Civ V: Single player vs. Multiplayer?

[Boojumhunter]

I've never played any Civ in MP... Can't devote the time or the schedule to do this. Civ is a game I can play 1-2 hours at almost totally random times.

Which means I've always battled with the AI and all that that implies. Never forget it's 'artificial' intelligence.

But I'm curious - how much of our problems with CIV V go away when you're playing with someone as smart as yourself? (I've no idea of the status of MP in civ v at this point )


Edit. Such a n00b me... Just found MP section... Still reply to this if you have a comment though.

 

[Captain_Crunch]

Civ 5 does not have a multiplayer mode

 

[SuperJay]

Ignoring the troll - yes, playing against other people does help in that you're obviously not playing the ******ed AI, but it invites some other problems as well. I'm sure many of the bugs are exquisitely documented in the MP section of the forum, but suffice to say it can be mildly frustrating.

 

[Hammy]

I've played it quite a bit MP with a friend and what Jay said is pretty much correct. It's a lot of fun to have someone else around who can pull off the same tricks you can but, unless you know the person and both have a ton of patience and are willing to put up with the absolute worst netcode in any game since, well, Civ4 vanilla, then you might want to hold off on trying for a few patches.

 

[milk steak]

FFA MP usually just devolves into rushing.

 

[highfive]

FFA MP usually just devolves into rushing.

I've heard that same comment in every RTS game I've ever played. The good players know how to counter and tech up.

I'm just getting into MP, but I don't see any reason why you can't defend a rush and tech up at the same time, especially if you use defensive bonuses correctly.

 

[milk steak]

I've heard that same comment in every RTS game I've ever played. The good players know how to counter and tech up.

I'm just getting into MP, but I don't see any reason why you can't defend a rush and tech up at the same time, especially if you use defensive bonuses correctly.

I never said you couldn't. It's just the most efficient method of getting another player out of the game.

 

[Biz_]

the multiplayer programming part is still a mess, but it's the way civ is meant to be played

all the problems you have with diplomacy or bad AI just vanish

 

[OMG Hexes]

I never said you couldn't. It's just the most efficient method of getting another player out of the game.

That's a meaningless statement. Of course the easiest way to eliminate a player is to conquer him/her. You can't eliminate other players early by winning the space race or building utopia.

You're building a civilization. Your primary concern should be its defense. Whining about games devolving into rushing is just idiotic. You know someone is going to build horsemen and try to steamroll someone. Don't let it be you!

 

[milk steak]

Dude, you're totally putting words into my post. All I said was "they tend to devolve into rushing". I never made a statement against or for it nor did I say it was indefensible.

And yea, I rushed with CC my last FFA game. My neighbor were the Romans. He had Spearmen. He was gone before turn 50.



VVVVVV Well, 'devolve' in the sense that all other strategies aren't as efficient. And eliminating a player well into the game and rushing to eliminate a player from the get-go are different strategies. Why would you employ a strategy that allows your opponent to grow to multiple cities and create an army? Just wipe them off the map while they still only have 1 city.

 

[OMG Hexes]

Devolve in that context implies that rushing is a less refined or lower order of play than is ideal. If I put words into your post it was only because the words you used carry meaning you (apparently) didn't intend to express.

 

[RoBoSMASH]

Dude, you're totally putting words into my post. All I said was "they tend to devolve into rushing". I never made a statement against or for it nor did I say it was indefensible.

And yea, I rushed with CC my last FFA game. My neighbor were the Romans. He had Spearmen. He was gone before turn 50.



VVVVVV Well, 'devolve' in the sense that all other strategies aren't as efficient. And eliminating a player well into the game and rushing to eliminate a player from the get-go are different strategies. Why would you employ a strategy that allows your opponent to grow to multiple cities and create an army? Just wipe them off the map while they still only have 1 city.

Any player that has played more than one multiplayer game can easily counter any rush. The advantages for the defense in this game can not be understated. Building cities with defensive terrain such as forest and hills, as well as tactical use of mountains and rivers can pretty much stop an early horseman rush even with spearman.

Adopting a defensive posture in early game forces the opponent to bring more than a mere 3-4 horseman as you can usually trade the loss of a spearman for his horseman as long as you stay within your borders. I feel that CIV 5 makes it extremely hard to knock out a player within the first 50 turns, and once you reach civil service (either through the Great Library, or with a GS) the horseman threat is done for.

Strategically speaking, I usually look to gain the advantage by the medieval era by beelining for steel/gunpowder. Gunpowder is best as you are now no longer tied to iron which in many games is in short supply allowing for 6 siege or iron units (unless you get that valuable 2nd iron source).

Lastly, for those of you that CAN play multiplayer, it is far more enjoyable than beating the snot out of the AI. Having played Civ 4 for some time, I didn't encounter any challenge until Emperor and up. Humans at least understand how to use their military units

 

[Thander]

I think multiplayer takes too long. I can't imagine having to coordinate with others to play an 2-3 hour game. It's hard enough getting people together for 30 minutes. Now hotseat and PBEM seem okay, but they haven't put those in the game.

 

[Nog]

If you want and enjoy strategy multiplayer games, stick to world-class efforts like SC2. Built from the ground-up for nothing but and only for top-tier esports multiplayer. So yeah, I'm stating the obvious.

Can you play MP with Civ 5? Ye...No... No. I mean technically... No.

Even if you have a lot of patience, know all the players, and have a lot of luck... No.

This is an offical statement from the publisher. Almost.

 

[Abremms]

honestly, with the simultaneous turn weirdness, no animations, and just general bad feeling on the multiplayer, I am more than happy to stick to the single player, especially since the AI is already being improved by modders.

i think if MP played like SP, i would enjoy it a lot more. even if it meant waiting 5 minutes between turns, the MP games i have tried have all been clunky and awkward.