer them.  You don't perceive he is any wiser than yourself, so you will always refuse any advice from him or others like him.

Would you refuse knowledge from someone who is stupid even if you lack that knowledge?  It reminds me of the Chinese Story called The Bookworm in which a man spends his whole life in books with no knowledge of common sense.  When his wife finally proposes to teach him how to make babies (his funny reply was "I just don't understand how we have been sleeping next to each other in bed and have made no babies"), the only way she can convince him to learn is to basically call him stupid in the matter.  So to avoid being called stupid, he learns. 

It's more a matter of being ignorant in that story but it shows that we can learn from all kinds of people - not just people that our own possibly misguided perceptions show to be wiser than ourselves.   

Let me reply to you with a famous quote by Galileo:

I never met a man so stupid I could not learn something from him.

I am not saying I cannot learn anything from him, like I said before, I'm sure that is the case, I am sure he is very knowledgable in the subject matter. I am just choosing not to, as I don't see him as a fit advisor. There's a difference there. And to make things clear (since I don't like people putting words in my mouth) I never called him stupid. I don't think he's stupid, all the contrary, he's probably too smart for his own sake, and that is what blinds him and robs him of much needed humility.

Of course if I thought he was the only source for knowledge I needed, I'd be stupid not to listen to him. But that is not the case here :-)

I am sorry if you feel alluded in some way, or maybe he's your friend and feel like stepping up for him. I am not coming here to insult him (as you so quickly came up and try to do to me) or offend him in any way. I am just trying to point out that sometimes a certain level of civility is preferred in most types of interactions.

Since I don't want to fall into any type of odd exchange with anyone, I will make this my last post on the matter as I think I have clearly stated my point. I just wanted to clarify what was exactly what I said. I haven't called anyone here stupid. All I said was I didn't think he as wise as I :-)

To MATT, take what you must and just leave the rest.

-- AI

I'd like a perfect stragedy for winning tech on deity difficulty please, but using one of the scenarios.

"As for Tmoney you obviously have a very biased opinion/negative opinion of me"

Geez, really?  I wonder why that might be? 

I mean, you come across as such a likeable person, you know?

 

Just so everyone knows, the strategy that MGT uses is known as an exploit, and has already been patched in Europe.  MGT continues to use it though, and has been using it since the demo.  It should be patched in the US soon.

Also, see this thread where he tries to accuse me of cheating, when it was his Xbox that froze (evidence inside) :

http://forums.xbox.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=21580950

MGT is already banned from countless other forums including the official 2K forums, and I'm thinking we should take bets on how long it takes for him to get banned from here, and even Xbox Live.  His language in-game was horribly offensive.

You do realize that making all of these posts and displaying a long list of anger towards me from the start on incidents before we even met ohh so "out of the blue" has pretty much sealed the deal on your fake account getting banned and your real account with the same IP getting banned? Im sorry but you do realize that its pretty much game over for you Oaken Poem. Thanks for making the Xbox live teams job a little easier. ;)

---

[Code of Conduct - Attacking others/Profanity]

I watched that game on the link and the only one being immature was the guy filming it, not MGT.

---

MAJ B SAYS FLY ARMY!!!

 C4ST4NED4 wrote:

 Mr Game Theory wrote:

If this is a place I can have the freedom to speak my mind let me know now or else I will take my perfect strategies and my #1 on the ladder personality somewhere else :D

 

You need to work on a strategy to win at life. Basic strat for life: Don't act like an &$$h0le or no one will like you.

That's a good strategy.

in before lock :)

other thread was locked.

 

---

I play video games. Not head games.

 POPPIN FRESH18 wrote:

TECH VICTORY ON DEITY STRATEGY

 

my strategy on deity is if i really want to win i will only make one city. when i start i will manage my workers on the apples until all spots are maxed and the population goes up. then i will build a court house and put all workers on the science squares. i wont worry about an army until other civs wage war on me because they want my knowledge. all the while ill have 1 warrior scouting for artifacts and getting gold from barbarians. once the other civs realize im going to get a tech win, i make modern infantry and batlle ship armies. i still have never been defeated when i have a modern army in defense at my base. once i get my defenses i continue my goal for a tech win my pumping out science and making universitys, librarys, wondors, great scientists etc. soon enough i'll research space and then i'll switch all my squares to production and put all the rest to work in the city. i'll make a new componet to the spaceship every turn until it only takes about tens years to get to the new planet. once it launches i'll have fun fending off other civs and launching a nuke. this strategy has worked for me 90% of the time. the other 10% is another civ getting a culture win but you can build a nuke and bomb them if they get to close to winning before you do.

This strategy is a success because you only have to worry about one city the whole game instead of trying to defend 3 or 4 when you get close too winning.

 

Hope my strategy helps for anyone who is stuck on deity!!!

 

-POPPIN

Sounds good...I'll try that. Sid Meier would have Agreed that sounds like a good story.