The point of multiplayer

[RulerOfDaPeople]

What's the point multiplayer? Even on small maps and few civs, games last so long that people don't even stick around to complete them. (They leave and the AI takes over after about 3 or so hours)

 

[[KC]Bantams]

MP games are more fun if you join the Number1 MP league at www.league.civplayers.com nobody quits league games and nobody cheats most League games last approx 2hours maximum

 

[StefOfDk]

Yeah, there are actually some leagues outthere that targets dedicated players and have very fun games.

In the next season of my league we will make some civ-battles where we focus on playing full games, even though this means playing 2-3 hours each time. This requires dedicated players since the game takes longer and longer the further up to modern times you get.

 

[Cashew]

MP games are more fun if you join the Number1 MP league at www.league.civplayers.com nobody quits league games and nobody cheats most League games last approx 2hours maximum

That's because league games have turn limits, Bantams :/
Nobody has to quit cuz the game doesn't get a chance to get boring.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

That's because league games have turn limits, Bantams :/
Nobody has to quit cuz the game doesn't get a chance to get boring.

We had a 20 second turn limit the last 2 games. Even the top most powerful civs didn't stick around because the time simply got too long and it got too late in the evening.

I'm still unsure if multiplayer is for me. I am interested in joining Stef's league though. I think some organization to complete an entire game might make it much more enjoyable.

 

[CanuckSoldier]

Civplayers Leagues are not limited to just the 2-3 random lobby game, we also have organized epic games and Ironman games that are organized in our forums. But the average turn limited games are exciting and rewarding for most people that learn the skills to compete in these style of games.

CS

 

[Sven Anka]

Or you can play with friends, thats what I do.
We play very long games cause we save them and play it for several days.

 

[StefOfDk]

It is absolutely the most fun to play with friends. Before I got a bit organized, we were 4-6 people who lived nearby eachother and played Civ on LAN. That was the BEST thing ever. But that eats up a lot of time - getting the equipment together etc. A whole day, most of the time. However, I do miss those days. *sigh*

 

[Speaker]

That's because league games have turn limits, Bantams :/
Nobody has to quit cuz the game doesn't get a chance to get boring.

If I am beating you after 130 or 150 turns, what makes you think you will win in the end? CIV doesn't have much of a catch-up mechanism. In fact, gaps and leads increase substantially as the game goes on. Turn limits simply hasten the inevitable.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

If I am beating you after 130 or 150 turns, what makes you think you will win in the end? CIV doesn't have much of a catch-up mechanism. In fact, gaps and leads increase substantially as the game goes on. Turn limits simply hasten the inevitable.

The fact that I only had one city to opponents 5 or so, and was being ganged up on by 3 enemies at once and THEY STILL couldn't kill me off and that I managed to sneak out a settler and begin expanding onto unexplored land/islands to build up my civ tells me that it is possible to come back as long as you have resiliance, military skill, and determination.

I once played a game as America on the Giant Earth map with many civs (it's a mod). I got caught up in war against Monty and Sitting Bull that caused me to lag behind all the European/Asian civs in techs. But as soon as I wiped Monty off the map and ended the conflict with Sitting Bull, I was able to meet many of those European Asian civs and was able to trade with them, and not much longer later I was AHEAD of all of them.

 

[StefOfDk]

I do agree with you in the fact that though you are technologically behind and may not has as many cities as the other civs you may have a comeback and be in front in the last part of the game. However, the odds are against you and you need some luck and good skills to make it through. It is kind of like playing on a much harder difficulty level - you can do it, but you can't do it without a little luck, e.g. a nice starting position.

For example, if you start in a jungle and it is only possible to expand in jungle you may get behind. But if you go for a lot of workers to cut down the jungle and you are left alone without warfare from the other civs, then you might have a land that is better than most of the others. Well, purely hypothetically anyway. Just to say: You DO have a chance, but I doubt you would win all the time - and especially against good human players.

 

[Cashew]

We had a 20 second turn limit the last 2 games. Even the top most powerful civs didn't stick around because the time simply got too long and it got too late in the evening.

That's a turn timer. A turn limit is different. If I had meant blazing I would have said blazing. I didn't. A turn limit means: the game goes on for only a specified number of turns, and at the end of that if no one has won then the victor is decided by score. Generally you play with a city elim of 2 with such a setting and the turn limit is 125.

The fact that I only had one city to opponents 5 or so, and was being ganged up on by 3 enemies at once and THEY STILL couldn't kill me off and that I managed to sneak out a settler and begin expanding onto unexplored land/islands to build up my civ tells me that it is possible to come back as long as you have resiliance, military skill, and determination.

Free for alls are kind of dumb anyways. A cton on inland sea or donut would be much more fair (and should be more fun to play). And a teamer is superior to either of those game variants.

If I am beating you after 130 or 150 turns, what makes you think you will win in the end? CIV doesn't have much of a catch-up mechanism. In fact, gaps and leads increase substantially as the game goes on. Turn limits simply hasten the inevitable.

I didn't say I thought that... where are you drawing this argument from >.>
I'm advocating a turn limit... so, I would generally agree with your assertion that turn limits hasten the inevitable. Aside from that, it also forces the losing side to try and make a bid for victory before the time runs out rather than sitting back and winning a game through patience (which is dumb, it's a game and it should be exciting).

 

[Neikius]

Well we play pangea,duel,7 civs (fill slots with ai). All friends or close, so we just set the handicap to something fair, for example 2 of us played emperor the last game, one noble and one chieftan (newbie). Its quite nice becouse its possible to balance stuff out. Plus dynamic turn timer is nice, we usually play on medium turn timer and quick turns. Games usually end in up to 3 hours with occasional drag, but that can be resumed later or just quit if the winner is apparent.

 

[Metallian]

I've noticed from this thread that a lot of players complain about how the game becomes dull after playing for a few hours. I assume this is because of the long turns and that most of the civs have already been developed. I'd recommend downloading the gamemonitor mod which is available at http://league.civplayers.com/?section=downloads. The mod allows the host of the game to speed up the turn timer during the game. For example, you can start on fast timer and finish on turbo (new speed setting) and there is also an even fast timer than turbo. The host has to press the H key on his keyboard and he can change the speed. Allowing players to speed up the timer will drastically limit the amount time between turns, thus allowing them to complete 200+ turns in a reasonable time frame. The mod has adds a few different check boxes to the game; eliminating gamebreaking wonders, eliminating espionage, disabling blockade actions, and many more. As for turn limits, they are always used for league games unless the game has been declared an epic (love them epics, keep them coming). Unfortunately, when playing against humans players the game of Civ tends to have a domino effect. If player falls behind early it's very difficult to make up the difference after certain point in the game, however the game does have a 20% cheaper tech discount built into it for lessor advanced civs.

 

[StefOfDk]

That is very useful information, thank you

 

[Neikius]

What about doing something like this from pitboss? I hate not beeing able to limit turns dynamicaly as in normal game from pitboss ... and that lousy 1 hour shortest turn. I understand pitboss was done for a different purpose, but adding this should have been so damn easy. Or at least to allow fractional hours like 0.01 hours turn time (if not dynamic).

Anyway we always play on medium turn timer and usually the time is sufficient, unless you are the most advanced player (or in war) -and too long if you are falling behind

I will test this mod nontheless - thanks for info - it sounds very useful

 

[JonathanStrange]

It's been a year now since I've played MP; we used to use turn limits, games became too long.

However, if you've got some good friends, MP wins over SP for entertainment value. We may have "finished" few games completely but we had a blast for awhile.

It's hard getting people together though and I don't like gaming long games with strangers.

.