What about MP

[Ming]

Will MP play second fiddle to SP yet again. Will we have a "working" MP version right off the bat, or have to wait for it. I don't see much mention of MP being a priority in anything that's been published yet.

The strength of many new games is the ability for MP... why do they seem so quiet on this issue?
Or have I just missed something so far

[Donegeal]

I think you just missed something. I thought I heard that MP is going to be included right away, but I am not sure if they are emphazing SP or MP as the root of the game.

[Hauldren Collider]

I just hope they don't use gamespy

[Ming]

Having them promise it and actually delivering a working/playable MP version are two different things

[Ming]

I just hope they don't use gamespy

Gamespy is fine... but only because they provided for alternatives like direct IP.
I've had to use gamespy a few times when we had connection issues, and it wasn't that bad.

[Hauldren Collider]

I couldn't ever get it to work when playing online with my brother. It doesn't seem to like NAT. Direct IP always lagged me out with more than 2, sometimes 3 people.

[Tattila the Hun]

Will MP play second fiddle to SP yet again. Will we have a "working" MP version right off the bat, or have to wait for it. I don't see much mention of MP being a priority in anything that's been published yet.

The strength of many new games is the ability for MP... why do they seem so quiet on this issue?
Or have I just missed something so far

And weakness of many games is near-forgotten SP...

[Nikolai]

I really hope they focus on SP.

[Krill]

What MP needs:

1. Server-Client model for online play
   
   
2. Pitboss, PBEM and online games
   
   
3. Mass testing prior to release (hundreds of players, unlike the dozen in CIV) to stress test the platform.
   
   
4. To not have uber slow early game play (ie 20 turns for a worker etc). 2 hour maximum games in a ladder setting should be the aim. Most people find it hard to come home from work and play a 4 hour game after all. Making it smaller should help more people take part and play.
   
   
5. Specific MP mapscripts designed to give identical and near identical starts (and good starts at that, none of the crap plains cow or calendar res starts that would **** up CIV MP games).
   
   
6. balanced leaders. Hopefully Firaxis have learnt from (my) mistake with EXP leaders that lead to EXP becoming overpowered, so that the none of the new leaders are drastically overpowered because they start the snowball faster than their adversaries.
   
   
7. Balanced warfare. For instance, it's not OK to make it so that there is a rock/paper/scissors type combat system, and then leave map scripts that don't give players a good chance of getting strat resources needed to build units to defend with. Nor is it OK to give some great choking units to one leader and not to another (Enkidu/Jag warriors)
   
   
8. On line moderators with strong central control over on-line behaviour. Let's kick out the objectionable language and flaming from MP, it should be a good environment for everyone from children to OAPs. I still remember Levi and what a joke that was.

What would be nice to have, but isn't critical:

• Integrated ladder system.
  
  
• Expected combat results mod, where the most likely outcome always happens (50/50 come out as defender wins on minimum hit points)
  
  
• Easy to work mods. In CIV the mods system destroyed any chance of mods taking off as a major part of the MP scene because most players couldn't fathom how to get them to work, so most mods only worked when people outside MP agreed to meet at a specific time to play a game, drastically reducing the chance of a mod ever catching on and becoming widespread. It is quite two faced to say that modding will be uber powerful, and then do nothing to help make modding work in MP.

None of that is really at odds with SP, except it might mean that more resources are dedicated to getting MP to work. However, if those resources mean that more people buy the game, because it appeals to a new market, that's a big bonus to 2K.

[Ming]

I really hope they focus on SP.

There is no reason why they can't do a great job on both

[Theben]

Be able to switch a game back and forth between PBEM and direct IP

[Quintillus]

I'd much rather have excellent single player and no multi-player than good single player and good multi-player. I played multiplayer Civ4 for awhile, and while OOS errors on GameSpy and the like were a major issue, the fundamental problem was there was the games just take too long to be feasible for most people. And while shorter game times would help for that, a large part of what makes Civ fun is the epicness of it. Those are two contradictory goals.

That said, Krill's list looks like a good start, though I don't agree with all of it. I'd be hesitant about the ladder system, as that can lead to situations where people care more about ranking than fun (this is what I observed while playing Age of Empires III online) - Civ4 was fortunate not to have that problem. I'm also not sure Server-Client is ideal, unless the server part were transferable - it would be no fun to be in a game and have it quit halfway through because the host had left. And I have a philosophical objection to the most likely combat situation always happening in Civ. The distinction between SP and MP that he seems to be hinting at may be key, though, as what makes SP fun (epic, long-term gameplay) and what makes MP fun (dynamic battles and it not taking forever) are somewhat distinct.

I like Theban's suggestion, too. I could've used that with the Civ3 game I started at a LAN in December.

But on the whole, I suspect 98% of my Civ playing will continue to be single-player.

[rah]

MP is critical for the replay aspect. The AI is predictable so the game becomes predictable also. MP offers the variety that SP can't.

Good list Krill, but not sure if I agree 100% on the balanced aspect. But then I really don't care about ladder type rankings so it isn't that big a deal if sometimes you get a bad start. It makes for a different gaming experience and succeeding from a bad start can be quite gratifying.

[wodan11]

There's no reason not to have multiple map scripts, with some optimized for MP.

[Ming]

I guess it depends what kind of MP experience you are looking for. Playing in a competitive "ladder" format or simply playing for fun are really two different games with different needs. While balance makes for a better game for fun, it's kind of critical for true competition and tournament play.