I find MP strategy a lot more interesting than SP strategy. However, these boards are mostly focused on SP discussion, and the other sites that I've seen which focus on MP just aren't very active. I know there's a few articles on MP strategy that have been written here, but TBH those are really lacking.

isn't this a good place?

Ill start. Don't build a slingshot, don't build GL. You'll be a big target in either case.

I assume you read these tips already: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/multiplayer

After that, the strategy is very specific for each map and game setting. Post the detailed settings of your last game if you want advice.

Yeah I read those, and they really only cover the basics. Some of that are downright wrong. It just seems like no one here ever discusses multiplayer strategy, i certainly couldn't find any threads about it either here or in the multiplayer forum.

edit: to clarify, i mostly just play pangaea FFA games.

There isn't a good place to discuss multiplayer. The ladder forum http://league.civplayers.com/?section=forum should be, but isn't. If you happen to read Russian or Polish, I've heard their CIV forums discuss multiplayer.

There isn't a good place to discuss multiplayer. The ladder forum http://league.civplayers.com/?section=forum should be, but isn't. If you happen to read Russian or Polish, I've heard their CIV forums discuss multiplayer.

dammit, we can't let the Russians beat us!

edit: to clarify, i mostly just play pangaea FFA games.

You still didn't tell me your detailed game settings. Turn limit? City Elimination? Ancient start? Tech trading?

The best strategy for pangea FFA is: Roll a lucky start!

I agree,

I find MP so entertaining and it needs to be discussed more, the characters you run into are unreal. I once had a player accuse me of cheating because I assumed a computer who had 6 cities and created a 12 musket stack in 2 turns. (I drafted)

My strategy?
Unless you're on a HUGE island map, sharpen your blade.

The best strategy I know of is pillaging, and 90% of the time razing cities when you capture them. its all about starving your enemy and forcing your war machine on his.

I know alot of people are going to call this retarded but after I get my initial cities worked properly I put my workers on Automate. When you're controlling 15+ units on a blazing timer in the ancient era you don't have much time for anything else. Also, the que command has become my best friend.

Once the Ancient/classic era has passed and the n00bs have been weeded out, I take them (workers) off automate and specialize my cities for optimum production, because then its usually an arms race that goes into the mid/ren. Then usually another big war.

Most games I play don't go past that but when they do (conts with 2/3 big civs left) it usually turns into a science race, due in part to the production already being there and everyone wants advance units.

Then, on the rear occasions when it happens: the modern/nuke war,! (which is an absolute blast)

Ok I'm ranting, I truly love civ4 mp, it's a 180 from sp, all the single player articles in the world wont save you in mp from a competent player.

(now for an actual strategy)

Landing behind the enemies main forces (via water) to destroy their core cities. Seriously, I know some people would all say "duh" to this, but you have no idea hoe many times this works.

For example, in the game I note above (12 musket stack) I assumed a computer civ that was on the verge of being destroyed. a human player had 60% of the map when I joined and close to 30 units on my border. I had the tech advantage as he had concentrated on military, so I kept drafting muskets to hold his ancient/classic army at bay while i produced gal/cav. made a landing on his core cities which were defended by war/arc. Razed 6 cities, he sent his main force back to save his city but it was to late, I was able to put a sizable force together on my front with him gone. The loss of his core cities effectively stopped his war machine, so I was able to beat his rather sizable army with mine on account that i was bringing up units to the front none stop (thank god the comp concentrates on only growth... draft FTW).

A prime example of why MP can be so much more dynamic then sp.

Also, I hear there are leagues for civ 4 mp, (which may have forums for strat) but they have rules like no war till 500BC which is lame.

anyways, thats my two cents, look forward to further discussion.

man mp sounds like a totally horrible time. no wonder you can't find discussion about it. *here's my maximally efficient SoD at your weak point by 2000BC* ... *yeah, well here's MY 2 SoDs on your border at 1750BC*

fast forward 1000 years... *here's my SoD pillaging every tile you own* *yeah? well here's my well timed SoD doing blah blah blah*


just a huge human warmonger race i'd honestly rather do taxes than to play.

You still didn't tell me your detailed game settings. Turn limit? City Elimination? Ancient start? Tech trading?

The best strategy for pangea FFA is: Roll a lucky start!

I'm interested in all forms of the game. So far I'd say my favorite is no turn limit, 3 city elimination, ancient start, no tech trading, but I don't intend to play that exclusively.

i could see an interesting form of mp being a 4 player set up where, totally arranged, 2 ideal warmongering leaders were placed in ideal collision, while 2 ideal tech/general commerce civs were placed behind each of them to feed tech and money and things. idk. otherwise seriously, the game is over pretty quick.

My strategy?
Unless you're on a HUGE island map, sharpen your blade.

The best strategy I know of is pillaging, and 90% of the time razing cities when you capture them. its all about starving your enemy and forcing your war machine on his.

Yeah, that's a given. A peaceful strategy just will NOT work in multiplayer, unless you're on a very unusual map type (and those usually just take too long to play to be practical). However, one thing I've noticed is that you can do very well if everyone else goes to war, and they all leave you alone because it's just not worth the effort of attacking you. Peace through strength, lol.



I know alot of people are going to call this retarded but after I get my initial cities worked properly I put my workers on Automate. When you're controlling 15+ units on a blazing timer in the ancient era you don't have much time for anything else. Also, the que command has become my best friend.

Civ4 multiplayer is almost like an RTS, there's just so much to do.



Then, on the rear occasions when it happens: the modern/nuke war,! (which is an absolute blast)

Hmm I've never had a nuke war. That sounds interesting. I think one of my problems is, I focus too much on winning early on, and so I'm unprepared for modern warfare.
(now for an actual strategy)


Landing behind the enemies main forces (via water) to destroy their core cities. Seriously, I know some people would all say "duh" to this, but you have no idea hoe many times this works.

Oh I agree. I had a recent game where he had machine guns/tanks, and I only had riflemen, but I was still able to take out one of his cities with a sneaky amphibious assault.


@olinwater: It's definitely not for everyone. If you don't like RTS games, I don't think you're gonna like multiplayer. What I like about it is that the humans are so much smarter than a computer, so they don't require ridiculous handicaps like what a deity computer has. You can fight them on an even footing.

So far I'd say my favorite is no turn limit, 3 city elimination, ancient start, no tech trading, but I don't intend to play that exclusively.

Wow. Your games must take forever if you find decent opponents.


The basic strategy is:
1. Invest 50% of your land in military, 50% into gold and beakers.
2. Research an advanced military tech.
3. Whip/draft/upgrade/build advanced units in all your cities.
4. Kill a neighbor.

I call this strategy Rock, because it's solid and balanced.


There are 2 other strategies:

Paper: Invest 33% of land into military, 66% into gold/beakers. Beats Rock by getting to the advanced tech first.

Scissors: Invest 80% of land into military, 20% into gold/beakers. Beats Paper by raw power. Fails to break through Rock and dies to their advanced counterattack.

Wow. Your games must take forever if you find decent opponents.


Well that's a big if... but yeah they can last a very long time. Luckily this stupid economy gives me a lot of spare time.

I like those strategies for early game, but it seems like they're really focused on killing a neighbor. I mean, if you kill your neighbor and burn his cities, that doesn't really help you does it? If one person manages to avoid getting sucked into a war, they can really run away in tech.

I like those strategies for early game, but it seems like they're really focused on killing a neighbor. I mean, if you kill your neighbor and burn his cities, that doesn't really help you does it?

This is where single player skills come in. You just beat someone around like a stupid AI, what are you gonna do now?


If one person manages to avoid getting sucked into a war, they can really run away in tech.

This is the lucky roll part. Pick maps that don't allow this to happen, or work on your diplomacy skills so you are that player.

I dislike MP immensely. Diplomacy is non-existant, you're almost assured of being in a state of constant warfare, and virtually every game boils down to who has the biggest army/who can raze the most cities/who can pillage the most resources. That really doesn't appeal to me. At all.

...Plus, it seems to me that human players like to gang up on people, and it's no fun when it's one on three.

Pick maps that don't allow this to happen, or work on your diplomacy skills so you are that player.

This is where you should start and not rock, paper scissors. Diplomacy is such a large part of the game. Since humans are much more balanced than AI's it is important to avoid getting ganged up on(or if you can getting attacked at all). Be the one to gang up on people(it is easier than attacking alone) rather than the one getting ganged up on. If you are playing everything in one setting(or a couple settings) or use something like pitboss or PBEM also influence things quite a bit. When playing blazing for example you got way less time to do diplo than when you have 1 day per turn. Not getting ganged up on work best with some variant of what Dave would call paper, less military more focus on teching.

there is "Attacko's Guide to Multiplayer" i think somewhere on the strategy guide section. maybe not.

it profers such advice as ....

"pretend you are a young player and don't know anything"

"say thngs like you like builder games and then kill everyone"

"if gang attacked type in "thanks for the game, i really like it and now since the operation i can't do much of anything else"

"since civ3 they all fall for the ship attack"

Multiplayer has so many forms and so many different settings that you cannot possibly discuss strategies that work for everything.

Saying general things like half your land in military and half in tech is a tottal generalization with no practical use whatsoever.

In my experience there are 4 different places to play multiplayer and each one is a tottaly different world.

1. Gamespy lobby playing ffa games

2. Gamespy lobby playing league games

3. pitboss/PBEM

4. lan, gamepsy or pitboss with friends

Every one of those is a different world with different mentality and different understanding of the game needed.

You might be the best pitboss/PBEM player in the world but you would get hammered badly going to play league games...and you could be the best league player but you would lose in pitboss games.

Random ffa in gamespy are usually filled with very casual players, lots of quiters...good to get some quick practice on different strategies, but generally purposeless games.

The next step in competitive games, which is to play league games, has so many different setups, requiring different strategies that it is impossible to discuss everything. If you get into those games I suggest you register to league forums and post in strategy and tips section...you will get advice back. http://league.civplayers.com

The next step in competitive games, which is to play league games, has so many different setups, requiring different strategies that it is impossible to discuss everything. If you get into those games I suggest you register to league forums and post in strategy and tips section...you will get advice back. http://league.civplayers.com

No offense Indiansmoke but that's got to be the worst Tips section ever.

No offense Indiansmoke but that's got to be the worst Tips section ever.

It is not the best, but all I said is that if you ask questions there they will be answered.

It is difficult for people that don't play league games to understand what is being said there. there are some really good tips to be found from time to time but they are relative to specific game settings that if you never played you would not understand what they are talking about.

Some examples

http://league.civplayers.com/forum/index.php?topic=748.msg7405#msg7405
This is about OCC reny games and it is a top guide

http://league.civplayers.com/forum/index.php?topic=696.0
This is for CTON games...basic but it is a start

http://league.civplayers.com/forum/index.php?topic=801.0
This could be usefull as you have to stack attack usually

http://league.civplayers.com/forum/index.php?topic=740.0
startup for popular teamers setting

http://league.civplayers.com/forum/index.php?topic=831.0
Nice video on how to fast move and use ctrl a

http://league.civplayers.com/forum/index.php?topic=2602.0
some other basic stuff to get you started

There's nothing wrong with the quality of the threads there, but the quantity is lacking after so many years of CIV MP.

Clans are jealous of their strategies when there is a very competitive clan tournament every 6 weeks; they don't post their best strategies for their opponents to use, for obvious reasons.

I play MP sometimes, unfortunately I never made it past the classic era (:D), except for when I was still a noble-SP-newb. Then I made it to rifling once.

I have a problem finding opponents, since my friends don't seem to understand the difference between SP and MP. They just keep spamming wonders...

When I made it to rifling, he was the first to attack me. He had rifles/cannons, I had cannons/cavs/engineering... guess who won that :D. Took me about 3 turns to take out 40 rifles and 10 cannons.

The other games, they spam wonders like GL, GLH, mids, and other expensive cr** like it. And of course, because it's usually 3-ish players, they also like oracle with a CS slingshot. Then at the time they get CS, I put 10 swords next to their city, and their lone warrior can't usually win that battle.

How is gamespy? I don't play online that often in general, because people tend to quit when they're losing, taking the balance out of the game. Is it fun? Is it playable, or lots of disconnects?

My only experience with MP is pitboss and using the words of other player: "Diplomacy is everything". If you can get a pack of 3/4 ( 5 top ) players cooperating, most likely you'll be able to use some very interesting tricks that can only pull if you trust your neighbour ( like letting one of the players REX to strike while the other garrisons the cities, making espionage rings ( I steal from A, that steals from B, that.... ), swapping cities to benefit from half priced buildings or wonder benefits ( Mids, S. Paya, pentagon..... ) ....

As you probably imagine this is light years away of the ruthless http://www.capniro.info/forum/images/smilies/icon_axe.gif that I hear it happens in gamespy :p

rolo- you can do that stuff in team games. But, it does help if you know the people you're playing with at least a little.

Anyway, what do you guys think are the best UUs for multiplayer? I'm starting to realize how some UUs that I never use in single player can be very good in multiplayer. For example the Holkan- one very common tactic is to rush someone with chariots and try to take out their copper source. With Hokans, you're immunite to that. Same with the Jaguar. And impis, if you get copper nearby, are just evil. The only things that can catch an impi are mounted units, which of course get destroyed by the impis. You can pillage someone mercilessly that way.

I've also had great success with the Hwacha, the ultimate counter to a big stack of axes. I've never had the chance to use cataphracts, but i'm thinking that they have the potential to end a game. Any 2 move unit is always helpful, so if you can survive to that point and build a nice force of them... hmm.

Perhaps the best strategy I can think of is to just focus entirely ln defense early on, so no one wants to attack you. Then when your neighbors are busy with wars, you can expand and tech, and try to get knights or macemen first, and then start rampaging and killing the tech leaders.

Most of my games are multiplayer, with my two housemates. We tend to hope for maps where we're all on separate continents, so we can all develop for a while before we meet. We're not as bloodthirsty as we would be in a "real" MP game, because once one of us is eliminated it stops being a fun group activity, so we start a new game (leaving the previous one as a 2 player game for when the third person isn't around). We tend to play Large maps, 9-12 civs, so most of the SP tricks still work pretty well and AI diplomacy is still hugely important.

Now and then we start bigger MP games with a wider group of friends (we tried pit boss once but one player's computer crapped out and we never actually got it started) and in those I'm more cutthroat.

As a note, we do NOT play with simultaneous turns. Civ is not a RTS game, and in our opinion there should never be a circumstance where the winner of a battle is determined by who clicked on their unit first. (This also comes in because one of our players is visually impaired, so it's flat out unfair to make her work against a timer.) For a little while we set it up so that we had a "turn order" that we had to abide by if we were in conflict (so two civs who haven't met can take their turns at the same time, but if I'm at war with my neighbor we have a set order), but that got too stupid so we just turned off simultaneous turns and we just insist that people do as absolutely much management between turns as possible. Unfortunately it still means wars take a while for the other players.

So, long story short, I love Civ MP, but what I call Civ MP is not what pretty much anyone else uses the term to mean. :)