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.
any good places for discussing multiplayer strategy?
- Thread starter pi-r8
- Start date
helemaalnicks
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 234
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.
Ill start. Don't build a slingshot, don't build GL. You'll be a big target in either case.
DaveMcW
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Messages
- 6,489
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.
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.
edit: to clarify, i mostly just play pangaea FFA games.
Unconquered Sun
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,462
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!
DaveMcW
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Messages
- 6,489
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!
He-Who-Hunts
2nd Legionary Cohort
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 ******ed 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.
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 ******ed 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.
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.
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.
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.
Civ4 multiplayer is almost like an RTS, there's just so much to do.
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)
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.
DaveMcW
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Messages
- 6,489
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.
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.
DaveMcW
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Messages
- 6,489
This is where single player skills come in. You just beat someone around like a stupid AI, what are you gonna do now?
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.
...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.
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.
troytheface
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,262
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"
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"
Indiansmoke
Deity
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
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
Unconquered Sun
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,462
No offense Indiansmoke but that's got to be the worst Tips section ever.
Similar threads
