Biggest thing for me is being able to reload a password protected online game with the password still on it, so I can play online with my friends Vs AI without anyone else joining the game too. C5 we either had to play LAN or all in one session
What do you want to see in Civ6 MP?
- Thread starter CanuckSoldier
- Start date
racha
Prince
I'd love to see an actual multiplayer server app, but I realise a snowball has more chance in hell.
anandus
Errorist
Do you mean pitboss?
racha
Prince
No, I mean something that runs as a daemon on an honest-to-science server in a datacenter, and preferably for Ubuntu as well as Windows servers. Something that could host multiple instances (server CPU and memory permitting), and had a bunch of cool options, like public / private games, mods, etc all configurable by the server admin.
As I said, I'm dreaming but I'd sure as heck love to see it happen. I don't even know if there's enough of a multiplayer base to make it worth Firaxis doing, but maybe one day this could be a thing.
dturtle1
Prince
I mentioned this another thread but something i would like to play is Share a Civ. Where Randoms( or Friends 
) can join with other players and Share control of a Civ Against the A.I or even in Teams etc. One player gets the first 50 turns or so and then the next player gets the next 50 etc. with it cycling through. You could log in before your "Shift" and watch the other player play before your turn or after. I read in a Gaming magazine where they did this and it sounded fun. You could even have it give you a breakdown of how well you played compared to other users with a Civ MVP and ranking system. This would obviously require a pretty robust way of determining player impact.
The key would be seamless connecting, where you give a list of the Civs you like and the server gives you the next available games. Biggest issue is of course intentional trolling where users will purposely sabotage the game
and of course abusive back-seat gaming 
. I do feel their are measures that can curtail this kind of behaviour and I think it could be a quite popular, casual way to play multi player Civ.
) can join with other players and Share control of a Civ Against the A.I or even in Teams etc. One player gets the first 50 turns or so and then the next player gets the next 50 etc. with it cycling through. You could log in before your "Shift" and watch the other player play before your turn or after. I read in a Gaming magazine where they did this and it sounded fun. You could even have it give you a breakdown of how well you played compared to other users with a Civ MVP and ranking system. This would obviously require a pretty robust way of determining player impact. The key would be seamless connecting, where you give a list of the Civs you like and the server gives you the next available games. Biggest issue is of course intentional trolling where users will purposely sabotage the game
and of course abusive back-seat gaming . I do feel their are measures that can curtail this kind of behaviour and I think it could be a quite popular, casual way to play multi player Civ.
Acken
Deity
Joining the NQ group has more chance giving you that kind of games.
plasmacannon
Emperor
LAN support.
It's the only way I play multiplayer with close friends.
We usually play as separate but vs the AIs only.
So I'd like a setting for the game ending when all AIs are taken out and a score posted.
It works when we are on the same team, but that made us share Great people and Great Generals, so one person tended to get more GP and the other more GGs.
Civ4 had an Unrestricted leaders option in the game setup. I liked this. It created more variety in the AIs that we fought.
This could apply to SP or MP games. A way to exclude types of leaders.
For example, if one wanted a game with more fighting, one would exclude the peaceful leaders.
As it stands, I only have had the option to choose the specific leaders I want in that game.
This gets tedious, when a random with limits option, would be simpler.
It's the only way I play multiplayer with close friends.
We usually play as separate but vs the AIs only.
So I'd like a setting for the game ending when all AIs are taken out and a score posted.
It works when we are on the same team, but that made us share Great people and Great Generals, so one person tended to get more GP and the other more GGs.
Civ4 had an Unrestricted leaders option in the game setup. I liked this. It created more variety in the AIs that we fought.
This could apply to SP or MP games. A way to exclude types of leaders.
For example, if one wanted a game with more fighting, one would exclude the peaceful leaders.
As it stands, I only have had the option to choose the specific leaders I want in that game.
This gets tedious, when a random with limits option, would be simpler.
Japper007
Prince
First of all no more bugs, drops and other such nuicances.
Second i'd want random matchmacking to include some sort of ELO system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system (based f.e. on win%, final score and finishing-times). So that a game with lots of pro's doesnt get unbalanced by the one newbie who practically gives away cities and XP, and a lobby of newbs doesnt get curb-stomped by one pro hotjoining for the lulz.
It would make the game less hostile to beginners or people who try hard to learn but just can't git gud. And for pro's a high rating means excellent bragging right and challenging games. I think it would benefit the game's longevity and create a lot of loyal new fans to buy next installments/DLC.
Second i'd want random matchmacking to include some sort of ELO system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system (based f.e. on win%, final score and finishing-times). So that a game with lots of pro's doesnt get unbalanced by the one newbie who practically gives away cities and XP, and a lobby of newbs doesnt get curb-stomped by one pro hotjoining for the lulz.
It would make the game less hostile to beginners or people who try hard to learn but just can't git gud. And for pro's a high rating means excellent bragging right and challenging games. I think it would benefit the game's longevity and create a lot of loyal new fans to buy next installments/DLC.
E_T
Chieftain
What, and take people away from Steam??
CanuckSoldier
Emperor
Steam allows for Devs to run games as Server-client, but 2k has no history of doing so. It would be nice to have servers so that data transmission is reduced, but I'm pretty sure that we are going to see a p2p game again. And pitboss will be the closest we will get to a fan run mini server.
CS
racha
Prince
I agree this is the likely outcome, and honestly, I understand that if there's not a significant demand for it, it's a waste of developer time and money. I've just never been a fan of a player hosting a game on their machine, particularly as it's less reliable. At least Civ isn't the kind of game where ping rates are particularly important in the grand scheme of things, or the current method would be horrid.
This and active AI.
FedorWin
Chieftain
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Some Civ V scenarios would be 10 times better if I could play it against a real person (american civil war, scramble for Africa, fall of Rome... in fact almost every single one of them). Plus I love hotseat and I would love to have an official modding support for it or any other kind of multiplayer game.
If I am not mistaken, when multiple players are completing the same wonder at the same turn, it's always the first player on the game setup who gets the wonder. In other words, if player 1 and player 5 compete for the same wonder and they have the same turns to complete, it's always player 1 who gets the wonder. I believe we can have a more balanced mechanism here.
Luckystrike77
Prince
The most important thing for me is to be able to play stable games of at least 12 human players again, as in Civ4. 12 player Hemispheres games in multiplayer is such a great gaming experience that I lack words to describe it.
Seek
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2010
- Messages
- 3,774
It has been, to some degree. Now, when an outside source of production gets added (eg, using a GE, chopping/harvesting, using a builder if China), if there's enough to finish it the wonder completes instantly instead of going to one turn. Pedare for fast-click chops!
anandus
Errorist
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but I'd also like to see a possibilty of you're playing with players and AI to remove possible civs for the AI or from the 'random' pool.
I mostly play with my friends on the same team vs AIs. Civ5 was such a big step back from Civ4 in that regard. Just want the same stuff that civ4 had:
- Full AI in multiplayer, not that passive shell that was in Civ5.
- Able to support at least 12 AI players on a large map.
- Pinging tiles
- Team-mates spawn near each other.
- Game stability
- Full AI in multiplayer, not that passive shell that was in Civ5.
- Able to support at least 12 AI players on a large map.
- Pinging tiles
- Team-mates spawn near each other.
- Game stability
THAT. Not being able to set AI difficulty to a proper level in MP is just unacceptable in a modern game. And random DCs, crashes etc.
