Sadly Civilization V multiplayer is 30% about your hardware and 70% of your skill

[BlackWizard]

Sadly Civilization V multiplayer is 30% about your hardware and 70% of your skill. I tested this with my friends. Host didnt engage in combat at all to rule out its effects.

1) Three computers. One is host. Then two computers A and B. A has superior harware and B is crap and it also has wireless mouse. Computer A won fast click fest everytime with B. Also changed player from comp A to comp B. With crap hardware lost 6 frigates when taking 2 of enemys cities. With super hardware didnt lose single unit. Thats very huge difference.

2) Tested this also with hybrid mode. Took 2 other players cities without loosing single Frigate.

So if you feeling you loose fastclick everytime you should at least abandon your wireless mouse. What is the most important part of hardware to win fastclick fests?

What kind on hardware people here have? Ecpecially those who win fastclick always and those who lose it always?

 

[nemesis464]

Swap the percentages around IMO

 

[Sharples]

Hybrid.

 

[Matjillam]

I find MP warfare not only to be about speed.

Sometimes it's good to strike first and fast (when that CB could bring your city to 0 % and he could take).

But sometimes I find that when I go too fast, my opponent can take advantage of my 0 movement troops and focus fire.

I dont think it's allways about firing fast. It's very much about setting you troops up and knowing exactly WHEN to fire.

And then ofc, managing your empire. If you bring 8 Xbows against his 4 Xbows because you just got a bigger, better empire, a fast mouse won't save him much

 

[TheHanzou]

Good luck trying to stop a pillaging horseman when you cant move first, he can just move from tile to tile and heal himself indefinitely while gaining gold and killing your economy if you cant kill him before he moves.

Pillaging is already borderline broken in hybrid mode, because the heal allows attacking troops to stay at full health or heal up every turn which negates the advantage of city defense, but in simultaneous games its a complete crapshot. Not only can you pillage and heal, but also take upgrade heal and move away from the attack when you are faster, the difference is absolutely devastating.

 

[sendos]

Swap the percentages around IMO

Kinda this, more like 50-50, as OP's premises seem to be contrary to his conclusion. Still, OP has a point: multiplayer definitely needs fixing.

 

[Silverfuturist]

I think there is a lot more luck in what kind of land you get; if I roll a killer start - salt as my lux with plenty of wheat, and my next few cities I can settle on mining resources/marble, and you roll a flat start with your luxes being calendar resources (excluding citrus) you can go first every time in combat and it won't help you.

 

[CraigMak]

He's talking primarily about battle and not about the luck of your land. I will agree that the combat system is definitely not completely fair but the better player usually still wins. If the players are equally skilled or nearly equally skilled the person with the better computer will have a distinct and over powered advantage in combat though. Basically running away every unit that is low on health and killing every unit that's about to heal. After some time this will lead to a large difference in army size in favor of the faster computer. I know a few players who are good at the game ONLY because they can get 1 - 3 moves off before everyone else every turn. Without that advantage they would be horrible because they kill everything and never lose a unit. This however is an extreme case and requires an insane machine which was probably purchased for some other purpose than playing Civ.

 

[CraigMak]

Here's a tip if you are consistently slow and don't want to get a better computer. If your enemy is consistently winning first moves on you, focus your first move on the 2nd most important fight. Then you should win that one while they win the obvious one with no contest. This way they don't get every single shot off first that turn only the very first one.

 

[rpg5414]

I don't think power of computer itself matters as much as you guys think it does. I have a desktop computer capable of running pretty much every game out there in 1440p at 120hz on max settings yet often end up moving 1-4 moves after friends with crappy laptops. I've started going through my connection trying to figure out how to improve that but it's not noticeably worse than theirs either. Obviously, either connection or computer are the cause here, but i'm just saying that you don't need to go and spend $2k on a faster computer, just work on your connection.

 

[rpg5414]

Here's a tip if you are consistently slow and don't want to get a better computer. If your enemy is consistently winning first moves on you, focus your first move on the 2nd most important fight. Then you should win that one while they win the obvious one with no contest. This way they don't get every single shot off first that turn only the very first one.

Not necessarily true. I've encountered a number of games where the opponent gets 3-4 moves before I get one.

 

[Heretiv]

There is the option where players take it in turn to attack but that is maddeningly slow.

Also it sucks when you are down as last one so everyone else attacks you first.

 

[CraigMak]

Not necessarily true. I've encountered a number of games where the opponent gets 3-4 moves before I get one.

If this is happening to you despite having an awesome machine then you must have a really terrible internet connection. Either that or you are actually physically slow. The only other possible problem I can think of would be having your graphics settings turned up so high that it's slowing you down. Running the game with glistening streams and fog of war that makes pretty swirls is going to have an obvious negative effect on your computer's speed.

 

[reddishrecue]

It is unknown what causes multiplayer disconnections, but when I have a nice decent start that works out fine I get a disconnection or something happens that the game stops working or whatever that I have to restart. However, when another player is doing good and wonder spams all the possible wonders there's no disconnection. When there is a douchebag that bullies everyone else/warmonger all the cities in the map I don't get a disconnection, the whole game works perfectly the whole time.

 

[CraigMak]

It is unknown what causes multiplayer disconnections, but when I have a nice decent start that works out fine I get a disconnection or something happens that the game stops working or whatever that I have to restart. However, when another player is doing good and wonder spams all the possible wonders there's no disconnection. When there is a douchebag that bullies everyone else/warmonger all the cities in the map I don't get a disconnection, the whole game works perfectly the whole time.

I think that many of the random game problems have to do with the players. Games with random noobs usually turn out to be the least stable. Games with good players often are pretty stable because those people have machines capable of running the game properly.

Of course random disconnects and other nonsense happens to everyone but that's a general trend I have noticed.

 

[Biz_]

funny how nothing has changed since 2010

this is a big reason why civ 5's level of play will never approach that of civ 4

 

[Heretiv]

I dont think they pay much attention to MP, hence still some issues with it.

 

[Arcaian]

funny how nothing has changed since 2010

this is a big reason why civ 5's level of play will never approach that of civ 4

If that's your opinion, then why not set the game so it doesn't do simultaneous turns, and you can play just like your precious civ 4?

I mean, it's an option. Your turn, then the next person's turn, then the next. If you want good competition, that's OBVIOUSLY the way to go.

 

[Biz_]

If that's your opinion, then why not set the game so it doesn't do simultaneous turns, and you can play just like your precious civ 4?

I mean, it's an option. Your turn, then the next person's turn, then the next. If you want good competition, that's OBVIOUSLY the way to go.

this doesn't really work outside of 1v1 because games would take too long

the obvious solution would be to implement sequential turns for each team instead of each player, but developers never do the obvious thing

 

[ElliotS]

Doesn't Hybrid have separate turns only when at war? Wouldn't that negate any of this?

I played against a friend with some comps and when we warred we took separate turns and fast click literally meant nothing. Am I missing something?