TURN BASED - how long can we wait?!

[Nefliqus]

The problem is that we don't have such option as TurnBased MP. There is only one solution forced by Firaxis. MP is just unfinished and this opinion is valid not only to TurnBased option but to several game elements like mods, Pitboss, custom maps transfer, animations, DLC sharing etc...

I think that there are several a lot better RTS games than Civ5 with simultaneous turns. Civ5 is turn based game for me. The best solution is a mix mode, turns based during wars and symultana during peace time.

 

[Balamutas LT]

Nefliqus has managed to put into two lines the whole point of this post. We are forced to simultanious turns with no options. But it should be our choise what kind of turns there should be. For example for me and our friends it's perfectly normal that our game lasts for several weeks - that's real Civilisation, real strategy. That's the only reason why we bought the game...

From now on with Firaxis games - me and my friends, we'll go back to torrents. And don't cry later on about the piracy when you have such a crappy atittude. Going to buy Skyrim now, later Diablo 3. Good developers, worth my money.

Maybe see you in CIV 6 :/

 

[Zaphod III]

.... Its like chess but much much more complex and entertaining.....

Bala

I would suggest using the Fisher time controls, very popular in chess. It gives a basetime for the entire game, plus a bonus per move made. Give the user the option to set the exact values, and we might have a nice mechanism to play turnbased MP.

For values I would suggest almost the same as used in chess, although with more than two players you may want to restrict time further. Also, the system is used in much more games than just chess, and could be used even more than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_clock

 

[Nefliqus]

I would suggest using the Fisher time controls, very popular in chess. It gives a basetime for the entire game, plus a bonus per move made. Give the user the option to set the exact values, and we might have a nice mechanism to play turnbased MP.

For values I would suggest almost the same as used in chess, although with more than two players you may want to restrict time further. Also, the system is used in much more games than just chess, and could be used even more than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_clock

Good idea.
http://www.skakur.dk/ online version of Fisher Clock

 

[Sgtslick]

I agree, I posted this on 2k forums awhile back.

~
TURN BASED MULTIPLAYER SMACX STYLE

The first number of turn is simultaneously played (up to like 60 turns)

After this turns are sequential. While it is not your turn you can adjust build order in your cities, move the city tiles around, players can also move there units - as in, give orders, intended goto's/workers orders etc.

The actual moving of the units is done sequentially. Each player has 1-5 seconds per unit and city designated to them (depending on the setting).

Players also have time extensions (imagine the clock in chess), when you finish early you can bank a little bit of time, and use extensions when needed.

This format would be marginally longer than a game played simultaneously. Obviously the game could still be played simultaneously as an option.

I imagine less errors/lag

Lastly, I can't imagine this would be very hard to code into the game since games like alpha centauri managed just fine.

*sorry for necro but this is important issue imo.

 

[Joe Steel]

Turn based MP should atleast be an option .I know I like turn based play in MP but I usually only play with one other friend and six AI's so slow turns is not an issue.

 

[Gort]

The best solution would be simultaneous turns until two human players are at war. At that point the game becomes sequential until they're at peace again.

I only play Civ 5 with people I know, and we have a "gentleman's agreement" where if two humans are at war, the aggressor moves all his units, then says, "Done", and then the defender moves all of his. Then we end turn and repeat. Everyone else continues simultaneously.

Makes the game way better, you guys should try it.

 

[tommynt]

Or u guys might try adopt to sim turns ..

multiplayer is different as sp - there is 0 wrong with that

differnet is not worse - even when some old guys might tell u so.

 

[TheHanzou]

Its different, weather or not its better is personal opinion. For me its bad and i have stopped playing it for that reason.

Its just dumb when u get attacked, and when u try to kill the attacking unit next turn it gets moved away and your attacking unit lands on an exposed tile and dies all over again. Basically u lost 1 Unit and didnt kill the Unit you desired to kill, its just dumb.

If, (which happens), Players are a lot slower OR their units move slower for whatever reason (latency, Performance etc), you outright win the game, its very easy. I have won countless games because i could retreat with Units that should have died, destroyed Units before they could react, whole armies destroyed without losing a single Unit, just because of faster movement. For a turn based strategy game its weak. Later in the game it gets INSANE, when u have 10-20 or more artillery and Air units that you need to move, set up, and fire, or even worse Carriers, using aircraft in a carrier is a nightmare of epic proportions. Even worse, Uboats, if your opponent moves his faster he can kill yours (they oneshot each other) and then he is invisible and you dont even know where his uboat was, its totally unplayable. Paratroopers that you drop end of turn next to an air raided city, if you move faster the city is yours, if not they die chanceless, victory and defeat or often decided by a single move like that. Bottlenecks are the worst, if you can click fast enough you can pillage the citadel and you win the game, click too slow and he has a unit on the tile again and you lose, it happens all the time.fighting multiple Players? Good luck with that, while u move 1 Unit they move 2, worst case you lose all your units without getting anywhere.

You want to think, carefully plan your advance, your assault, your attack options. But no, click click click super fast or you lose all those units without them doing anything.

I have stolen settlers, workers, pillaged land, killed units, saved units, taken cities, destroyed or overtaken citadels etc countless times because i moved faster, and it didnt feel good to just stomp the other player not with my wits, but because i have a faster finger/ pc.

That said, multiplayer games with strangers would be almost impossible to finish in a reasonable manner with turn by turn movement, but im not saying that they should remove the other option.

Just give us both options. I have a lot of friends that would love to play a huge multiplayer game on a turn by turn basis, we just dont bother because simultaneous is a luck feast and GMR is too much trouble. Just give us both, its not too much to ask for a CiV game.

I have never used Pitboss but isnt that what we are talking about? As far as i know it was announced to be in at launch (2010) and its still not there in 2013, they even said last week in the official Forum that they are still working on it. Probably a lie at this point but who knows.

 

[Diendiadre]

The multiplayer enviroment here, needs to learn that people don't want to play according to multiplayer rules set by those who like the fastest possible speed. While speed is an issue, so is people who think you need apm to play Civ. Please change to starcraft 2.

There are easy rules to follow if you want to make simultaneous turns more like regular play. Let one of the players in combat go first. The other one second. Just make a gentlemens agreement about it. If you play with people who can't make such an agreement, you will have to adapt, but one way of adapting, is to not play with these people. No quitting is another gentlemens agreement and people at no quitters manages this one quite good.

The worst thing you can do, is play multiplayer with just random people on the net though. Since that only works with a really really really STABLE multiplayer game and civ V isn't that game. Find good and nice players, who wants to use your rules. Use these forums to find them. There are an enormous amount. You can find them randomly, but you usually don't.

This also prevents things like alliances formed before the game even starts and sacrificial players.

 

[Securion]

Its sad that almost all of the features of the game have been stripped down to only be a "click-fest" in MP. Its like they wanted MP to be some sort of arcade version of Civ, catered towards the younger player base that have attention span problems.

Moderator Action: The last sentence is not going to provoke anything other than a negative reaction. Please be more careful with how you phrase your opinions.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[tommynt]

Its sad that almost all of the features

military unit movement and

 

[Swordsman45]

Being able to move before your opponent in simultaneous games is often a decisive factor in multiplayer battles. For example Artillery, CBs, cities are all much more effective when firing first. Its a shame that connection speed changes the game dynamics so much.

Even more frustrating than being shot to pieces by someone with a faster connection is the constant disconnects I experience in multiplayer. It's a real shame there isn't a stable multiplayer environment that the xbox and playstation have achieved so well.

 

[tommynt]

Being able to move before your opponent in simultaneous games is often a decisive factor in multiplayer battles. For example Artillery, CBs, cities are all much more effective when firing first. Its a shame that connection speed changes the game dynamics so much.

the moving thing it just an excuse for most people - i m for examle get outmoved by every other good player and still win 85% of my games.

being good at playing civ - maximising your eco is whatmatters both in mult and singleplayer

 

[sendos]

After experiencing civ 5 multiplayer, I am also irritated by how time-consuming it can get, even with turn timer. Turn timer, in my opinion, should only increase by about 20 seconds per era, once the first person reaches the era. 60 seconds for ancient, 80 for classical, 100 for renaissance, etc..
However, my main issue is that my mp games crash if they contain more than 2 people (myself included). The game basically freezes, you try to do stuff and then game reverts back to loading screen. It could be a connection issue, perhaps at my end, if I try to play against people from the US. But, I heard from the other players that they are affected as well. Saving the game every 20 or so turns is a must, otherwise all that time becomes a waste.

I can't wait to experience MP past the renaissance era. It would be truly be a long wait if you're playing with a large group.

 

[Crustacian]

Yes it takes longer to wait for your oponents to end teir turns. But CIV never was about speed playing/clicking - it always was about thinking. Its like chess but much much more complex and entertaining.Me and my frieds have played all the versions until CIV 5 FOR YEARS

~ This is a good point for a valid playing style that is no "dumber" than Simultaneous.

I remember in older Civ you had the ability to choose "Simoleatnous Turns" i.e everyone made their turns (except the A.I) at the same time....

~ I remember...There should be a toggle for simultaneous/single turns. Customization is good.

~ There should be as in the past, a toggle for a generic none special unit, bldg, or Civ ability because this too is a fun way to play civ.

I m playing enough to get a good sample size and well games are never like the worse player (who gets less production, science and so on) magicly wins cause he moves faster - no!

Main problem is just that most players want and try to play mp as sp and wonder that they arent succesful when facing some1 clever instead of dumb ai

~ Very true about not magically winning because of being a faster clicker when overall strategy is weaker.

~I doubt you are trying to say that someone who likes to play turn based in not clever.

~ Simultaneous turns became the option back when. Civ II MP was turn based. And in MP if you were not clever you got whupped! Simultaneous was the option added later, not the other way around, and I don't remember anyone complaining about it being stupid compared to Turn based, because it was a cool option FOR THOSE WHO LIKED TO PLAY THAT WAY.

You may run into all kinds of Civ players as have I. And it is true, when a person first plays other humans it is no comparison to ai. We know this. All of us know this.
How many of us could win games from the very first game? Or with no study. Everyone has to start somewhere right?

My first Civ game was off floppy disks, and thought I was doing great until Aztech armor and rifles dropped off on my shore. I bribed an armor with a diplomat and somehow got those far superior units off with that bribed tank and tenacity with only phalanx and archer era tech. I had no clue that GROWTH IS production and science. Anyway a bomber wore me down, and one lost to one of my phalanx!! talk about reworking game balance...A mushroom cloud and siren finally helped me see the light! And it was back to the drawing board where I have been many times since then.

 

[MadDjinn]

In case no one in here has been watching the BNW coverage::

MP finally has a 'team' working on it.

Everything being done MP wise for BNW will be back ported to G&K and vanilla.

Turnbased MP
Hybrid mode (simultaneous turns until someone is at war, then shifts to turn based)
Observer mode
PitBoss
etc

 

[Tabarnak]

Hey thanks for the infos! I'm pretty excited about the ''hybrid'' mode. Very interesting!

 

[Luckystrike77]

There are better options then pure turn based. Let's face it, it's only unit movement that is a problem here. Being first one to take a ruin, finding a city state, attacking or retreating in war etc.

The solution vs this double movement and fast clicking issue is simple. Just make it impossible to move the same unit again for 15 seconds. If you move at the end of the turn, you will be forced to stay there for a while before you can move again.

 

[Diendiadre]

I do like the 15 seconds rule. I think a lot of others will too. It might be possible to make it, in a mod perhaps?
However I'm also very curious about this hybrid idea, it seems like a very good idea.