As a CivNet Veteran, here's my thoughts. . .
Someone above mentions that simultaneous movement will be a problem. I'd have to assert that simultaneous movement is a fair trade for shorther games.
When I used to play CivNet, 3 players in the modern era would take *weeks* to finish a game. I remember one game where we all sat there all weekend, all day for four weekends straight. . . just building our armies and waiting for the other one to attack. Finally, I attacked. It took me five hours just to get my tanks loaded on the transports, and across the strait to his continent (about 7 squares). When I finally did land, I took his entire continent in one turn (thank you railroads!). He quit in a huff. . . and the other guy didn't show up the next weekend.
So, there went a month's worth of weekends.
In CivNet, you could turn off simultaneous movement and most people elected to do so when combat started because the hosting computer had an advantage (faster moving, no lag). But if they find a way to equalize that, I think simultaneous movement is the only way to go. Sometimes you'll be beaten to a city spot, sometimes you won't. . . that's a fair trade for having a game that is actually *feasible* as multiplayer.
Just FYI, I tried Civ2 MP, but I'm no longer a student and didn't have the eight hours/day it would apparently need to finish a game.
Just my 2 cents,
Hurin
Someone above mentions that simultaneous movement will be a problem. I'd have to assert that simultaneous movement is a fair trade for shorther games.
When I used to play CivNet, 3 players in the modern era would take *weeks* to finish a game. I remember one game where we all sat there all weekend, all day for four weekends straight. . . just building our armies and waiting for the other one to attack. Finally, I attacked. It took me five hours just to get my tanks loaded on the transports, and across the strait to his continent (about 7 squares). When I finally did land, I took his entire continent in one turn (thank you railroads!). He quit in a huff. . . and the other guy didn't show up the next weekend.
So, there went a month's worth of weekends.

In CivNet, you could turn off simultaneous movement and most people elected to do so when combat started because the hosting computer had an advantage (faster moving, no lag). But if they find a way to equalize that, I think simultaneous movement is the only way to go. Sometimes you'll be beaten to a city spot, sometimes you won't. . . that's a fair trade for having a game that is actually *feasible* as multiplayer.
Just FYI, I tried Civ2 MP, but I'm no longer a student and didn't have the eight hours/day it would apparently need to finish a game.
Just my 2 cents,
Hurin