Which way do you prefer to win?

Same here. I have never won a cultural victory on a map larger than than a large universe 12x12. I would like to continue on just when i'm about to win an alliance victory..by ending the alliance..but i'm usually so exhausted by then that i go with the alliance win!

I like to win by Alliance even though most people find Alliance easy in some games Aliens will not Ally with me.

Then I am stuck with a Beyond Humanity win.

Military Wins I avoid. If I am playing nice like I usaully do I do not invade Alien systems even if they are weak. The biggest flaw of the game is a Saintly AI invading or extorting a weaker race.


Cultural Win is the worst I hate getting into the game and all of the sudden find it is over.

I turn off Alliance victory. No fun in it for me to win that way.

For me it's usually a race between Tech victory and Culture. But I'm always ready for a military path if needed.

As for techs taking 99 turns? Never for me. I'm raking in those final techs in 10 turns or less easy. By the time I get there my research is plugging away at 200+ % bonus or more and if I'm that close and not moving in for military I cut back all spending as much as possible and pour it all into research. My last tech victory Beyond Human was going to take me 70 turns. After a couple turns or more it was down to 30 and then I searched for every anomaly left I could find that might give me 25% bonus on current tech. Basically got it in 15 turns and won the game.

Ummm, why is this a flaw? Being "good" doesn't mean you don't extort or start wars. Just look at the real world around you.....or even in history. The Crusades where in the name of "good".

Because a game shouldn't force you into the role of the cynical 'good' of human history. That makes alignment nothing more than another racial pick for the Terrans. It would be nice to be genuinely saintly and try and unite everyone and actually be rewarded for it.

Just because you're a galciv bully who doesn't get any sense of satisfaction unless you take the whole map doesn't mean that is how everyone else should have to play.

****

As for myself, my first pick is military followed by alliances. With the end tech tree the wreck that it currently is I find tech wins to be pure tedium. Culture wins are anti-climactic to me so I only use culture as a tool for facilitating military or alliance situations.

Of course, until alliance wins are scored higher, I almost always betray my friends in the end.

Alliance is my preferred because I miss teh point of invading a race I am 100% sure I can conquer if I can ally with them.
I did tech once or twice, but it is generally boring, and if you want to score for metaverse, worthless. Tech victory would be better IMO if it didn't take that long to research and if the path to tech victory would prevent you from researching more military techs (i.e. if you go immediately for tech victory, you can reach it, but you'll suffer militarily in the meantime). It might also require diplomacy adjustments.

Don't get your panties in a wad.

I guess you haven't looked at my submitted games. Only one was military conquest. In my last game I never fired a shot except to take over a minor that was about to be taken over by the Drengin. I personally don't prefer military victory. I was only pointing out that just because something is "good" doesn't mean that they don't go to war or exploit. Has never been the case in 10,000 years of human history so far either.

I'm very much a builder type Civ player and would often quit Civ 3 games near the end because you usually had to conquer everyone or go to war to protect your spaceship victory and it was very tedious. At least in Gal Civ you can indeed win with very limited military action at times, depending on situation.

Bonscott,

Do I do not ask Aliens to go to War. That would not be nice.

Can we not all live in piece ?

I do not like to live in the past, today piece is nice.

Well, what you do or do not do is not related to your stance in this thread and others that there's something inherently 'easy' about other victory paths and that they aren't worth as much as the military path. So, no, I didn't look at your submitted games, but I've certainly seen enough of this belligerent attitude from you regarding those of us who think this game's scoring method is weighted much too far in favor of betrayal and bloodshed.

My favorite is easy: Culture bombs!

Sorry CM. I really don't know where you are coming from since I rarely post as it is and have never posted about this sort of thing except once in this thread. You may have me confused with someone else.

All I was pointing out was that "good" doesn't *always* mean never going to war just as "evil" doesn't *always* mean always going to war. But you obviously can't see that and want to attack me so we'll let it rest. Thank you.

No, it's you; I'm going by your recent comments in the 'Military Conquest' thread in addition to what was posted here. I was a bit hyperbolic above, sure, but you are certainly on record putting down alliance wins.

Fair enough CM. I have stated that I personally don't like Alliance victory because it's too easy to do. In my current game I'm only half way through the tech tree, about 35% culture and if I had Alliance victory turned on I could win quite easily right now. But I don't want to win now, I want to savor it. But that's just me. There is certainly nothing wrong with others liking or winning via Alliance victory. To each his own that makes the game fun. And having fun playing the game is all that really matters, no matter how you do it. I think we can both agree on that, no?

Certainly. My reaction stems from that I'd seen you put down Alliance wins twice in recent history and this has become a bit of a crusade issue for me. Whether you like a particular victory type should be a purely individual matter, what warps my perception of your stance is the issue of scoring and you came down on the side of alliance wins not being equal to others.

In your example above, by virtue of how early it is in the game, you should expect that your score will not be that high if you went for that alliance, no argument there. The problem is that not only are you not going to score that high by virtue of not having racked up all the points for playing a longer game, you're going to be penalized for choosing an alliance victory over military at that point on top of things.

At the very least, the penalty for choosing an alliance win needs to go, and I personally think because you will almost always have less raw points relative to any other victory path, that you should actually receive a portion of the AI's score(s) in an alliance as well. And, before you think I'm insane for this, consider: In the above scenario, the AIs are probably not far along either, the early alliance even with my proposed bonus will still score poorly relative to a later victory. If you choose a much later alliance to avoid some tedium, well, your score is going to be so high relative to the remaining AIs that the effect is going to be minimal as well, it's just a nice incentive to encourage peaceful wins compared to the current implementation which always penalizes a peaceful win.

All good games implement a way to avoid having to chase down and kill every last unit. GalCiv comes close by giving us alternatives to that, and then screws it up by altering the scoring so heavily.

Getting back to the posted question...

I've won using each of the four methods, and my preference for each game is truly dependent on galaxy size and what alignment I'm planning on developing.

It seems to me that if you're interested in winning via a tech victory, you're better off playing in a Gigantic galaxy and trying to maintain peace with your neighbors. (Easiest if you've got a large corner all to yourself.) Even though I've tried playing as technologists (or simply added Research +20% as an ability), it's tough to get a Tech win on anything smaller.

On the smaller maps, it depends on whether I'm playing towards good or evil. (As a G.R.O.S.S. member in good standing - I think - I tend more towards evil these days.) Good & small = culture victory. Evil & small = military victory.

Like CodeMonkey, I like the Alliance victory - granted, there are times it feels a bit empty... and it certainly doesn't get you a lot of Metaverse points, but in a galaxy where there are no truly dominant races, it can be your best bet.

As for me, my favorite games involve capitalizing on trade routes and creating a large financial incentive for why aliens ought not attack me... that is, right up until the battleships and combat tranports are knockin' on their planets' front doors.

I think all the victories are boring.

I rarely finish my games. When I get near domination of the galaxy, ie when my economy and military is larger than everyone else's combined, then I usually quit and start a new game. I have beaten it all the ways, though, multiple times.

I do think tech and alliance victories are easier to achieve than cultural and military. If you're on the verge of cultural or military victory, you generally dominate the galaxy and could easily get yourself a tech or alliance victory with a little patience. The reverse, however, is not true.

I hear you Code Monkey. I guess I just really don't care about my score in the Metaverse all that much. I just play the game and have fun and I don't worry myself about the score.

Thank you guys for your input!

Ok, my two cents..

I guess I like cultural victory the most. I tend to play as a builder. I like having the biggest economy, manufacturing base, and the best movies and entertainment (culture). I like having the rest of the galaxy come to my way of thinking because they like me, not because I have troops on their planet

But, sometimes I just go for the Alliance win because in some games it is easier. One of these days I am going to get aggressive and beat up on everybody else! No, really, I am.... LOL

I tried to get tech. victory all the times but I finish with cultural instead May be I am doing something wrong ? But if I do not increase my infuence my planets start to flip to others and if I do increase - I will culturaly

~SDC~

It is easier to get a cultural victory on a large or smaller map as compared to huge and gigantic.

I tend to win through military victory by culture bombs. I've even had games where I get a military win with no ships lost and no ships killed.

~SDC~

for me it is either tech or cultural

i like to win culturally, building lots of culturally maxed starbases tend to result in a pretty easy victory.

the tech victory wasnt too difficult for me. i actually made myself reasearch everything in the tech tree before i finished researching the "final frontier". i only wish i submitted that game after i upgraded to version 1.05. i just submited an old game on a large map with simple difficulty that i never bothered finishing till today. i got a 6000 score on it, even though it was a cultural victory on simple, with not much techs researched!