How am I supposed to play multiplayer like this?

[Eutropius]

On probably every Civ V multiplayer game I've went to, on turn 1, it crashes, doesn't crash to the desktop, but instead to the leader loading screen, after it is done loading, it returns normally to the game, with my city sprite being a road instead of an actual city, and the city location different from where it actually is.

This leaves me with an inability to research or build anything, and ultimately, I have to intentionally leave because, well, I can't do . How do I fix this problem?

 

[calad]

You dont. Civ5 multiplayer does not work so you should not bother with it.

 

[nimling]

You dont. Civ5 multiplayer does not work so you should not bother with it.

This is so true. Not only is it buggy and prone to crash, but it's just a poorly thought out experience.

Next time, Civilization should be designed with an actually fun MP experience in mind. I can think of ways to improve the game architecture for MP, without sacrificing too much in SP.

Unfortunately, bad game design leads to bad behavior from the player base, and most of the people who grew up playing Civilization see the later games as being un-fun. Some of the criticism is just crotchety old men and women complaining, but for Civ V most of the game's inherent flaws were known upon release (and some known even before release). I have to give credit to those who made the game, and taught the AI to play somewhat competently with 1UPT.

 

[LordBalkoth]

I've been able to play Civ V multiplayer (and so have many others) without this issue -- did you verify the integrity of your game cache for starters?

Yeah, I've had a lot of issues where people just ragequit and then it's a pain to fix the freeze that sometimes happens (usually someone has to leave and rejoin), but saying it flat out doesn't work is hardly true.

That said, I agree with nimling that multiplayer is generally not a good experience (at least not in the public lobbies -- games with people I know or met in Civ V multiplayer groups have tended to be a lot better). Games tend to be focused on xbow or chariot archer spam with emphasis on simply pumping out units...and other games like the Starcraft or Command and Conquer series have much better gameplay if you just want to build a big army and attack the other guy.

I never played any prior Civ games, but I did play other 4Xes like Lords of Magic or Heroes of Might and Magic (along with many other genres like FPSes, RTSes, etc). I actually like the 1UPT system, even if the AI tends to be incompetent at it. I like being able to set up choke-points, use melee as shields for ranged, use things like rivers to my advantage, etc.

 

[anandus]

You dont. Civ5 multiplayer does not work so you should not bother with it.

Well, multiplayer is a lot more fun than playing against the AI
And for most people it works fine. I only play multiplayer, as the AI is a disaster, and have put 1000+ hours in MP.

 

[calad]

Well, multiplayer is a lot more fun than playing against the AI
And for most people it works fine. I only play multiplayer, as the AI is a disaster, and have put 1000+ hours in MP.

I have also played several multiplayer games but there has always been major issues, you need to have some level of masochism to enjoy it. It has something to do with players so with few selected it likely will work but try to have +6 players. Multiplayer means lot of players and not tetrarchyplayer.

So for MP this game is not worth of your time because it does not work. Civ5 sucks so fans get over it and find other better working game.

 

[Sharples]

Peer to peer has ALWAYS had issues. It's time Fraxis understood that and developed a new means of MultiPlayer for players.

 

[Tabarnak]

I managed to host/play like 5-6 games lately in a row without any problems. I always tell players to check if they see all pings(if not rejoin...). It's very important for stability. Well it's a must now for me to yell this important note...