What format will MP take in CIV3?

SITS · September 21, 2001, 02:36

This thread is designed to speculate on the format of MP in CIV3. Firaxis are saying it will be something new and wonderful (if it happens) so what do we think it will be and what sort of thing are we looking for in MP if we use the examples of CIV2 and SMAC/X?

Earthling7 · September 21, 2001, 04:59

Simultanious turns. Every player acts at the same time. Each turn could be 60 seconds...?

SITS · September 21, 2001, 05:02

That sounds very similar to SMAC/X - Firaxis are saying that MP will be a new concept. I kind of wonder if it will be some kind of central server and that is why it might not be in the game on release.

drake · September 21, 2001, 05:34

Yeah having the game served off some sort of central computer would be nice perhaps, but then again it might not.

I am old fashioned I guess, but I sure as hell don't want simul. turns instated. Civ is for patient people who like to think before they act (to my knowledge). I am not at all interested in having a button race.

I personally would like it to be similar to that of civ2s mp. All that I ask is that they fix the bugs that screw up mp in civ2 in later stages of the game.

SITS · September 21, 2001, 07:38

Quote:

Markg
sits, thank you for the response in the apolyton forum and the initiative to start these threads in the civ3-general forum. if the amount and the diversity of discussions about mp increases, we will make the civ3-mp forum sooner than scheduled

The man has spoken - so lets try and expand on the MP topic so a proper forum for it can be created.

SITS · September 21, 2001, 21:53

^bump^

tniem · September 21, 2001, 23:02

Quote:

Originally posted by SITS
^bump^

What is the point, there are other mp threads on the board demanding MP and now you want to know what it is going to be when it may not be in. They said something new and now because of deadlines it doesn't appear that they will have time to include it.

ChrisShaffer · September 21, 2001, 23:14

Asynchronous simultaneous turns.

See http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum28/HTML/000343.html#5

SITS · September 22, 2001, 04:53

tniem - There are a number of reasons for this thread:-

1) To expand the debate on MP
2) To add weight to the debate on a CIV3 MP forum
3) To put pressure on Firaxis to live up to what they said
4) To actually discuss the format of MP

I'm not sure speculation is banned on these forums. Just because we think something isn't in it doesn't mean that is true or will always be true. I'm very interested in CIV3 MP and I want to talk about it, ideally I would like the CIV3 MP to have its own forum but that hasn't happened yet. So I guess what I am saying is if you don't wish to particapate in this thread then by all means don't.

ChrisShaffer - Not sure I want asynchronous simultaneous turns. I think the TBS has a charm of its own. But maybe the new multiplayer will be based on PBeM where everybody posts their turn to a central several and when all the turns are in it processes it and sends the results out again. This would make PBeM considerably faster and also enable a kind of IP MP game as well - you could have several people on line and have their turns processed as and when they are all sent.

ChrisShaffer · September 22, 2001, 05:23

Quote:

Originally posted by SITS
ChrisShaffer - Not sure I want asynchronous simultaneous turns. I think the TBS has a charm of its own.

SITS, I'm not sure what your point is. Yes, TBS has a charm all its own. I think that asynchronous simultaneous turns retains that charm - unlike the other forms of simultaneous turns which tend to turn the game into a RTS.

Quote:

But maybe the new multiplayer will be based on PBeM where everybody posts their turn to a central several and when all the turns are in it processes it and sends the results out again. This would make PBeM considerably faster and also enable a kind of IP MP game as well - you could have several people on line and have their turns processed as and when they are all sent.

Um, yah, that's exactly what I mean when I say "asynchronous simultaneous turns." So you just summarized the idea of asynchronous simultaneous turns....did you mean to say that you agree with me that it would be a good thing? Or were you saying something else?

SITS · September 22, 2001, 05:26

Oops! I misunderstood what you meant - my brain read it as RTS, sorry!

DonJoel · September 22, 2001, 06:19

Multiplayer was great in civ2-gold. You could manage you cities while it was the other players turns but now move your units.

Simopoultanieus turns whould be cool to check out though.

mactbone · September 22, 2001, 09:09

What about MP allied games where you delegate responsibility? I like to build, so I control the cities, workers, and settlers. My buddy likes conquering, etc. so he controls military, diplomacy, and espionage. Or if you expand it to include more people you delegate further, then during the opposing players turn you and your allies can chat about what direction your civ should go. Problem is ther will always be one w@nker who thinks it's funny to run your civ into the ground, so there could be a boot/fire option, where everyone else can vote to have the w@anker fired.

Dreams....

dainbramaged13 · September 22, 2001, 09:23

i actually liked the ctp1 MP.. you start a game, then the remaining non-human players start out as ai. Then, if a human player wants to join, they take over one of the AI's (preferably the one with the best score so far or whatever) or even one of their choice. If a player decides to leave, then it is taken over again by AI. That way, there wont be any interruptions in play. (i never played civ2 MP, is this what it was like?)