Defensive terrain - Crutch for bad tacticians
Instruction manuals - Crutch for bad improvisors
Tranmissions - Crutch for bad drivers
Money - Crutch for bad thieves

How about "Transmissions - a clutch for bad drivers!"

Venger
If you don't like WLT*D, don't use it. Next thing, you'll be complaining about building cities in mountains.

I usually don't use it myself. But the idea of recruiting people to your cities by with "social spending" or whatever is not unrealistic. The overall effects can be too extreme, but as everyone is saying this is a game, not reality.

Chess is a war simulation. It not very realistic. A few people like it anyway, and its hung around for a while.

Civ2 is extremely realistic compared to any game of similar scope and intent. It is also a fun game.

Is 76 million population growth in 19 years (turns) realistic?

See USA, 1946-1964 (a.k.a "The Baby Boom"). I challenge any CivII player to match this type of growth.

quote: Originally posted by Ming on 05-09-2000 08:09 AM Venger... "I knew people would get bugged by it. I actually tried to take Crustacean's head off, but Ming nuked that post..." "Well, looks like Ming nuked my response. After all that hard work to clean it up, his post is an HTML mess..." HUH??????? I have not done anything in this thread except to post, you must be mistaken.

I *****slapped him in a post, and I DID read it in the thread. But now it's gone. Figured you nuked it...

Venger

quote: <font size=1>Originally posted by Canadian War Beaver on 05-08-2000 09:54 PM</font> Venger and co........ wltkd is no more unrealistic than adding caravans to the wonder production or to be more precise , starting a wonder , losing out on it and transfering the shields to another wonder.

Redeploying production is not nearly as disconcerting as what can be done with WLTXD.

quote: the hoover dam is in no way similar in pieces to the cure for cancer..... the game tries to be realistic, but alas it can only go so far we already beat the realism topic of civ to death last millenium, so if its realism your looking for, maybe a computer flight sim is more your spead.

The most realistic part of Civ2 is that when playing last stages it seems to take one year to play one year...

quote: However, i like your stance and there is nothing wrong with your opinion, keep up the good work and watch the debate continue , after all, thats what these forums are for

Thanks, just wanted to bounce the topic around a little. Again, it seems too powerful to me...

Regarding the growth rate itself, WLTxD cannot compete with the growth rate experienced by the city I live in during the decades following 1849!

I love that phrase "crutch for the weaker player" - I think my playing style requires a full-fledged walker!

- mindseye

quote: Originally posted by Tom DeMille on 05-09-2000 11:42 AM Maybe we should start threads like: Wonders - crutches for the weaker player? Caravans - crutches for the weaker player? More than 1 city - a crutch for the weaker player? Democracy/Fundy/Commie - a crutch for the weaker player? Not playing Multiplayer - a crutch for the weaker player?

Okay, so does this mean you actually have something to ADD to the thread?

quote: My point is, agains't the AI, even at Deity, there is nothing that is essential to winning. Skipping any particular wonder or government type will not make you loose.

How does that relate to the power of WLTXD and whether or not it's easy to abuse?

quote: Originally posted by Sten Sture on 05-09-2000 01:08 PM LoL - How about: Defensive terrain - Crutch for bad tacticians Instruction manuals - Crutch for bad improvisors Tranmissions - Crutch for bad drivers Money - Crutch for bad thieves

You are a singular wit.

quote: I can't believe this thread exists...

So SKIP IT. God people, if you have nothing to add, then freaking go DO SOMETHING ELSE.

If you think WLTXD is a perfectly reasonable tactic, used to good effect, so be it, please say so. If you think it's too powerful, too easy, then say so. But if you aren't very clever, but really think you are, feel free to post your LoL posts down at the local gay bar, or Homeless Shelter, or some other place...just not on this thread.

quote: Originally posted by Ming on 05-09-2000 02:02 PM Oh come on... give him a break. Everybody is welcome to their opinion. While I will disagree with him on whether the designers intended us to use WLYD's to crank up population, I have no problem with him stating that it could be considered a crutch. I will disagree with him on that too, but he is just stating an opinion.

Disagreement I can take.

quote: And what fun would be these forums be with out a difference of opinion

Apparently some of these guys are just amusing the hell out of each other...

quote: Originally posted by The Mad Viking on 05-09-2000 02:40 PM If you don't like WLT*D, don't use it.

Gee, you know, I NEVER thought of that. Jeez...

Has anyone noticed I've posted at least twice asking the best way to remove it from the game in the rules.txt or wherever? Trust me I DON'T use it...

quote: Next thing, you'll be complaining about building cities in mountains.

Why? You are appropriately handicapped by building in mountains.

quote: I usually don't use it myself. But the idea of recruiting people to your cities by with "social spending" or whatever is not unrealistic. The overall effects can be too extreme, but as everyone is saying this is a game, not reality.

I agree with the too extreme part. Again, it's not that WLTXD exists, but that it can be utilized to ridiculous ends. As to reality, I don't find it realistic within the scope of the game.

quote: But shouldn't a good player be able to win the game using the correct strategies?

Part of my contention is that a good player should be able to win without what I consider a questionable strategy.

quote: WLT_D is but one of many strategies. Like any strategy, you give up X now in the hopes of gaining Y later.

I'm not sure I'd call it a strategy, I'd more likely refer to it as a tool. Or crutch...

quote: Given the severe restrictions placed on Rep/Dem gov't, there needs to be some incentive to switching to these gov'ts.

Severe? I really find the restrictions are more than offset by the advantages, all without the population growth aspect of WLTYYYD...

quote: Why is growing your civ via WLT_D less valid than plunking down a large number of small cities?

I'm not sure why there is an attempt at a correlation between these two. Frankly, I find ICS more digestible than WLTYYYD, probably since I witness WLTYYYD firsthand and what it can do in my own Civ. I could add 10% more luxuries and explosively grow my Civ. But that's too easy, and cheap.

quote: If you want to play a perfectionist style game, WLT_D is the only way to do it. How else can your 10 cities win against the Mongols' 40+ cities unless yours are larger?

As the geniuses at Hasbro took the Mongols out of the Extended Game in ToT, I'm not sure...but against any aggressive Civ - find a way. Probe their rear (God that's an uncomfortable sentence to type). Attack en masse. Take and consolidate. Whatever. Sometimes you may lose. But saying "I know, I'll whore luxuries for 10 turns so I can double my size", just seems too easy.

quote: Also remember that unchecked population growth brings on pollution. Mass Transit and Hydro Plants are a long way off from Rep and Dem. So while you might get into the low teens with WLT_D, you are basically stuck there throughout the rest of the mid-game.

I imagine most of my problem with WLTYYYD is in the later game, maybe Railroad on, when most players should have good infrastructure of roads. It's not growing your capital from 5 to 9 that's so bad, it's growing it from 15 to 32 that really chaps my hide.

quote: In the area of realism, the "standard" method of population growth is exactly the opposite of what you expect in a real population, i.e. It takes more and more time for a city to grow each time a new citizen is added.

I find it most realistic. Diminishing returns applies here.

quote: You can accomplish the same thing with ICS.

No way. ICS is slower to develop, and is anathema to Rep/Dem. At least I would expect it so considering the higher city overhead required in those governments.

quote: Or capturing your neighbors cities.

Not the same.

quote: Or using Spies.

Another crutch - spy pimping.

quote: Or demanding tribute.

Not under these govs.

quote: Or sharing techs in an alliance.

What's an alliance?

quote: Or sending caravans across the seas.

I never trade with a foreign city. Unless I'm about to sack it...

quote: Also you are not correct in claiming that you are merely "taking 12 turns" to come out ahead. In truth, you must have already spent many dozens of turns setting up for WLT_D: a) building infrastructure, b) improving land, c) pursuing "peaceful" science goals. All the while you are making your civ more and more vulnerable because the above also implies: a) not building a good military, b) not settling and claiming new land, c) having obsolete units.

Isn't that part of good management under of Rep/Dem? I don't see city bloat as a piece of that puzzle.

quote: My experience in exactly the opposite. I find it much easier to win via conquest than via the space ship. In conquest games, I never bother with Rep or Dem. YMMV of course.

The first spaceship I ever built was in ToT. And that was only to go conquest THAT planet...

I played bloodlust only in Civ2. Why? Too easy to build the spaceship. Plus, spaceship, big whoop. Try landing 25 divisions on the Carthaginian homeland for a mass invasion. Now THAT'S a challenge...

Oh, and as to governments...I never play Communist or Fanatic. Blech. Just a moral hangup or something...kinda like never being able to play the bad guy in other games...

------------------
The Mad Monk

"The capacity of a grass leaf to grow from the sheath
at its base is a useful adaptation to herbivore grazing.
It has also resulted, over the eons, in the piteous
spectacle of thousands of hominids vibrating behind
their lawnmowers from spring to fall."

quote: Originally posted by The Mad Monk on 05-09-2000 10:31 PM So, who wants to guess when the Horse is gonna trample this young'on for invading his territory (and successfully, I might add)?

Okay, I gotta ask, what are you talking about? This can't be to my credit I'm sure...

quote: Originally posted by Venger on 05-09-2000 10:30 PM I played bloodlust only in Civ2. Why? Too easy to build the spaceship. [...] Oh, and as to governments...I never play Communist or Fanatic. [...] Venger

God, Venger, we are all *so* impressed at your Civ-playing abilities. All the rest of us whining, WLT_D-using, luxury-whoring, spy-pimping weaklings are completely unable to compete with your pure and viruous method of play.

I bow at your feet and request that you enlighten me with you infinite wisdom about how the game should be played. I will never again move a unit or build anything without first asking you, Venger, if doing so is acceptable in the Pure and Virtuous Method of Civ-Playing.

Have I made my point? No? Did I at least amuse you? *No*?! Well, I sure as heck amused myself. :-)

Bottom line...I don't think there is a way in which you can remove WLTLD from the game. Since it has been programmed within the core program and not within the text files there probably is no way to remove it, unless you are gifted enough to open up the program and actually rewrite it to your liking. How that is done is a mystery to me.

I hope that this topic was brought up as a legit topic and not as an attempt to "dethrone" AH by being more controversial and clever than he, because that's not possible. I think AH is the only person on these boards that can create such an uproar that people start getting pissed off at each other. It is his art and he is good at it. It's funny too. This thread is getting there, but it has a way to go.

quote: Part of my contention is that a good player should be able to win without what I consider a questionable strategy.

Yes, but my point is that you must be a good player to successfully pull off WLT_D. If a poor player could do it easily, then I would consider it questionable.

quote: Severe? I really find the restrictions are more than offset by the advantages, all without the population growth aspect of WLTYYYD..

W/o WLT_D Rep/Dem's only adavantage is one more trade arrow per developed square. Disadvantages are many: senate, unit support, unit unhappiness, no martial law, gov't collapse potential, settlers eat 2 food.

quote: Frankly, I find ICS more digestible than WLTYYYD,

But growth is much more explosive with ICS and you can do it much earlier in the game.

quote: too easy, and cheap.

Compared to ICS? No way. For ICS, just do the following: 1) Build Setter, 2) Found new city, 3) Build Warrior, 4) Repeat. Far easier and cheaper. Each city adds to population, science and production.

quote: Me:If you want to play a perfectionist style game, WLT_D is the only way to do it. How else can your 10 cities win against the Mongols' 40+ cities unless yours are larger? You: As the geniuses at Hasbro took the Mongols out of the Extended Game in ToT, I'm not sure...but against any aggressive Civ - find a way. Probe their rear (God that's an uncomfortable sentence to type). Attack en masse. Take and consolidate.

You missed the first part I said. I want to play perfectionist, not warmonger. It is of course easy to reduce the AI to a few cities via war. At that point you can win any way you want. But if your going to do that, you are not playing perfectionist.

quote: just seems too easy

So the Mongols spent their resources founding a bunch of small crappy cities while I spent my resources developing a few cities - and I should be punished with less trade, science, production? Why are the Mongols's 40 size 4 cities more valid than my 10 size 16 cities? We spent resources differently and achieved the same thing. I guess I don't see your point.

quote: it's growing it from 15 to 32 that really chaps my hide.

Of course the AI is not shy about doing this. In reality, most cities would require severe terraforming to grow into the 30's.

quote: No way. ICS is slower to develop

Disagree. The effects of ICS are immediate while preparing for WLT_D only pays off far down the road. As such, I would expect the rewards to be better.

quote: I never trade with a foreign city

You lose half the value of a trade route by trading with yourself.

quote: Isn't that part of good management under of Rep/Dem? I don't see city bloat as a piece of that puzzle.

quote: Originally posted by Venger on 05-09-2000 10:01 PM Disagreement I can take. Venger

You don't seem to be able to do as you say if you feel the need to "slap" someone when they dissagree as I did.

You have an interesting point but you are not experienced with using WLPD and other posters replies shows they feel the same way.

My suggestion is give it a try, and maybe you will also see it as a strategy and not a crutch. I also said I did not think the logic you used in drawing your comparisons was consistant.

That sums up my points if you want to take another stab at "slapping" me LOL. It is Crustacian with an "i" tho

If you "slap" me for this then your words mean nothing when you say you can take being dissagreed with

quote:
Originally posted by Venger on 05-09-2000 10:01 PM
Disagreement I can take.
Venger

So let me get this straight: When you get offended by someone who dissagrees you slap em and take their head off? Or do you take their head off first then slap em?

quote: <font size=1>Originally posted by JERandall on 05-10-2000 09:53 AM</font> God, Venger, we are all *so* impressed at your Civ-playing abilities. All the rest of us whining, WLT_D-using, luxury-whoring, spy-pimping weaklings are completely unable to compete with your pure and viruous method of play.

What a jack ass. Do you have anything to add to the thread besides your overpowering ignorance?

quote: I bow at your feet and request that you enlighten me with you infinite wisdom about how the game should be played. I will never again move a unit or build anything without first asking you, Venger, if doing so is acceptable in the Pure and Virtuous Method of Civ-Playing.

What are you, 12 years old?

quote: Have I made my point?

Did you have one?

quote: No? Did I at least amuse you? *No*?! Well, I sure as heck amused myself. :-)

I imagine you must do quite alot of that.

quote: Originally posted by The Mad Monk on 05-10-2000 10:29 AM Because of my playstyle, which involves having twice as many settlers/engineers as cities (after the initial exapnsion), and buying economic improvements, I can get democracies into "perpetual WLT*Ds" fairly easily. I set lux to 20% and never change it after that; coupled with universal marketplaces, banks, and fully roaded terrain, most cities jump from three to eight in next to no time. Stock Exchanges typically push them to twelve, and superhighways often take them as far as they can go.

I do something very very similar, but my cities are usually large by the time I roll out the big happiness improvemets, so when WLTYYYD hits, I normally have mostly size 5 or larger cities, many up at 12. I also roll to Republic early, so early that 20% doesn't do a whole lot...I usually have to use 30 or even 40% to keep order during my first few turns of Rep. Now mind you, were talking early in the game...

quote: Originally posted by Bohlen on 05-10-2000 10:12 AM Wow. What a thread. I'm here late, but here goes. Bottom line...I don't think there is a way in which you can remove WLTLD from the game. Since it has been programmed within the core program and not within the text files there probably is no way to remove it, unless you are gifted enough to open up the program and actually rewrite it to your liking. How that is done is a mystery to me.

Not a chance of me doing it either...

quote: I hope that this topic was brought up as a legit topic and not as an attempt to "dethrone" AH by being more controversial and clever than he, because that's not possible. I think AH is the only person on these boards that can create such an uproar that people start getting pissed off at each other. It is his art and he is good at it. It's funny too. This thread is getting there, but it has a way to go.

Very legit topic. I had read numerous other threads with statements like "Once I WLTYYYD and grow all of my cities...". It just seemed so weak. That's why I posted it.

quote: Good topic nonetheless.

Thanks, I hoped for some more intelligent discussions, but these will have to do...

Venger
P.S. Your's is not one of the more inane posts...

quote: Yes, but my point is that you must be a good player to successfully pull off WLT_D. If a poor player could do it easily, then I would consider it questionable.

I guess I don't see how it takes a whole lot of effort to pull off. In fact, it seems rather easy if you are growing a thriving republic to simply bump the luxury rate to go into city swell mode.

quote: W/o WLT_D Rep/Dem's only adavantage is one more trade arrow per developed square. Disadvantages are many: senate, unit support, unit unhappiness, no martial law, gov't collapse potential, settlers eat 2 food.

That extra trade is huge. In addition, I also believe the rate of corruption is lower under Republic, removed under Democracy, and all bribery is disallowed. I consider those huge advantages.

I don't often play as Democracy, don't really know why, just tend to stay Republic, which fits my Romans nicely...

quote: But growth is much more explosive with ICS and you can do it much earlier in the game.

It depends on the level of ICS. If you consitently spew Settlers out of every city, that's one thing. I will build a city, build a warrior, build a settler, then another. The first settler builds a road or two, usually connecting in the general direction he will settle. The second settler is dedicated to improving its parent city, roads, mines, etc. Each city founds a child.

quote: Compared to ICS? No way. For ICS, just do the following: 1) Build Setter, 2) Found new city, 3) Build Warrior, 4) Repeat. Far easier and cheaper. Each city adds to population, science and production.

But the real key behind ICS is spitting Settlers out like Tic-Tacs. A city that produces 8 settlers and has 9 size 1 cities is working 18 squares, versus two size 5 cities working 12. ICS works best when the cities are kept minute. But - that usually precludes happiness improvements, preventing the move to Rep or Dem until much much later.

quote: You missed the first part I said. I want to play perfectionist, not warmonger. It is of course easy to reduce the AI to a few cities via war. At that point you can win any way you want. But if your going to do that, you are not playing perfectionist.

I've not always found it so easy, depending on the opposition and my luck at the start.

quote: So the Mongols spent their resources founding a bunch of small crappy cities while I spent my resources developing a few cities - and I should be punished with less trade, science, production? Why are the Mongols's 40 size 4 cities more valid than my 10 size 16 cities? We spent resources differently and achieved the same thing. I guess I don't see your point.

The Mongol cities don't stay at size 4. They will grow to become ridiculous size cities with 4 Mech Inf., 4 Cruise, and 4 Stealth.

quote: Of course the AI is not shy about doing this. In reality, most cities would require severe terraforming to grow into the 30's.

Yeah, but the AI sucks

quote: Disagree. The effects of ICS are immediate while preparing for WLT_D only pays off far down the road. As such, I would expect the rewards to be better.

They can be immediate, I just see it somewhat limited under deity rules and a Rep or Dem government. Now fundy can really rack up on the ICS...

quote: You lose half the value of a trade route by trading with yourself.

But the enemy loses all the value. Sorry, no trade for the enemy. I can pull in 500+ on late year trades domestically, and with trade arrows appearing in both the host and destination, the only one benefitting is me.

quote: But without growth, most infrastructure doesn't pay off. You can't afford 3 gold Banks, 4 gold Stock Exchanges, 3 gold Universities, 5 gold Superhighways, 3 gold Factories, etc. in size 8 cities. Why would you bother building any of them? You'd have to wait until 1950 for enough citizens.

I don't. Stock exchange is late. I go, later in the game, defender, temple, settler, settler, library, market, factory (may move up or down a tad), aqueduct, university, bank...etc. The city is grown progressively, and grows continuously. Each improvement tends to come at just the right time, sewer at 10 or 11, aqueduct at 8. Everything seems to gel. But man, if I peg those luxuries, once the basic infrastructure is in, I could clean house.

quote: Originally posted by Crustacian on 05-10-2000 01:05 PM You don't seem to be able to do as you say if you feel the need to "slap" someone when they dissagree as I did.

No, you asked if I had read the manual as someone asked. That's not disagreement, that's just being smarmy.

quote: You have an interesting point but you are not experienced with using WLPD and other posters replies shows they feel the same way.

I'm not experienced in fellatio either but you can be damn sure I know it ain't for me. Why does the fact that I don't use WLTYYYD somehow mean I have no valid point against it?

quote: My suggestion is give it a try, and maybe you will also see it as a strategy and not a crutch. I also said I did not think the logic you used in drawing your comparisons was consistant.

I've seen the trailing edge of it, and trust me, if I wanted to, I could engorge my cities with it. Not interested.

quote: That sums up my points if you want to take another stab at "slapping" me LOL. It is Crustacian with an "i" tho

It actually is beyachslapping, but the program edits out the naughty bits...again, only for the "did you read it like he asked?" crap...

Venger I said in the first place I respect your views and playing styles regarding not usings wlpd. I just don't agree.
I offered you to give it a try, no problem that you don't want to.

You admit you are not experienced at it thx for that.

The problem I have with what you said is in calling WLPD a crutch when it is a very valid strategy equal to any of your own.
Your own logic does not disprove this.
You want to belittle wlpd on bogus logic and lack of experience then maybe i might slap you around a leedle beet eh?

This alone shows that it is not a crutch.

I know that these players game does not rely on WLPD solely, as they are strong players due to their ability to be flexable acording to the situation at hand, and they realise that this is a growth game. Many ways to grow in CivII, and WLPD is a valid option.

My new suggestion to you is this: develope a strategy that will consistantly beat WLPD.
There are threads about how to beat ICS, so if you think it is so weak why don't you post a thread on how to whip a WLPD?

I tryed it and by the time I got their my units were outdated. There is some awesome growth in science that can go along with the increase in city size too. I tryed it again and on a large world did not find them!!!!! They found me and kicked my butt beeg time.
Got to find em quick or you are dead by the setback of raising an army while they grow.

quote: Originally posted by Crustacian on 05-10-2000 08:35 PM quote: "Why does the fact that I don't use WLTYYYD somehow mean I have no valid point against it? Venger I said in the first place I respect your views and playing styles regarding not usings wlpd. I just don't agree.

OK...

quote: I offered you to give it a try, no problem that you don't want to.

Why are half of your sentences yoda-esque?

quote: You admit you are not experienced at it thx for that.

You keep repeating that as if it has some bearing. I've stated before, I can utilize it and make my game EASIER. That's why I don't use it. Why do you insist I use it then?

quote: The problem I have with what you said is in calling WLPD a crutch when it is a very valid strategy equal to any of your own.

I offered it as an opinion. Note the question mark at the end? It was a question leading an opinion. I still maintain it is a strategy leading to a quick and easy win. No I don't need to peg my luxuries to figure this out...

quote: Your own logic does not disprove this. You want to belittle wlpd on bogus logic and lack of experience then maybe i might slap you around a leedle beet eh?

What???

It has well been shown by those commenting here that it is not a crutch for the weak so I think the "question" on your post was answered.

And this I do not agree with:
"I still maintain it is a strategy leading to a quick and easy win. No I don't need to peg my luxuries to figure this out...

It is not necissarily an easy win. Many things have to be balanced to pull off a win with other compitant players. You risk being overly vulnerable for the chance of very quick growth if you choose. There are many things to balance and yet try to remain flexable to deal with unpredictable things your opponants come up with.

You would have to do more than peg your luxuries to do it right.

The point about experience is that if you were familiar with the strategy more, you would not claim it as an easy win. If all you think is involved is uping the lux setting, then no wonder you see it as simplistic.

I am not sure why you associate my words with Yoda's I wonder whos words would you have associated Yoda's with when you first heard his?

I was teasing you back cuz of what you said about "took Crustacian's head off and slapping me or whatever that was all about. I got a kick out of that in view of how you said you could take dissagreement.

Did you really get your comments nuked?

Anyways to each their own, but that means to EACH--yours & others their own.

I don't like the cheat bug things either but if thats how others want to play who cares so long as if they play a game with me we all use the same rules.

I don't like 2x2x setting either but see it as just fine for those who like it.

So will you cough it up and admit that you may have underestimated the comlexity of using WLPD?
And even tho you don't like it for your expressed and valid reasons, you won't think those you end up playing with are weak players cus they like to use it?

When you see that END sequence as someone takes your last city you might then.

Otherwise you will be left with a fairly weak thing to say like "well dang! I would have won those games IFFFFF they would have played me "fair" and not used WLPD, or built that Shakespeares Theater to where that city never needed to worry about happyness......."

So I am not at all against playing a game where there is a luxury setting limit of say 20 or 30% tops instead of the 100% possible that the game designers built in as an option for us.

*****When you set up games where no one can max their civ out really quick that would be one way to do it. Agree to limit the luxury setting. You asked about this earlier BTW

I have enjoyed playing no wonders and no ai games for some of the same reasons you use regarding WLPD.
But there will allways be nothing like a good ol 1x1x raging, deity, full comp civs, and mutually agreed set of rules to play by.

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

Disagree. Try it without a Temple or Marketplace. Who hasn't had the frustrating experience of a celebrating city stuck at size 7 while you rush in settlers to irrigate more grass or plains? Who hasn't had the Vikings come knocking on your door with vet Knights while your cities are building Caravans and Libraries?

quote: That extra trade is huge. In addition, I also believe the rate of corruption is lower under Republic, removed under Democracy, and all bribery is disallowed. I consider those huge advantages.

Bribery is only eliminated under Democracy. Add that 80 shield Courthouse to the list of "must-haves" for a Republic to grow. In reality, you don't even get double the science rate out of Republic compared to ICS Monarchy due to the loss of trade to luxuries. And of course each science advance makes the next one come slower and slower. While you'll be ahead, pretty soon your science rate will not be much better off than under Monarchy.

quote: ICS works best when the cities are kept minute. But - that usually precludes happiness improvements, preventing the move to Rep or Dem until much much later

If you begin a journey, you must know your destination or else become lost with the first step, i.e. If your gonna play ICS, then go for it all the way. You must beat the AI before (IMO) they get Industrialization and Democracy. IMHO if you beat down the AI with war in the early and mid game, you should just finish them off since the game becomes just too easy after that.

quote: I've not always found it so easy, depending on the opposition and my luck at the start

YMMV of course. I find war with the AI laughably easy. But leave them alone and let them get into the modern era and find out what a real space race can be.

quote: The Mongol cities don't stay at size 4. They will grow to become ridiculous size cities with 4 Mech Inf., 4 Cruise, and 4 Stealth.

And the same thing happens to your cities. The game expects this and adjusts accordingly: science advances take more and more beakers. Units cost more and more. Improvement upkeep costs get more expensive. I mean really: just how are you supposed to build 320 shield Solar Plants or SS Modules in a size 11 city?

quote: They can be immediate,

Not unless you already have the infrastructure.

quote: But the enemy loses all the value. Sorry, no trade for the enemy. I can pull in 500+

You can get 1500+ science and gold by trading with the AI - and only you get the bonus. I understand your position but consider this: If you have, say, 15 cities that each have 3 trade routes with the same AI city, you'll get the trade from 45 routes each turn while the AI will only get trade from 3 of them. Each of those routes will be worth double what they would be if you traded with yourself. Best of all, you can keep reestablishing the trade routes to get the bonus over and over. This makes it worthwhile to build Superhighways which increase the value of the routes and the bonus yet again. Give it a try!

quote: But man, if I peg those luxuries, once the basic infrastructure is in, I could clean house.

But you must wait for a new city to become size 3 before anything happens. Also, you can only build one thing in a new city per turn and you must wait for you Engineers to transform, irrigate, road, etc. It's still quite a bit to do.

quote: The city is grown progressively,

You brought up this thread *knowing* that it could result in flames. You admit that you b*itch-slapped Crustacian in a post. Yet you pretend to be affronted when others respond in kind. You appear to be one of those people who can dish it out, but can't take it.

You have repeatedly ignored those who have pointed out, again and again, the enormous amount of preparation necessary to make WLT_Ds work -- and the ongoing management it requires to pull this off as a long-term strategy.

You have denigrated those who suggested that you try a new way to play, and have insulted those who suggest that you either decline to use WLT_D, or use it and learn its strengths and weaknesses.

You have implied through successive posts that your way of playing is the only legitimate way to play Civ2, and that any other way of playing is inferior.

Finally, you have resorted to personal attacks on those who dare to meet your chest-beating pompousness with tongue-in-cheek, relatively gentle flaming.

WLT_D is a legitimate strategy. You are not the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable in Civ2 play. End of discussion.

quote: Originally posted by JERandall on 05-11-2000 01:21 PM Well, Venger, since my attempt at humor and sarcasm was lost on you, I'll try again.

Searching your post I found the sarcasm but found no humor...

quote: You brought up this thread *knowing* that it could result in flames.

Sure did. Anytime you challenge how someone wins the game you are going to get something of a heated response.

quote: You admit that you b*itch-slapped Crustacian in a post.

The magically disappearing post...

quote: Yet you pretend to be affronted when others respond in kind. You appear to be one of those people who can dish it out, but can't take it.

I'd like to find where I've precipitated any such remarks.

quote: You have repeatedly ignored those who have pointed out, again and again, the enormous amount of preparation necessary to make WLT_Ds work -- and the ongoing management it requires to pull this off as a long-term strategy.

I fail to see how the WLTYYYD prep work is any different than the work needed just to make a successful democracy or republic. Temples, aqueducts, banks, courthouses, are all required to make a succesful dem/rep growing them the old fashioned way. WLTYYYD simply removes time as a factor and allows for your city to bloat overnight.

quote: You have denigrated those who suggested that you try a new way to play, and have insulted those who suggest that you either decline to use WLT_D, or use it and learn its strengths and weaknesses.

Quotes please. Find the denigrating posts. Crustacean? As explained, anytime someone tells you to go read the manual, they can take a flying leap.

quote: You have implied through successive posts that your way of playing is the only legitimate way to play Civ2, and that any other way of playing is inferior.

What? I think WLTYYYD is bogus. So? What is so freaking threatining about that? I have nowhere said that "if you don't do it this way, you aren't playing it correctly". I've stated I don't use some governments. That's a far cry from saying you shouldn't use them, or they are the inferior form of playing the game.

quote: Finally, you have resorted to personal attacks on those who dare to meet your chest-beating pompousness with tongue-in-cheek, relatively gentle flaming.

Find the personal attack. Find it. Let's watch the thread develop and see where all the BS starts.

quote: WLT_D is a legitimate strategy. You are not the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable in Civ2 play. End of discussion.

Talk about chest-beating pompousness. Curiously, have you actually addressed any of the issues? Looking back through the thread...uh, no. Now, you and Sieve Too both apparently fall on the same side of the argument. But, he actually had a point, whereas you seem to post simply for the joy of seeing your name in HTML. God knows nothing you've written has had to do with the topic itself.

quote: Originally posted by Scouse Gits on 05-11-2000 05:29 AM If this thread has anything vaguely to do with Civ Strategy the connection defeats me. Could it please be moved to OT where it (and Venger) belong?

I would swear that by now, 7 days and 70 posts into this thread, you've seen it before. So you know what it's about. So why don't you SKIP IT if it ain't your cup of tea?

quote: Originally posted by Crustacian on 05-11-2000 12:50 AM WLPD is as valid of a strategy as any ones you use. End of story.

Huh? The question is whether the WLTYYYD population growth is a crutch to overcome other gameplay or planning deficiencies, or rather just a quick way to gain an advantage; that is, unreasonable or otherwise just plain hokey. I maintain it is. Some don't. Valid strategy is another question, personally I don't gve a rat's ass how anyone plays their own game. Anyone can screw the rules.txt enough to get a 1500% score every time they play. Big whoop. The question is, are WLTYYYD's population increases something that should not be abused, if that's the word.

quote: It has well been shown by those commenting here that it is not a crutch for the weak so I think the "question" on your post was answered.

How? Please recap - I've seen people defend it as requiring planning, and that it is part of the game, and that the game planners even desired for it to occur over and over in every city for turn after turn. But I still think it's best avoided for truly challenging and meaningful gameplay.

quote: And this I do not agree with: "I still maintain it is a strategy leading to a quick and easy win. No I don't need to peg my luxuries to figure this out... It is not necissarily an easy win. Many things have to be balanced to pull off a win with other compitant players. You risk being overly vulnerable for the chance of very quick growth if you choose. There are many things to balance and yet try to remain flexable to deal with unpredictable things your opponants come up with.

I consider those risks concommitant with the forms of government, not with WLTYYYD.

quote: You would have to do more than peg your luxuries to do it right.

Not if you've developed an infrastructure to support a powerful rep/dem. WLTYYYD is all frosting, no cake.

quote: The point about experience is that if you were familiar with the strategy more, you would not claim it as an easy win.

That makes no sense. Except maybe that if I depended on the strategy, and couldn't win without it, I'd make such a claim.

quote: If all you think is involved is uping the lux setting, then no wonder you see it as simplistic.

In a well developed rep/dem, that's all it takes. Want the save game file to prove it?

quote: I am not sure why you associate my words with Yoda's I wonder whos words would you have associated Yoda's with when you first heard his?

Disjointed sentences with the action leading the subject. "Show you I will"...

quote: I was teasing you back cuz of what you said about "took Crustacian's head off and slapping me or whatever that was all about. I got a kick out of that in view of how you said you could take dissagreement.

Disagreement is one thing, being smarmy is another. I made a very nasty reply to your post, but it disappeared off of the board...

quote: Did you really get your comments nuked?

Ming says not, but...

quote: Anyways to each their own, but that means to EACH--yours & others their own.

I've never stated it should be any other way. You know, people have referenced another thread on allowing players to build on mountains. Listen to the phrase - allow players. My phrase was "is it a crutch". Nothing about being allowed. To each his own was never in question. Rather, to discuss whether the effects of WLTYYYD disbalance a game.

quote: I don't like the cheat bug things either but if thats how others want to play who cares so long as if they play a game with me we all use the same rules.

I don't think that really is in question.

quote: I don't like 2x2x setting either but see it as just fine for those who like it.

Well that's a gamestyle that is a universal change affecting all players. WLTYYYD affects only Dem/Rep and for my purposes only when it occurs by design to grow cities, which the I have never seen the AI do. Although it should, cause it's dumb as a stump post fence.

quote: So will you cough it up and admit that you may have underestimated the comlexity of using WLPD?

No, because I never offered otherwise. You cannot simply take a Monarchy, revolution to republic and WLTYYYD whore the next turn. What I'm referring to is not the creation of growth infrastructure, but rather the setting of the luxuries rate to put your cities into WLTYYYD for turn after turn after turn. Substituting luxuries rate for time to obtain growth seems cheap to me.

quote: And even tho you don't like it for your expressed and valid reasons, you won't think those you end up playing with are weak players cus they like to use it?

I don't MP, so it doesn't really matter. It's just a point for discussion, as having seen a number of posts where city growth is designed around WLTYYYD, rather than WLTYYYD results from wise development.

quote: When you see that END sequence as someone takes your last city you might then.

Never happens (bloodlust). I do however fail to conquer other races by the determined time. If I play an additional 200 turns, I might make it, but alas, the tech tree has normally petered out (original Civ2) and 200 more turns of the same thing with no hope for glory kinda bites...

quote: Otherwise you will be left with a fairly weak thing to say like "well dang! I would have won those games IFFFFF they would have played me "fair" and not used WLPD, or built that Shakespeares Theater to where that city never needed to worry about happyness......."

I'd rather lose with diginity than win without it.

quote: So I am not at all against playing a game where there is a luxury setting limit of say 20 or 30% tops instead of the 100% possible that the game designers built in as an option for us.

You know, the % luxuries thing in my opinion is an act of ommission rather than commission. I don't think they set out to make sure you couldn't pursue x% luxuries. I can't imagine they thought anyone would want to! I think they were rather limiting the amount of science and taxes, rather than limiting luxuries.

quote: I have enjoyed playing no wonders and no ai games for some of the same reasons you use regarding WLPD. But there will allways be nothing like a good ol 1x1x raging, deity, full comp civs, and mutually agreed set of rules to play by.

I couldn't agree more with the latter part. I just find WLTYYYD is a part best left out, or at least not utilized to the extent some advocate.

quote: Great times, funny chat, and time consuming but cheap intertainment

Mmm, yes, entertaining this is...