Starting out with multiplayer (is military the only way to win?)

[Mizipzor]

Ok, so me and a couple of friends got Civ 4 and started playing together. There are 6 of us, all except two (me included) are completely new to the Civ franchise. And me and my pal who have played it before havent played it enough to call ourselves good at it.

Se heres our first game together:

Everyone started expanding, no one had any particular build order, just went with what sounded cool. It didnt take long before we were discussing the inevitable nuclear war. Hehe.

I, on the other hand, wanted a peace victory. UN election victory was out of the question since I coulnt bribe my enemies into voting on me (Ive only played against the AI in a few games before this). Having tried the space race before, I went with cultural.

Making some buildings and wonders that gave bonus to culture growth was my first thing to do. I researched stuff that gave more bonus. After that I put the sliders on 80 % research and 20 % cultural.

This made my score go through the roof! (How do they calculate that thing?!). I used that to intimidate one of the players to give me his smallest city ("or else I completely annihilate you!"), I had no significant military force so this was just an empty threat. I spent all my resources on building cultural stuff.

This made everyone afraid of me. Everyone refused to trade with me. Around 600 AD two of the players war-decced me and stomped me from two seperate fronts with giant stacks! On one side there were 4 Longbowmen and 8 Catapults, on the other side there were an equal number of Knights. What I had in defense were a mere one or two axemen/crossbowmen. I got completely wiped out...

==================================

On a more serious note, on the internet Ive only seen warring tactics. Is it impossible to win a peacevictory when not playing against computers?

Let me try to concretisize (sp?) this into a number of questions:

a) Are there any ways to stop being swamped with military units?
b) I guess I can have more military units myself... but shouldnt I as well just go on as a warmaster myself?
c) Or maybe I could go really defensive, units with city defense bonus and walls. But I can see him just go around desroying imrovements and killing workers, any way to counter this?
d) I guess, in the end, I just want to try to win a peace-win. Is cultural or space race better suited for this? Or maybe even the UN variant?

Comments?

 

[notagoodname]

Yeah multiplayer is heavily influenced by military, although it does depend on the game type.
On the ladder a typical game type we play is ctons, they start from any era, typically ancient and we set the turn limit to about 130 turns. That way the game only lasts a couple of hours and the object is to score the most points in that time. Typically the guy who builds and techs the most wins in that form of the game and those that war with each other simply weaken themselves.
Another game type is epic which is the same as single player but with no tech trading. These are a bit more warlike as the idea is to win by one of the victory types so everyone tends to pick on the current leader of the game.
Lastly there are teamers, these are brutal. The teams are fixed at the start and the idea of the game is to kill the other team right from the beginning. It is quite common to lose a player in the first 10 turns in these games.

A great map type to play on in multiplayer is inland sea. This map is a ring of land around an ocean. You have 2 neighbours to deal with - one clockwise from your position and one anti-clockwise. This works well because if you are winning there is no way for everyone to attack you at once without having to go through others land. Instead the game has more diplomacy as the neighbours that work together only have to defend 1 frontline each. This means you tend to form strong alliances in game where you each fight back-to-back together whilst trying to beat the other in one of the end game victory types.

 

[Mizipzor]

Inland sea sounds like a lot of fun. I like game settings that encourages everyone to be more diplomatically involved.

Is it just me that tries to win a peace-victory in MP games?

 

[Mutineer]

Actially I am lost to undestand why they could be afraid of you at all?

They probably too new to multiplayer.
Keep look on Military power graph. It does depends a bit on tecnology you have and your teretory and population and some buildings and actial military units. In short it represent you current military might + you potential to create more military units fast. Keeping eye on this graph give you a good idea of intention of your rivals and comparable military strength.

 

[Mizipzor]

Thanks, I will check that graph the next time I try to evaluate someones military might.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

'ts mltarstc but don't worry people wll do fun thngs le buldng wonders too. A lot of people race for the Oracle or buld the stonehenge and wat for a CS slngshot (to ll you wth maceman).

Sorry some eys on my eyboard aren't worng properly.