I don't play multiplayer because....

I don't play cIV multiplayer because...

  • I like that I can play at my own pace in singleplayer.

    Votes: 66 40.0%
  • I can't find enough people that will play a whole game from start to finish.

    Votes: 28 17.0%
  • I'd rather mod the singleplayer game.

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • I don't think I'm good enough to play multiplayer.

    Votes: 33 20.0%
  • I DO play multiplayer, all the time!

    Votes: 28 17.0%
  • There's Multiplayer?!?!?

    Votes: 9 5.5%

  • Total voters
    165
Efexeye said:
Well, do you want it to work, or not? Can you provide some more specifics?

i have one firewall, zonealarm. i turned that firewall off while attempting to get civ to run multiplayer, but nothing happened.

after i enter in my account data, the program goes into a state of perpetual loading. ctrl-alt-del does not work. i have checked my gamespy account and it appears in good standing. i really can't give you much more details on the problem since i am baffled by it.
 
Well, don't you have the Windows XP firewall (I assume XP, you may be running Windows 2000)? There's a checkbox when you install the game that you tick, and it lets cIV access the Internet, firewall-be-dammned.

Oh, also, are you patched? I had heard about a problem like the one you are having, but that was pre-patch.
 
troytheface said:
The biggest drawback to mp for me is getting shot to a city for the next build order when i needed to attack with a unit- when the other guy gets the drop on ya, it bites- on occurance that does not happen with sp.


Check the "minimize popups" box. It will pull up your dialogue boxes at the end of the turn rather than the beginning, though modal dialogue boxes for city build selections are evil in general!
 
Islandia said:
Check the "minimize popups" box. It will pull up your dialogue boxes at the end of the turn rather than the beginning, though modal dialogue boxes for city build selections are evil in general!

That is a friggin' fantastic suggestion- I get tired of having to make a build choice without being able to look around my empire a bit first...thanks!
 
Efexeye said:
I totally disagree- cIV is pretty much a big board game. Playing against an AI is eventually gonna get boring, but different humans will always offer different, interesting strategies.
Not reallly. Whoever has the best alliance will win. Boardgames like Risk suck for this reason.

I wasn't bashing multiplayer - it's a great thing, but for me is only fun cooperatively vs. the AI. I was saying that the development emphasis should have been on the singleplayer, which is more played and more important.
 
I think Risk sucks for a whole different reason (endless dice rolls) but that isn't the issue.

I don't think they emphasized multiplayer over single player when developing cIV- the improvements in AI are a testament to that- I think that they simply accomodated and planned for multiplayer from the get-go, instead of trying to bolt it on to the single player game, a la PTW.
 
Efexeye said:
Well, don't you have the Windows XP firewall (I assume XP, you may be running Windows 2000)? There's a checkbox when you install the game that you tick, and it lets cIV access the Internet, firewall-be-dammned.

Oh, also, are you patched? I had heard about a problem like the one you are having, but that was pre-patch.

yea, the XP firewall is disabled and i am running civ4 1.09.
 
Hunh.....any help in the tech support forum? I found help with problems I was having with a direct IP game there...
 
You missed the "Live in a country where any kind of ADSL connection is regarded as a 'Corporate Solution' and is priced accordingly so meaning that I regularly have to scream (loudly) at my stone-age 56k dial up" option.

So no multiplayer for me.
 
MickyLuv said:
You missed the "Live in a country where any kind of ADSL connection is regarded as a 'Corporate Solution' and is priced accordingly so meaning that I regularly have to scream (loudly) at my stone-age 56k dial up" option.

So no multiplayer for me.

What about PBEM?
 
PBEM...how many weeks does one of those take? ;)

Maybe I'll try this whole gamespy thing this weekend. There are really several reasons I don't play multiplayer.

1. I just think there are better games for multiplayer action (the main reason, which I previously stated)
2. GameSpy (and the pranks anonymous kids play)
3. Waiting for players to end turns (this is related to #1)
4. Waiting to join a game.
5. Having someone drop mid-game, or going AFK.
6. Getting disconnected myself.

If I knew people (personally) who were insterested in multiplayer Civ, I'd go for that in a heartbeat.
 
Oggums said:
PBEM...how many weeks does one of those take? ;)

More like months! The only POSSIBLE way I would play PBEM is if I could play at work...anything else, I would think, is excruciating. Even in hotseat mode, the first 2-3 hours of the game are SUPER boring.
 
Efexeye said:
What about PBEM?


Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Used to do that with hex-based wargames. Get less time for murder!!
 
I do play multiplayer and think its a great addition to cIV.

Pros of MP are:
  • People are better able to defend agaisnt attacks in war for the most part. The computer rarely counter attacks my assults, but a human will almost always hamper my supply line and forward progress in wartime.
  • A human is much more interesting to talk to in diplomacy. If tech trade is on then alliances can be formed. Though it may not seem fair, it adds a much more realistic feel to it when trading.
  • Bragging rights. Beating an AI seems too gamey. Out witting a human is usually harder and adds a rush that you don't get in SP.



However, the cons to MP are:
  • More difficult to get a game going as easily as SP.
  • People joining midgame. I wish more people would use passwords to protect their civs so all 5 of us don't have to wait for someone new to join the 6th slot every 10 minutes until we all quit due to the waiting.
  • Having to play on blazing turn timer and quick game speed gets old. I prefer epic, or normal at least. But I understand why people want units and techs to be built faster. Quick just seems to favor the stack of doom strategies.
 
Efexeye said:
So, by your definition, Risk would be better played against a computer? Chess, the same thing?

To me, cIV is essentially a multiplayer game with a singleplayer training mode.

No, Risk would be better suited on a board, at home, with some geeky friends, pizza and a keg. :goodjob:
 
Because I play to play....
MP is always about winning..I "play" to win at work every single day. When I'm relaxing , Civ is one of the things I do to relax,I just want to relax.

The only exception is when I happen to get into a game with a group of my close longtime online buddies..the ones I first started MP with way back in 95/96. Then its more like a social gathering than a pitfight.
 
Where's the "Screaming, immature players, demanding I make faster moves, demanding a faster game, yelling leet speak at eachother is not my idea of fun" option?
 
Oggums said:
PBEM...how many weeks does one of those take? ;)

Maybe I'll try this whole gamespy thing this weekend. There are really several reasons I don't play multiplayer.

1. I just think there are better games for multiplayer action (the main reason, which I previously stated)
2. GameSpy (and the pranks anonymous kids play)
3. Waiting for players to end turns (this is related to #1)
4. Waiting to join a game.
5. Having someone drop mid-game, or going AFK.
6. Getting disconnected myself.

If I knew people (personally) who were insterested in multiplayer Civ, I'd go for that in a heartbeat.

1. Fair enough, but why are they categorically better?
2. I don't know what you mean here...
3. Set the timer!
4. There are always about 200 open games waiting for people...
5. Free cities! OR, you can turn over their empire to the AI...
6. Yeah, that certainly sucks. However, autosave every turn helps to cut down on the suckitude.

Yeah, it IS much easier to play with friends than with random Gamespy hoolignas...that's what I do!
 
Top Bottom