Who's your friend, MP or SP?

[Nikolai]

Personally, I have nver been especially keen on MP in civ(or any other game for that matter). For me, SP just is the way to go. However, Civ4 are, contrary to the older civ games, made especially with MP in mind according to the developers. I suspect I will still play SP exclusively or mostly at least, but it seems like it will be more attractive to play MP this time around. So, will you play MP this time? If so, what kind of MP will probably be oyur choice? Traditional or one of the new types?

[Solver]

I will definitely play SP mostly, but it appears that the MP will for once be working and fun . If so, an occasional game of simultaneous turn MP would be nice.

[Nikolai]

I agree, SP for me, but I wonder if this could be the first civ game I might play MP. Thanks for the fast clean up of the mess I did with the double thread btw.

[Solver]

No problem .

From the looks of it, I'm fairly certain that I will want to at least try MP this time around.

[Donegeal]

Although I will play MP (a couple of PBEM, I will try the new server and I will participate in most team demo games), SP will be my mainstay.

[Senethro]

I sometimes forget that most Civ players are single player only. However, when you can tell how a single player game will end after 100 turns I have difficulty not just starting a new game.

(also, the AI has never been a reason to play civ)

[Sabre2th]

Primarily SP, but I'll try out MP once or twice before I put it away.

[Addled Platypus]

SP'er here too

Tried a few C3 MP with simultaneous moves

just sucks knowing there will be faster computers than yours and will always be the the slow one

[Adagio]

I might play a MP game or two, but I wouldn't cry if they released the game without MP since chances are I'll play it are slim

[Adm.Naismith]

I'm an old. too busy man, so I need the "no timeframe limit" of SP, when I can play at my pace.
Now it seems that Persistent Server can be a refreshing new mode, on the same tune of a Single player without the letargic snail of PBEM. May be I'll give it a try.

[AeonOfTime]

I'll stick to the good ol' me against the machine. Maybe have a look in the MP menus, but that's about it. In my eyes, Civ is made for SP - not that it sucks at MP, but turn-based MP? Wohooo, even with that new system of theirs I'll be baking cakes in the meantime and finally getting an education reading to oblivion...

[Proteus_MST]

Most of the times SP.

I might, by occasion start a MP-Session with a friend,
maybe per eMail or I-Net, but most of the time I´ll spend in SP-Mode

[Harovan]

If Civ4 is good enough to lure me back to TBS games, I suppose I will play both SP and PBEM. Perhaps I will give the server a try too.

[Sarxis]

Voted the persistent server thingy just because I'm not entirely sure what it is, and how it works. But it sounds interesting.

PBEM was always a favorite in SMAC tho. CivIII was buggy and boring, and I never made it out of the ancient age in MP with any of my friends.

[eris]

I do SP. It is what I bought the game for. I have tried some LAN stuff at home, but my only partners were the kids and they don't find the game as fascinating as I do. [Humoring the parental unit only lasts so long.]

My problem with MP is that I am not a great player. I am probably an interesting strategist, but not a good micromanager. I would need to be able to find players of similar management and skill levels to have a balanced and interesting game. I have looked at the MP forums and have no idea how I would go about finding a medium level game to participate in. Everything seems geared to those who can display the most skill and manipulation at the highest levels possible. I would gladly play MP, and would play until the bitter end if I was losing. But why bother if that bitter end seems practically guaranteed?

So, here's hoping that Civ4 has a slightly more interesting AI, because I have not found out how to find and play with folk on my level.