Multiplayer Setup Screens

[Clay Pigeon]

I agree with RAH, Drake, Rasputin, Zylka and especially AH

I dont want Special servers. We need to keep the ability to host ip and lan games. Special servers leads to lobbies where kids that hav no intention of playing hang out. There they practice hiding behind there anonimitty, with things like filling my screen with the repeat function.

------------------
if i display a lack of skill, please note the enthusiasm

quote: Originally posted by EvilProphet on 04-29-2001 01:17 PM always I will arise as the greatest player.

Sean, change the record man. We all know a. you cheat and b. you only ever win when you get the game settings you want i.e. refer to a.



------------------
Founder, Dear Leader and Great Helmsman of PROT -the People's Republic of Topics www.delphi.com/prot1

lol Please, Markus is 0-3 with me on 1x1x. The ONLY setting I won't play is Deity, so when you come right down to it it's all you've got. As for the cheating thing, you're still going on about my riot factor? It's been at the normal setting for over half a year now. It's really quite sad that you actually think you would have won if it had been set at normal. How stupid can you be?

[markusf]

Servers i think would be pretty useless... ie you can't play with modified rules.txt MDL rules, or curumbers.... And the whole idea of playing with hundreds of civs is just "stupid" i mean the game starts at 4000 bc, i join 5 hours late and i start out with no tech etc? and everyone else attacks me with nukes.

I am worried this game is to geared towards single players, and because playing civ can be turned into a art form i highly doubt that they will catch all the bugs when play testing it for multiplayer. Me eyes and arri are some of those few players that can take this game to the extremes.

eyes = knows all the cheats and loopholes
arri = Can launch a spaceship at 700 ad on diety and grow faast
me = Tremendous growth and power & understanding of trade... Deity i am sure you remember those 7 player games i won

I hope they get some really SKILLED people to play test civ3 otherwise it will be as unbalanced as civ2.

uuhhhh...Markus you kind of forgot that I can take war and expansion to the extreme and beyond. But I do know all the loopholes and cheats too.

[Damien]

ok for the settings that set the number of settlers the map size etc but plz don't put those that set up the level of goods,land,varied or uniform,continents,humid or dry,cold or hot,as is it in CTP...those sh**s avoid games to begin coz a player wants 5 levels good higher or so.

[markusf]

ya you do a early horse rush to get all the huts, free tribes etc. There are just to many loopholes to list them all. The thing about 2x 2x is it makes the game a lot like red alert starcraft etc, Rush ASAP and rush with as many units as u can. I think a good addition to civ would be you can't move a army or unit X amount of squares away from a barracks, or supply depot (built in cities)

The multiplayer game should have as many options as possible, as the better players get the more they will want to customize settings from the default.

quote: Originally posted by markusf on 04-30-2001 06:20 PM edit... eyes = knows all the cheats and loopholes arri = Can launch a spaceship at 700 ad on diety and grow faast me = Tremendous growth and power & understanding of trade... Deity i am sure you remember those 7 player games i won I hope they get some really SKILLED people to play test civ3 otherwise it will be as unbalanced as civ2.

I haven't a clue what you are referring to?
You and I have yet to complete a game. We have 4 I think that need to be completed - you only significantly lead one of the pg's - the arii/Crusty/finbar game.

OR, are you talking about games you've TOLD me about LOL!

------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924

[ChrisShaffer]

quote: Servers i think would be pretty useless... ie you can't play with modified rules.txt MDL rules, or curumbers....

Um, no. Nothing about servers automatically means you can't play with modified configuration files. This is 2001, not 1996. Don't base everything on your experiences with Civ2.

If Firaxis owns and hosts the servers, they could still allow upload of modified rules files. And if they allow anyone who wants to host games, then the possibilities abound. Galaxy is server based but anyone who wants can run a server and make whatever modifications they would like - each game can be different. Civ3 could be the same way....I hope.

[markusf]

quote: Originally posted by deity on 05-02-2001 06:55 AM I haven't a clue what you are referring to? You and I have yet to complete a game. We have 4 I think that need to be completed - you only significantly lead one of the pg's - the arii/Crusty/finbar game. OR, are you talking about games you've TOLD me about LOL!

That 7 player game with your map... ahem 8 wonders at 100 ad 7 players... everyone else has what, 3 wonders combined?

[markusf]

quote: Originally posted by ChrisShaffer on 05-02-2001 07:20 AM If Firaxis owns and hosts the servers, they could still allow upload of modified rules files. And if they allow anyone who wants to host games, then the possibilities abound.

Well i am a programmer, and trust me this wouldn't be on the list of firixas list of things to do... They would have to maintain the servers, get good bandwidth, manage/build a system to allow you to have your own config files etc. And for what end? So that some remote machine hosts the game instead of yours? What happens if the game crashes? etc etc Nearly ever game that has gone this route has turned into pay/per use

[GNGSpam]

Maybe you should just not take the game to the extreme.

I will never understand players who insist on manipulating the game so they can claim they are "godly"

[ChrisShaffer]

marcusrf, I'm talking about TBSE here, not simultaneous connected IP games. If the server crashes for a few minutes, no big deal. Continuous connections not required. And, note also that I said "if Firaxis hosts the servers" -- I'd much rather if they allowed us to host servers ourselves.

And anyway, who here wouldn't pay $20 per year or so to Firaxis to have them continually updating/patching the game...I'd be happy to give them money for server access.
[This message has been edited by ChrisShaffer (edited May 02, 2001).]

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by EdwardTKing on 04-26-2001 03:56 PM A major problem with Civ2 is that it can become very asymmetrical. One tribe has 4 or 5 cities and 20 units; another has 40 or 50 cities and 200 units. While AIs will play on stoically when their tribe is pathetic; real people cannot be expected to wait 15 minutes for an ICS leader and then play for 30 seconds in a hopeless situation. There is nothing worse than being a host on the defensive and being asked to give me another 10 minutes [so I do not risk hurrying my 50 unit assault on you.] I would therefore suggest for Civ3 three new multi-player parameters: (a) maximum number of cities each tribe could build (b) maximum number of units each tribe could build (c) maximum number of units each tribe could move each turn. I believe that this could dramatically improve multi-play quality.

Good point! I have never played any Civ MP-game, but what you are describing above is the very reason that I often been so reluctant to even try. I would really hate it if I found out late in the game that I wasted time on playing against ICS-type of players, with tiresome quantity-before-quality approaches.

There really should be SOME means of enforcing optional agreed rules BEFORE the MP-game begins.

Horserushing is just for the BEGINNING of the game. Once the huts are gone there is no need for them except to use as defense. And you seem to always try to brush those 3 1x1x games we had under the carpet. And that third game you can't blame on any sort of luck because there was a point in that game where we both had like 8 cities and the exact same techs. Maybe, just maybe, I'm doing something you don't know? There's alot more to the game than just trade and building up your cities. Anyone can build up their cities and WLTKD, it's why there are so many good 1x1x players and so few good 2x2x players. Trade is a very very small aspect of the game and you can only build up your cities if you survive long enough. It's not my fault you need 4000 years to be able to have any effect (You freely admit to needing time in the beginning to build) so don't try to take it out on people like me who can do everything all at once. It's not my fault you're a slowpoke.

P.S. I don't usually rush. Rushing would be getting out knights by 2800BC or earlier and attacking with like 4 or 5 of them. When I attack I usually have 40 or more and I take you out in 1 turn. Making it so units can only move so far from a barracks or something is unrealistic (Which ironically you Apolytoners always preach about) and is just an attempt to compensate for your weakness. Luckily I doubt Firaxis would do something so insane.

quote: Originally posted by tniem on 04-16-2001 11:50 AM I find the most frustrating thing about PBEM games is that it takes so long to get going. You move one unit and tell your city to build something and then you have to wait for your opponent to do the same and send it back to you. I think it would be a great addition if you allowed PBEM games to start as a LAN game, allowing all participants to work the early part of the game for a couple of hours before carrying on to the more strategic part of the game. This first part of the PBEM game would end either by a default time setting or when one person has to leave. From then on, the game becomes a normal PBEM game. P.S. I also believe that diplomacy must be handled by the player him/herself. Without it all this, let's make diplomacy more important is useless.

I agree with this wholey, maybe even make it so that you can convert to either one at any time so that if all players have some time alloted the game can go from a PBEM to a LAN game for a while, then back to PBEM, when time constraints become a factor.

ADDED NOTE: I didn't know this topic was started over a year ago! I'm sure the interface has been decided upon by now *blush*
[This message has been edited by bigfree1 (edited May 03, 2001).]

quote: Originally posted by markusf on 05-02-2001 10:22 AM That 7 player game with your map... ahem 8 wonders at 100 ad 7 players... everyone else has what, 3 wonders combined?

Ahhh, we are talking about ONE game are we now
The one where you are at the top of the pg with me closely behind...........LOL!

I don't need Wonders! Hardly ever build them. Maybe Leo and Hoover.




------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924

[Deity Dude]

If there are unique civ attributes or other elements that give certain civs advantages over others there should be a way to turn them off. We spend alot of time restarting games now just because someone gets extra techs. In multiplayer, players want things to be as equal as possible so that outcomes are determined by player ability and not luck.

[markusf]

quote: Originally posted by deity on 05-05-2001 06:45 AM Ahhh, we are talking about ONE game are we now The one where you are at the top of the pg with me closely behind...........LOL! I don't need Wonders! Hardly ever build them. Maybe Leo and Hoover.

Oh come on you think the power graph actually means anything? When someone has 3 times the science rate and 2 times the cities of everyone else they are going to win. If i went into WLTKD for 10 turns and totally dominated the pg, what would that prove? Would mean i couldn't drop my luxeries back down to 10% and i couldn't reasearch anything. PG is the most useless way of telling if someone is winning.

[markusf]

quote: Originally posted by Deity Dude on 05-10-2001 05:11 PM If there are unique civ attributes or other elements that give certain civs advantages over others there should be a way to turn them off. We spend alot of time restarting games now just because someone gets extra techs. In multiplayer, players want things to be as equal as possible so that outcomes are determined by player ability and not luck.

Oh come on, i play red alert, i play starcraft etc. most games have different factions with unique units. One guy gets a cool tank another guy an airplane and another guy gets a science bonus etc. Those games wouldn't be so successful if it didn't work

[tniem]

quote: Originally posted by markusf on 05-11-2001 10:10 AM Oh come on, i play red alert, i play starcraft etc. most games have different factions with unique units. One guy gets a cool tank another guy an airplane and another guy gets a science bonus etc. Those games wouldn't be so successful if it didn't work

I would have to concur. The reason in my opinion that Firaxis is putting unique civs in the game is because they feel that it is going to add to the multiplayer element.

In that token, having an option to randomly pick civs for each player is a must. It will force players to be able to play multiple techniques with multiple unique civs so that no matter what civ they get the player can adapt. If unique civs are in the game, randomly assigned civs is a must have option for multiplayer.

[ancient]

i want to see a thing similiar to batle.net easy to use easy to find a game and start it quickly to.. but i also think you should have a Instant messanging buddy service built in and a save game option so you can continue games with the same person(s)

quote: Originally posted by markusf on 05-11-2001 10:06 AM Oh come on you think the power graph actually means anything? When someone has 3 times the science rate and 2 times the cities of everyone else they are going to win. If i went into WLTKD for 10 turns and totally dominated the pg, what would that prove? Would mean i couldn't drop my luxeries back down to 10% and i couldn't reasearch anything. PG is the most useless way of telling if someone is winning.

I agree about the pg and I know this is a tangent to the thread but I just had a quick look at the last save and you have 24 cities and I have 18 - you tend to exagerate
And, even if you are correct (doubtful), the Science Rate is not a measure in itself. There are the Science bonuses too. Your analysis is so simplistic.... LOL... then there is the military side and alliances
I'm first in pop, production and very advanced with irrigation - can churn out settlers and caravans for rapid expansion and trade...
Gosh, if I got the huge river matrix start you got the game would be over!
Hope we can continue it when agharta is free from study.




------------------
*deity of THE DEITIANS*
aka: half-assed dieticians
icq# 8388924

[TCO]

Jeff...need any more help with MP??

[monkspider]

Thanks Jeff, this is some excellent PR with your dedicated fanboy wing.

[MarkG]

you must be really bored gp.....