Chippy Smith
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2021
- Messages
- 7
Hi! After playing Vox Populi with friends since 2018, I find it difficult to play the new versions by myself. Unfortunately, my group has had issues with early crashes in newer versions using the "MP_MODPACK" method of playing online multiplayer. Crashes / desyncs have always been an issue, but in older versions they tended to mainly show up in later eras, on larger maps, during AI wars; they were controllable to a degree. Our games in newer versions struggle to get out of classical, with crashes being all but fatal to the save during AI wars in Renaissance or later.
This post isn't me asking for advice on what we as players can do (there are many other threads detailing actions we can do to promote stability with CivV's flawed multiplayer system), but is instead me trying to gauge community interest in remote multiplayer Vox Populi; its stability, as well as its unique strategies compared to singleplayer / human vs. AI.
Do most users here enjoy playing Vox Populi singleplayer more, or with friends? Friends as allies, or friends as adversaries? Do strategies / playstyles differ in viability playing in a multiplayer environment vs. playing against AI, or is the optimal playstyle in Vox Populi the same regardless, just like vanilla Civ V? Is Vox Populi doomed to forever be unapproachable as a multiplayer experience, outside of asynchronized hotseat / play by email? Would a dedicated Vox Populi multiplayer instance improve stability to a noticeable degree, or would the effort yield negligible results? Are Civ V's flaws in its implementation of multiplayer too deep-rooted in the game for players to work around or for modders to improve, short of making a whole new game/executable?
Maybe I could stand to acquire a better understanding of the game and its intricacies, but for me, multiplayer Vox Populi is a much fuller strategy experience compared to singleplayer. I feel like Vox Populi is a dynamic multiplayer game due to the viability of numerous playstyles and their interactions; for every specific action taken against a player by player, there is a tangential reaction that player can employ, often utilizing a different game system. This is to say that I believe the variety of ways in which one can play Vox Populi truly shines in a meaningful way in multiplayer. I think that singleplayer Vox Populi is a more rigid meta when trying to play optimally, and that static environment is almost an antithesis to what makes Vox Populi cool.
As a longtime lurker, it was the establishment of the VP Congress that got me to actually use this account. Having a vote in making this game more polished, with more "balance" and meaningful mechanics, was too enticing; I had to end my lurking ways. However, the feature that I think would make Vox Populi THE strategy experience on PC is functional, user friendly multiplayer. If it's impossible because of Firaxis, or it's because of the amount of work required; either way I understand that it's a lot for unpaid developers to address. The fact that we have Vox Populi as is, with regular updates that improve the experience, is just awesome. It's a prime example of fandom gone right, but can we get much higher? Is there any interest in a better Vox Populi multiplayer?
This post isn't me asking for advice on what we as players can do (there are many other threads detailing actions we can do to promote stability with CivV's flawed multiplayer system), but is instead me trying to gauge community interest in remote multiplayer Vox Populi; its stability, as well as its unique strategies compared to singleplayer / human vs. AI.
Do most users here enjoy playing Vox Populi singleplayer more, or with friends? Friends as allies, or friends as adversaries? Do strategies / playstyles differ in viability playing in a multiplayer environment vs. playing against AI, or is the optimal playstyle in Vox Populi the same regardless, just like vanilla Civ V? Is Vox Populi doomed to forever be unapproachable as a multiplayer experience, outside of asynchronized hotseat / play by email? Would a dedicated Vox Populi multiplayer instance improve stability to a noticeable degree, or would the effort yield negligible results? Are Civ V's flaws in its implementation of multiplayer too deep-rooted in the game for players to work around or for modders to improve, short of making a whole new game/executable?
Maybe I could stand to acquire a better understanding of the game and its intricacies, but for me, multiplayer Vox Populi is a much fuller strategy experience compared to singleplayer. I feel like Vox Populi is a dynamic multiplayer game due to the viability of numerous playstyles and their interactions; for every specific action taken against a player by player, there is a tangential reaction that player can employ, often utilizing a different game system. This is to say that I believe the variety of ways in which one can play Vox Populi truly shines in a meaningful way in multiplayer. I think that singleplayer Vox Populi is a more rigid meta when trying to play optimally, and that static environment is almost an antithesis to what makes Vox Populi cool.
As a longtime lurker, it was the establishment of the VP Congress that got me to actually use this account. Having a vote in making this game more polished, with more "balance" and meaningful mechanics, was too enticing; I had to end my lurking ways. However, the feature that I think would make Vox Populi THE strategy experience on PC is functional, user friendly multiplayer. If it's impossible because of Firaxis, or it's because of the amount of work required; either way I understand that it's a lot for unpaid developers to address. The fact that we have Vox Populi as is, with regular updates that improve the experience, is just awesome. It's a prime example of fandom gone right, but can we get much higher? Is there any interest in a better Vox Populi multiplayer?
Last edited:
