Biggest waste of time ever

[Addled Platypus]

Re: The pitfalls of multiplayer

Originally posted by marvinkosh
Why play multiplayer when someone can just randomly declare war and send a stack of doom at you?

Why not ?

You never done this to anyone ?

[Possibility]

making your own stack of doom and crushing another human is very enjoyable.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by MasterDave
I have played quite a bit on Blazing, and I can get everything done each turn, even while at war, about 90-95% of the time. A few tips to help speed up play that I use are:


Automate workers once a war starts (with no chop and no tearing down improvements)


Use stacked movement for armies whenever possible. Also use pathed movement on your way to the front

Use production Queues in your cities whenever possible. Set those queues on less active turns when you are waiting for others to finish. This lets you concentrate more on a war on less on random buildings going up around your empire.

Obviously blazing is not for everyone, and I have a group of friends who refuse to use any timer at all, which can get painful at times. However, it is possible to play at that speed with some practice, and you can get a complete game done in one sitting this way.

I agree it can be done.

But personally I don't like to automate workers, I like to decide what they do.

Production queues are fine until you have a bunch of cities and you put them all in queues 10 turns ago and now the queues arent really the best choice. (And since its blazing you have no way of checking)

And as you said yourself, even with all of that automation and practice you still only finish 90%-95% of the time.

I just don't understand the mentality that says saving a few seconds is more important than playing at 100%.

To each his own I guess.

[marvinkosh]

Re: Re: The pitfalls of multiplayer

Originally posted by Platypus Rex

Why not ?

You never done this to anyone ?

No, I have never sent a stack of doom against anyone. Even if it wasn't the worst of cheese tactics, I wouldn't do it, and this is my reasoning.

No matter what I think I know about the enemy's troop dispositions, if there is any city which I can't see right into then there's the very real possibility that a large reserve is just waiting for a stack to move in. So then, if I commit only a portion of my total strength, I still have something left in reserve should I be ambushed. I also leave some doubt about what exactly I have in reserve.

So I have two other offensive groups ready in reserve, with a slightly different mix of troops depending on which units in the first group are likely to suffer casualties. I can move one of these reserve groups into enemy territory and defend the main group from attack, and replenish its strength. When this second group needs to return to friendly territory, the third group advances to cover their retreat.

A stack of doom is much simpler to operate by comparison (Me Smash! Me Take! Me Burn! etc) but it does not give the opposing human payer much incentive to stay in the game. By giving them a chance to crush your offensive, you draw out their forces and you can then play your own reserve. By escalating in stages, you're engaging ye olde grey matter and encouraging the use of tactics which are bold instead of bland.

[Addled Platypus]

stack of doom

vs

stack of defense

we all have done one or the other(even the AI), if not both

[marvinkosh]

The biggest stack of doom I have ever had was a dozen stealth bombers, and they never got used :P

[CanuckSoldier]

Well for most games I just prefer a fast timer, but blazing can be fun for shorter games. As to the issue of long vs short games in the lobby, this is a fact of life for Civ MP, most Civ4 MP games take 3-4 hours to complete. Compare this to your average FPS or RTS game that can be done in 30-60min easily. And most people do want some sort of military action in that time frame, it's the fun factor. So to get a fast, fun game in 3-4 hours with some military action the timer can't be set to a slow speed :-/

Now we do play long games in the MP world but they are organized in the forums generally and not in the lobby. Civ4 is a bit of a victum of it's success, in that it's attracted alot of the younger(less mature) crowd that was the domain of RTS games like AoE3, and now they are in our lobby as well. They will eventually see that we Civers have a higher standard of conduct than that, but it'll take time.

If you want to try a ladder Epic just visit the ladder forums in my sig and you might find game more suited to your style than what you will find in the lobby.

And on the topic of attack/defence, you sound like you are not setting up a sentry net, knowledge is power, and if you see the enemy coming you can react accordingly in a much better way.

Cheers CS

[Deity Dude]

IT is a myth that you need a blazing or even a fast timer to anywhere in an MP game. In the groups I am familir with we play with no timer. In the lobby I usually play at medium timer. I am able to find games, though it is tougher, and if people don't quit, in a 3-4 hour session get very far along.

[Possibility]

IT is a myth that you cant think and strategize with a blazing timer and that its only a click fest. 99% of the time I get done with plenty of time to spare, even when conducting wars on 2 or 3 fronts. Blazing gives plenty of time to do everything you need to do including well thought out strategies and micro-managing every single worker. Most people can play at this speed and like it and have enough time to do all that they need and have fun, a lot of fun.

Possibility

[marvinkosh]

Originally posted by Possibility
Most people can play at this speed and like it and have enough time to do all that they need and have fun, a lot of fun.

I guarantee you that I will never enjoy a game where I can't keep pace with the opposition. It will never be fun for me to play a Blazing game; the converse of your observation is also true.

[Possibility]

Of course no one will enjoy a game if they cant keep up. But ask yourself these questions: Why cant I keep up with the opposition? Is there something wrong with me that inhibits my brain from working as fast as others?

Possibility

[LzPrst]

bah! to paraphrase TheCapo, quick games on blazing timer = beer and tractorpull style gaming.

if you dont enjoy that rowdy uncivilized crowd that are more irrational than the AI, get yourself a group of civilized civers here or at a ladder or even at civfanatics.

if you enjoy long games building and trading etc etc, join a diplogame. they are Great fun. you get to know and love your civ and know and love\hate your fellow players
though it must be said. a diplogame requires considerable effort and dedication. ours has had some birthing difficulties and we've spent 6-7 weeks playing (or trying to get things working) just to get to 400AD on marathon length. despite this, I feel it is well worth it.

it is more enjoyable to run a civ over several sessions and slowly see it growing and developing than to throw one together and kill whatever you can get at in a few hours. civ is not a RTS game, and imo it shouldnt be played like one. slow turn timers can be boring for some, but it gives more time for diplomacy and even looking at demographics and the like giving a little flavour to it.

the difference? enjoying a good multicourse meal, or gulping down a fastfood burger. some days the latter is to be preferred, but most of the time the former is far more enjoyable.

check out the HOTW 6 thread. starting this saturday.

[Possibility]

OK, I have to play one of these longer games, maybe on standard speed, but definately not marathon, 6-7 weeks and only got to 400 AD? LOL, thats a little to slow for a multiplayer game. Anyone willing to play me, standard speed, medium turn timer?

Possibility

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by LzPrst
bah! to paraphrase TheCapo, quick games on blazing timer = beer and tractorpull style gaming.

That's my line!

And it may sound slow, but its definitely a captivating game. It'd probably be twice as fast though if we didn't have our connection issues.

[CanuckSoldier]

Originally posted by LzPrst
bah! to paraphrase TheCapo, quick games on blazing timer = beer and tractorpull style gaming.

if you dont enjoy that rowdy uncivilized crowd that are more irrational than the AI, get yourself a group of civilized civers here or at a ladder or even at civfanatics.

if you enjoy long games building and trading etc etc, join a diplogame. they are Great fun. you get to know and love your civ and know and love\hate your fellow players
though it must be said. a diplogame requires considerable effort and dedication. ours has had some birthing difficulties and we've spent 6-7 weeks playing (or trying to get things working) just to get to 400AD on marathon length. despite this, I feel it is well worth it.

it is more enjoyable to run a civ over several sessions and slowly see it growing and developing than to throw one together and kill whatever you can get at in a few hours. civ is not a RTS game, and imo it shouldnt be played like one. slow turn timers can be boring for some, but it gives more time for diplomacy and even looking at demographics and the like giving a little flavour to it.

the difference? enjoying a good multicourse meal, or gulping down a fastfood burger. some days the latter is to be preferred, but most of the time the former is far more enjoyable.

check out the HOTW 6 thread. starting this saturday.

Well we can discuss til the cows come home what a "real game of Civ is" and have as many opinions as posters.

But the fact is that for the MP community fast timers, within a 3-4 hour game=fun. This in no way makes it anything like a RTS game, infact we went to lengths in the beta to remove anything that made the game anything close to a "clickfest", like putting a 6 sec timer on units moved at the end of the last turn, to prevent the dreaded double move.

I have enjoyed the pace of democracy games and other PBEM/Pitboss games. I've been on the C3C ISDG Ladder PAL team and will take part in the CIV ISDG PAL team as well. They do offer the advantage of having the time to discuss every minutae of detail with your team members and no doubt improve your game as a player. But they don't fit into my after work relaxation time by any means. But a good random ffa or teamer certainly does. And I have no problem micromanaging cities, workers and moving all my units and opening half the advisor screens during any one turn on fast. So I don't know what the exact issue is with time management for some. And we may be "tractor pull" Civers, but looking at our results in the C3C ISDG that doesn't keep us from being consumate strategists and tacticians.

My 2 cents

CS