Espionage

[ScrotusMaximus]

Is anyone else disappointed about the exclusion of espionage from vanilla Civ 5? I play LAN MP games with friends (Civ 4 SP serves only as practice, in a sense), and espionage is a key part of my overall strategy against them. I play Bismarck so that I can rush Great Wall, pop a great spy and start with a huge espionage advantage. I almost never spend my points, finding it much more valuable to just see what my opponent is doing.

[·Imhotep·]

That's exactly the reason why Espionage is banned in most competitive MP games - it simply destroys the game. With the advantage the defender has anyway a successful attack often relies on the moment of surprise as a key element, and that is totally gone with Espionage. Practically you cannot really attack any more in a game like a 5v5 teamer in the ancient era because you can spot the stacks and coordinate the defense. That means most attacks have to be done before the opponent reaches Alphabet, unless you have an overwhelming force anyway. It is even worse on maps like Inland Sea and in later eras as the possibilities of attacking are diminished further - Espionage just reduces this to zero.

Even in SinglePlayer Espionage more often annoys me than is of any help. Sure, seeing the graphs and the research is nice, especially for those techs you get a bonus for if you land them first. But the AI focuses hard on Espionage and sends around tons of Spies, and the constant sabotaging even from your Vassals is totally annoying. Mostly because there is no way to prevent it 100% - having an Espionage lead and stationing Spies in cities doesn't help in all cases, at best it increases your chance. I think Espionage is one of the features which could have been great if they were balanced better, but balance wasn't an issue for the expansion pack developers. And it shows also that the devs didn't think too much about MP - a feature that is great in SP can destroy Multiplayer totally.

Imhotep

[ScrotusMaximus]

And it shows also that the devs didn't think too much about MP - a feature that is great in SP can destroy Multiplayer totally.

Funny - I always viewed espionage as a MP feature first. I agree that in SP it tends to irritate and distract more than anything. But I would point out that it can serve as a huge advantage for the attacking player in MP. It shows you where the soft spots are in your opponent's empire. I always feel like I'm in a dark room waiting to get stabbed when my enemy is ahead in esp. points.

[Robert]

Espionage is a lot more interesting in espionage (you can use it to annoy your enemy, the AI can't be annoyed), it's also less balanced for the reasons Imhotep states, imho. Not in the last place because you can use spies to explore the entire map of your enemy, even if he keeps his borders closed. If spies would not have been able to explore and would not have been able to spot enemy units, then that would have been much better.

[ScrotusMaximus]

it's also less balanced for the reasons Imhotep states, imho. Not in the last place because you can use spies to explore the entire map of your enemy, even if he keeps his borders closed. If spies would not have been able to explore and would not have been able to spot enemy units, then that would have been much better.

I guess the issue of balancing is kind of lost on me. Anyone can build spies fairly cheaply. And if you'd rather just focus on building an overwhelming force, you can still do that, and all the enemy spies in the world won't save them. Even before BTS, a few well-placed scouts could serve as adequate early warning.

[·Imhotep·]

@Scrotus:

Of course Scouts are important - hence all good players will have a properly laid out sentry net. But there is a difference between a sentry net with Scouts and using Spies - the point of time when you know the attack is coming. In 1v1 games Spies may be negligible as it seldom lasts to Alphabet, at least not with the 120 turn limit most commonly played in competitive MP. But in a teamer game it's different. It's a huge advantage to know where that SoD of your opponent assembles and where it moves because you can plan your defense ahead. That gives you a lot of time - and time is key. A sentry net will give you time also, but a lot less. Most striking is the difference with 2-mover stacks - a good sentry net will spot that stack at a time so that you have at best 2 turns to react. A Spy detects the stack while it is still in the territory of your opponent. Major difference.

[ScrotusMaximus]

@Scrotus:Of course Scouts are important - hence all good players will have a properly laid out sentry net. But there is a difference between a sentry net with Scouts and using Spies - the point of time when you know the attack is coming. In 1v1 games Spies may be negligible as it seldom lasts to Alphabet, at least not with the 120 turn limit most commonly played in competitive MP. But in a teamer game it's different. It's a huge advantage to know where that SoD of your opponent assembles and where it moves because you can plan your defense ahead. That gives you a lot of time - and time is key. A sentry net will give you time also, but a lot less. Most striking is the difference with 2-mover stacks - a good sentry net will spot that stack at a time so that you have at best 2 turns to react. A Spy detects the stack while it is still in the territory of your opponent. Major difference.

I can agree with all of that. So we've established that espionage is extremely powerful in MP matches, and that the player(s) who has the upper hand there often has the upper hand overall. But I'm still not sure where the balancing issue is. The best argument I could make against espionage would be that it requires some management, and so if you're not keen on putting in the extra work you will put yourself at a disadvantage. But you can, if you choose to, ignore it outright and instead pour those resources into purely militaristic endeavors.

Where you say "it simply destroys the game," I would instead say: it creates a major obstacle for players seeking an early decisive military victory. In effect, it *balances* against that strategy. If you like to mount major offensives early, go for it. But if you're up against a player/team with a lot of espionage points, you had better add some extra gusto to it :-)

[·Imhotep·]

@Scrotus:

The point is you don't need Espionage Points at all. You simply need Spies. All that commerce invested in EP would be better invested in research. And if you point to rushing the GW and oppping a Great Spy - that takes no skill at all but is simply a luck factor. Hence it should be banned in MP games.

[Robert]

Well, knowing that nobody has a full spy network, one can obviously also take advantage of the partial knowing of the enemy, by sending SODs in small stacks. With every game it is that the gameplaying will adapt to the game rules, I'm sure you the MP community will find ways to make it work. But now it can be turned off..... that's most probably easier indeed. (though the espionage points adding up to the culture points is also not that good)

[Boris Godunov]

Espionage was supremely irritating in Civ IV SP. As was noted above, I'd have cases where I was on a continent only surrounded by vassals that were Pleased or Friendly with me, yet I'd still get spies blowing up my improvements or poisoning my cities. A quick look at the World Builder confirmed they were spies from my friends. WTF?

[MxM]

I never played MP, but in SP there espionage is boring, micro intensive task without any interesting decisions to make an with huge annoyance factor. I am glad that it is gone. And judged by the above posts, it creates some problems for MP. Good riddance!

[rah]

At least there was an option to turn it off.

[ScrotusMaximus]

The point is you don't need Espionage Points at all. You simply need Spies. All that commerce invested in EP would be better invested in research.

Yeah - I never spend any commerce on EP, but I do use great spies, buildings and civics to get the upper hand.

And if you point to rushing the GW and oppping a Great Spy - that takes no skill at all but is simply a luck factor.

Well, there are plenty of things like that in Civ aren't there?

[rah]

@Scrotus:
And if you point to rushing the GW and oppping a Great Spy - that takes no skill at all but is simply a luck factor. Hence it should be banned in MP games.

Not skill but a CHOICE. Those hammers spent on the GW could have been more axes choking or rushing someone. Those hammers could have been a down payment on mids.
You also have to have kept you pool untainted, instead of generating more science or something else. It's just one of many choices you can make, so I see no reason to ban it from MP games. But since it's an option to turn it off, people can agree to play however they want.

[ScrotusMaximus]

But since it's an option to turn it off, people can agree to play however they want.

Right on. I think that pretty much settles it. I happen to like spies and espionage, but hey, I can wait for the expansion.