1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

10 Mistakes Offline Players Make When Playing Online

Discussion in 'Civ4 Strategy Articles' started by SoxSexSax, Jun 6, 2006.

  1. BCLG100

    BCLG100 Music Master

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    16,650
    Location:
    Lahndan

    yep and it also differs whether your playing PBEM or direct conncection, with PBEM after putting in months of effort your less likely to quit than if it was after only a few hours.
     
  2. TheRealCzar

    TheRealCzar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    77
    Location:
    Republic of Ireland, Sometimes.
    in reference to game length (Though pretty new to MP)

    I've played a 2 human 2 AI ring world game in about 6 hours, I've played a 3 person continents game in about 5 sittings, but that ended in capitulation from my enemies only a short time after I landed on their continent with overwhelming force. about 20hr total. I played a 2 person co-op game versus some AI's, team continents, it took fours sessions, about 20hr total.

    I started a 4 player PBEM game on the 2nd of February. Its about 790AD! When I started I hadn't a clue about Civ4 or MP, and now I'm stuck with some baaad choices!!

    All games on quick setting naturally.
     
  3. Norseman2

    Norseman2 Commy from the North

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    457
    It's actually a good idea, if done properly. If you already have iron, you won't go out of your way to get it. Little do you know, your source of iron could disappear at a critical moment. As long as they aren't a neighboring country, they can make you feel very powerful with your praetorians. You might go and kill off a neighbor. That's good, if you pull it off. Less competition. If they turn things around and take you out instead, that's good too. The odds in your favor though, and you won't be as powerful when your UUs are obsolete, so it works out. You get rid of the opposition, then the iron-giver gets rid of you. Alternatively, you take on a neighbor with not quite enough units to go all the way through them without reinforcements (probably the case against a decent player). If they cut your iron then, which normally you would expect to be constant, you're at war and you've lost your ability to produce your main offensive unit. Now you need to hunt down some iron while in the middle of a war, and you won't be able to do much until you get it. Potentially, you're screwed.

    It has to be done carefully though. If you have a nearby source of iron, it won't hurt you much, it will just make you angry. If it's clear that your neighbors are noobs, it's better that they be made stronger, and not you. As much as possible, you want to make all of your opponents equal (helped greatly with the power graph). This way, when they go to war, they tend to cause severe damage to each other, instead of just one opponent being mauled, and the other hardly scratched.
     
  4. dh_epic

    dh_epic Cold War Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2002
    Messages:
    4,627
    Location:
    Seasonal Residences
    With online play, which I don't do too often, I always start off with the bad habit of building cities too fast and building defence too late. Bureaucracy is a must, in my limited experience.
     
  5. KingJim

    KingJim Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    Messages:
    15
    Thank you very much for writting this. I just started online play and kept wondering why I loose all the time.

    Also, funny how you write a good article and the only thing someone has to critique is your sig. I say put it back. Good job!
     
  6. Skudor

    Skudor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    39
    Good stuff - thanks for the tips. I've played a couple of games online and must say that a very strong military is a must. Way beyond what you'd see in a single player game. I do wonder, though, if it is possible to win without being hugely aggressive...
     
  7. Tommy1234567890

    Tommy1234567890 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    298
    Location:
    Argentina
    A lot of ppl came here saying they became more confident about playing MP now reading this kinda makes me less confident :S i don't know if I will be great at making a good army fast and good at trading with other ppl is an singel player game a good way to practise for MP if so wat level? or is it better to read articles like this ?
     
  8. TrailblazingScot

    TrailblazingScot I was kittenOFchaos

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2001
    Messages:
    6,877
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Brighouse, England
    To be honest, play against the AI on any level from noble and above and you'll get familiar with the game better than reading about it.

    Then, get online, join the ladder and take a pounding for a while as you get familiar to the tactics employed that the AI just doesn't use.

    For simple starting recommendation on an ancient start it is to research in turn towards bronze working, animal husbandry and then iron working. If under pressure go for archery to form up defense. In that start period grow to size 3-4 before your first worker putting out scouts/warriors for defense, finding huts and enemies.

    Beyond that just gain experience and take on a few ideas...

    1. No advance without security - the bankers tactics. Essentially don't expand without defenses or push an attack without having a sound defense.

    2. Make it really hard for enemies to beat you. Even if that means doing nothing but building archers all game, don't die easily and in a typical cton ffa game you won't end up last.

    All this time you'll be getting used to the online game and improving.

    For me, when I start a game my primary goal is survival and secondary to that is winning, I recommend that philosophy to everyone, that and having loads of catapults :D
     
  9. joelwest

    joelwest Noble

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    339
    Location:
    Houston, TX USA
    what is to stop this from happening in ladder matches?

    I invested several hours in a MP Civ game once, but at a certain point it became clear I (my team) about to be steamrolled. what is the point of sticking around for that?
     
  10. Eqqman

    Eqqman Walrus

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    342
    In ladder matches, it will still count as a loss if you leave the game before you officially lose. Since people are presumably only playing on the ladder because they care about their ranking, then this is usually sufficient to nip quitting in the bud. But it's not a cure-all because nothing 'forces' a person to stay in a game longer than they want to.
     
  11. se7en

    se7en Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    96
    what is the problem with people quitting? i play chess a lot so im used to thinking that if your opponent resigns then you win.. and almost every game ends in a resignation once a player's hope is lost. personally, i'd rather take the W and move on. is it just to drive the point home that you have won or something else?
     
  12. Eqqman

    Eqqman Walrus

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    342
    I had a lengthy and thoughtful answer to this written out, but I decided to delete it. I saw it would only inspire people who like to quit early to catch me in one of those fruitless arguments that go nowhere.

    Speaking for myself, I do have a totally different mindset playing chess opposed to other games online. Chess is basically all about strategy- if my opponent decides mine is better, it's fine if they resign. Computer games add a visceral component where most of my enjoyment resides. In these cases, it's not enough that I have an unstoppable force, I need the chance to employ it.
     
  13. Zombie69

    Zombie69 Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,898
    Personally, if i played multiplayer and had an unstoppable force, i'd much rather my opponent quit than stick around and waste both his and my time carrying out a forgone conclusion. Civ 4 is all about strategy, and if there's no strategy involved, there's no fun involved either. Actually, if my opponent didn't quit at that point, i'd quit myself and take a loss rather than waste my time carrying out the win.
     
  14. TrailblazingScot

    TrailblazingScot I was kittenOFchaos

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2001
    Messages:
    6,877
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Brighouse, England
    So, any player with abit of backbone will beat you?
     
  15. HectorSpector

    HectorSpector Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    58
    I don't play MP, but isn't it really annoying having to hunt down all the tiny cities, and finding that the AI has sent out a settler to start a new new civ when everything is almost lost. What's the point.

    I had a game where the AI had found two seperate 1 tile islands at sea, and planted cities on them both. They held out for a while and were nothing but a pain in the butt after the rest if their civilisation was totally wasted. Annoying.
     
  16. TrailblazingScot

    TrailblazingScot I was kittenOFchaos

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2001
    Messages:
    6,877
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Brighouse, England
    During online play it is rare that an elimination limit hasn't been placed, for instance most myleague ladder games have a 2 city elimination limit. Thus if you really are more dominant it isn't about chasing an enemy civilization as they spread like a resistant bacteria across the globe, it is about getting in there and killing them.


    Both sides of the arguement are correct depending upon the game settings, if it is 1 vs 1 a la chess then give up whenever you want to. My objection is in a 3+ free for all game where if someone gives up all to easily it gives an undue advantage to others and is just bad play. Worse still this idea that Zombie had that if on paper (powergraphs) things looked desperate, just give in. I've turned around many games from desperate positions and just by building up a reputation as a tough customer it does you good as people won't as readily attack you. Well, that has been my experience.
     
  17. Yanik

    Yanik Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    22
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Montreal
    Very nice article, useful tips!

    I would only like to add something about the passwords. They are almost useless. Because when someone quits or retires and the AI takes over, the password is erased. So anyone can join and take over the Ai's place.

    If you dont want people to join when someone quits, just turn off the option "Take over AI".

    However, it might sucks to not have humans replacing the quiters... But at least it doesnt OOS or freezes the game :)
     
  18. Piemaster

    Piemaster Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    132
    That's completely untrue. People who hate permanent alliances usually do so becasue they despise Kingmaker scenarios (not just in Civ, but in all games)
     
  19. bunny_lard

    bunny_lard Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    93
    very informative guide. I definitely agree with the barbs should be off and build a huge military strategies. Just today I had a 1v1 and got completely flooded by barbs and lost 3 settlers and 2 cities, although i suppose i was used to civ 3 where barbs couldnt raze or capture cities...on another note, what do you recommend on building settlers? if you build only an army as you suggest, then you would likely be stuck with a small, resourceless empire and would be forced into a long and difficult war.
     
  20. Bianezzi

    Bianezzi Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Sao Paulo, Brazil
    This article makes me want never to play Civ online.

    Only military conquest? All armies? Everything you do should goal a military victory? No fun at all, at least to me. Civilization is a game with different ways of playing and I don't enjoy playing just one for too long.

    I'm open to 'friendlier', diplomacy focused games. I know I have played quite a few of them, with humans.
     

Share This Page