MP vs SP - Page 2

Matthew · June 27, 2000, 11:10

I have actually built the oracle in mp games. And not by accident. Didn't last long, but long enough for what I intended, and it did more than pay for itself over its short useful lifespan. But I'd never build it on a very small map, especially not when there are more than 4 players in a game. Theology comes around too darn soon.

I think that some sp play is great practice, especially if you play with that in mind. It's great for trying out new ideas on civ building and expanding. An MP game usually takes quite a while to play, ad if you limit yourself exclusively to MP you are probably not going to be able to experiment all that much or improve your game as much as you could with some sp play.

East Street Trader · June 28, 2000, 00:27

I am persuaded and will seek out an MGE version and get stuck in. It's not as tho' my butt will find the experience of being kicked particularly novel.

Particular thanks to DaveV - the importance of the preferred time to play point simply hadn't entered my head before I read your post. Do'h.

As to deservedness - well I have to say that Apolyton is by some considerable distance the most companionable spot upon which this undeserving soul has had the good luck to stumble, on or off the web, in many a month of Sundays. No doubt the efforts of Ming and those others who help to run the place go some way to explaining this but (partly because the Civ2 strategy forum is the jewel in the crown in this regard) I suspect that love of the game may actually be some sort of flag more easily attaching to a civilised or part way civilised person than to a plonker. Nice if it's true

- before visiting here I would have been a bit defensive about admiting a passion for a mere computer game - and an ancient one at that. Having seen the quality of my fellow addicts, no more I think.

PS I don't really think there's anything "mere" about a computer game. IMHO they are an art form of the future and are verging on being so already.

Fbitt · July 2, 2000, 03:46

A question about MP-ally games.

If you have Leo's then cede the town to your ally, it will upgrade your allies troops, then he can cede it back (assuming it's not your capitol). Is this allowed? Seems a huge advantage.

TCO · July 2, 2000, 04:16

Ming, Isn't that cheating? Like looking at somebody else's cards in poker after you folded?

Sabrecat · July 2, 2000, 09:58

I wouldn't consider it cheating

, but it's really cheap, you'd also have to coordinate it with tech advances. I'd never thought of that idea before, probably because i don't trust humans

.

rah · July 2, 2000, 16:13

I don't know if it is truely cheating, But we agree not to do it before our games. That and no trading units back and forth for infinate movement.

RAH

SCG · July 3, 2000, 09:03

quote:

Originally posted by Ming
Another good way to learn from a MP game is to save every few turns. Later, you can go back and load the files as regular game files, and use the scenario editor to take a look. You can then see what the good players were doing that was different than you

quote:

Originally posted by GP
Ming, Isn't that cheating? Like looking at somebody else's cards in poker after you folded?

GP: that is a tried and true method of learning what you did wrong, or what you could have done better. Obviously you do it after the game is over, or else it would be cheating. The best example would be going over old chess matches to see what the better players do. But even in reguards to Civ II, do you not talk with other players after the the MP match is over, chatting about how the game went and what stratagies worked or could have worked? It's the same thing looking over old saved games. Second-guessing or marvelling at what others did is all about learning from your mistakes

Sabrecat · July 3, 2000, 09:49

Yes, this is the only way to get better (other than reading these posts

) I totally agree with SCG, you have to learn from your mistakes and see what you could have done better.

TCO · July 3, 2000, 23:30

Well a chess match is different. the moves are public. What if your opponnent doesn't choose to share his strategies. It's different looking at his empire than at yours. Like reaching across the table and turning over the cards when you didn't pay to see them.