Bunny hopping WAS/IS cheating and yet so few CS players on the numerous forums realised that...
Playing CS online is okay...but online at an internet cafe lan where all the machines are the same and people can't cheat without being caught and beaten up does the game come into it's own.
Every week at university on a Tuesday we play for 5 hours at Reality-X in Durham with at least 1 all-nighter in term...I prove myself there and have the all important notebook to take down the scores
The problem is CS generally is the level of cheating (which is major even at these lan competitions according to some people I respect who have done the circuit for CS and Q3) and the variability in peoples computers and connections thus eliminating true skill from the equation. The forums reflect these issues in addition to people wanting to say "I OWNZ U"...with CIV it does reflect the same because it is predominatly a single-player game where being BAD can often be extremely good fun! Getting killed in CS in under a minute and watching for upto 4 minutes for the next round doesn't lead to people enjoying themselves in the main with the OWNZ U brigade in town.
Proof that civ2 multiplayer wasn't immune to the nasty OWNZ U brigade is evident in how eyesOFnight treated people and the alligations of cheating etc that surrounded much of that gaming. As a player of multiplayer only on a few occations my greatest gripe was the silly settings people would ask for (especially x2 movement to aid their nasty diplomats about).
In one case I remember a game setting I and another dude got tricked onto playing...the map was VAST but very, very thin, but VERY VERY LONG! Thus distances between players was immense...the german player basically a briber player who had chosen the settings went along the republic, demo route without building any army...
I hadn't realised till a bit into the game the shape of the planet and so I had a large empire and army with nowhere to go being stuck on a puny continent! The other player withered on his own. Eventually my forces met the Germans and immediately invaded...however the player brided my units and cities I captured easily as the distance between our empires was huge...me and the other player united (but basically it was me vs the germans) till the other player resigned and I eventually saw it was futile to continue as another large invasion of my units (which had to travel such a vast distance) was eventually bribed and THEN he was WLTK day pop-booming...I couldn't match that as my lands were poorer (I had so few hills).
We did play again 1 vs 1 on the world.mp map...since I knew his position I was able to storm his empire in a turn with my crusaders and knights, REVENGE WAS MINE ON A NASTY PLAYER.
Summary:
civ2 mulitplayer and CS have the same ugly traits on the forums, the fact that civfanatics does nicely is that is mainly a single-player game OR cooperative (succession games or democracy games) OR GOTM (the winners of which have been modest and we all know that certainly for civ2 it depended on how much micro-management they wanted to put in pop-booming and caravaning etc).
Plus the nasty people seem to like apolyton more...
