Future of Diplogaming and MP in general

[CapTVK]

(Looks around to see if the coast is clear)


Okay! Coast is clear, let's do it!...Time to discuss the future of Civ-MP!

FRIENDS, ROMANS, FELLOW COUNTRYMEN...LEND ME YOUR EARS!




As some of you may already have heard, Civ3 appears to be going gold soon. It now seems certain that MP will not be in the upcoming release of civ. My guess is that there will be some basic MP functionality in the form of hotseat but that will be about it. Okay no real MP then? But instead of complaining and whining we could also do something constructive. Let's make our own MP feature wishlist and present it to Firaxis. It will certainly take awhile before we see the Civ3MP on the shelves. So why not spent it in a useful way, hmmmm?


My suggestions on what should be included:


Extended Start options:

Ability to:
start in different era's with given techs
Choose no. of starting cities at outset
Give players a basic army at the outset (for the warmongers)
Equal starting positions (everyone starts on the mainland or islands etc..)
set goal at the start (certain wonders or techs, prod/econ/cult level)


Diplogaming
Civ3 seems to offer various treaties for use with the AI. They should also include treaties and alliances that can be used in MP.
A chat screens that keeps a complete log, not like the Civ2 where you have to perform various cut&paste actions to save everything said.
The option of 'political'- weapons, like espionage, embargoes or nuclear warfare (no idea how destructive nukes will be in civ3 though)
Not so trigger happy AI in diplo-mode (we should be able to set the level ourselves)




Proper scoring system:
Tough call, what's a proper score? Production? Gold output? Cultural levels? Combination of the above? My suggestions is they include an export option for the demographics screen. That way we can up with our own system should we want to.

[rah]

For scoring, I'd like to see points earned for Goals. Then after a number of preset turns. The game ends and points are totaled.
(something that would be definative for one night sessions)
Possible goals.

1. certain wonders or number of wonders.
2. certain technologies discovered or count of technologies.
3. points for capturing enemy cities.
4. points for number of cities or population. (or number of trade arrows worked, or shield, or something)
5. Feats of accomplishment. (similar to CTPII, and you don't know how much that bothers me to say that) Like sailing around the world, eliminating an advanced civilization, etc)
6. Maybe points for going the entire session without ever declaring war on anyone.
7. points for rankings in
...a. gold
...b. city improvements.
...c. trade routes.
...d. military strength



On starting in different era's with numbers of cities and armies,
Scenarios can fit this need without using critical MP programming development resources.


And yes it SUCKS BIG TIME THAT IT WILL PROBABLY NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL RELEASE, BASTARDS.

RAH

[Ming]

Continuing along the "start options"...

They gave us a whole new concept with 2x movement and 2x production... I hope they have something else new and exciting up their sleeve for Civ III.

But other game options besides the original.

No nukes
No City Bribes
No Unit Bribes
No trading of techs
No gifting of any kind

The general idea is for people to determine what rules they want to play, and have the game enforce it, instead of being a matter of honor. There is nothing worse than playing a mp game with "no city bribe" and then have somebody drop out, the game continues anyway, and the AI walks up and bribes a city.

The above are just few thoughts... What other game options would you like to see

[DaveV]

How about handicaps? If there's a big difference among players in experience or ability, you could start out the weaker player(s) with some extra units, gold, tech, etc. Or, if the computer had some reliable way of determining the "goodness" of a starting position, the strongest player could be put in the worst position, and so forth. If all players are equal in ability, you could fall back to the Civ II scheme of compensating players for a bad start. All of this, of course, depends on the computer having a clue...

And, of course, my old favorite: eliminate "free" map information. Clicking around in the black or checking units for closest city is a gross perversion of the game's concepts. All of this new line-of-sight stuff won't mean much if there's a cheap way to gather map information without exploring.

[Ming]

I hope the AI is a TON smarter if it is the one that determines the strength or weakness of a starting position. As can be seen now, it "supposedly" gives you free sciences to make up for a bad starting position. I've had positions where they I have received 4 or 5 sciences and had great specials on my opening screen, as well as a hut...

I like the concept of "equal" starting positions, but only if the AI is smart enough to know what equal really means

[CapTVK]

I just browsed through the great list and the E3 one, it's a bit short for MP pro's . We really need to come up with a better MP-player wishlist.


Ming,
Those sort of options have become so standard for us they should be included as a standard. (- As far as I know you can still bribe cities in Civ3, cultural levels be damned - we definitely need a no city bribe option)


Rah, DaveV
I like the concept of goals and handicaps.

Fix #7 - Multiplayer Startup Option

quote:

Randomness is a great feature of this game that we all love, but we need the options that could minumize it when needed when starting games.
1: To be able to choose that no one starts next to each other or starts with free techs or 1 vs 2 settlers. -instead of wasting time restarting or trying to make a scenario...

2: To be able to choose equal or more equal starting points, terrain, and landmass wise.
- this way no one needs to end up starting five squares from an opponant, or being in arctic while another is in river/grassland.

3: To be able to customise your titles and Civs name and save them so you don't have to type them in every time.

4: If it is a no AI game then no AI should be able to take over a human Civ if he drops from game.

[SlowwHand]

Dips in II is one of the things I loathe about the game.
I'm really hoping they make it more realistic in III.

[CapTVK]

What's wrong with diplomats? They were also a major part in Civ1.


Now that Firaxis finally made an official statement (in the FAQ ) that MP won't be included we can start making a real list. The gaming mechanics are already set by now but the game setup/rules/goals/log and chat functions are still uncomplete or only half done. Which means room for new suggestions and constructive criticism once the game mechanics have been tested properly in SP.

I won't be visiting the forums in the coming days. At the moment I'm busy with writing a "history civ in a nutshell" (interesting stuff you can find in various 8-10 year old reviews. Sid's dinosaur game has actually been planned for quite a while . So feel free to come up with anything that could (should) be included in the MP-edition (or patch! ).

[sekong]

Zone.com don't support CIV MP any more. CIV MP at Games.com is basically dead. So my wish is a game server. And with a score that a player discontinue a game. Altho I may get a bad score.
Also faster game..
*****************
Above is some realistic wish. following is too brave ones
simu turns,
combination of RTS and turn based. (Production, researching are turn based, but combat, exploring, moving are real time )
I made a lengthy post in civ3 general board...
10+ or at least 7+ players possible

[rah]

10 or 7, geeze, any more than four, and i die of boredom in between turns.

Unless they speed up other aspects. Simul move would help, BUt you're right, they do have to resolve the movement conflict turns.

RAH

[Ming]

We really do need something to speed the game up, but is fair.
I can't imagin a 10 person game the way civII mp is

[Rasputin]

its not jsut the slow turns., its getting those 10 people back for the next session that is hard.....

I can put up with the delays in turns , gives me time to post at apolyton...

[Ming]

Nahhh... even with Apolyton open during the game, I can't play for 5 hours and only knock off 2000 years

Yeah, but continuing a game is tough... no matter how many people are involved.

[War4ever]

The real problem with civ 2 is the building of cities on mountains and hills...which makes waging war virtually impossible before cannons......

Even then you can only go after a weak opponent....so its the same old pattern..settlers/caravans.....

At least civ3 won't have mountain top cities to deal with.....

as for gameswith more than 7 people ....... i doubt it...... look at all the threads and you see a pattern....everyone *****ing about the same thing....games not finishing!!!!!

And this isn't flakes not wanting to play.......this is your top..middle and bottom feeders all doing the same thing...

For the future of civ2 games.....perhaps mountain cities should be banned..... oh well i am off to ramble somewhere else

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by Ming
Nahhh... even with Apolyton open during the game, I can't play for 5 hours and only knock off 2000 years

Yeah, but continuing a game is tough... no matter how many people are involved.

Playing a long term game is probably the MAJOR issue that has to be solved in Civ3MP. Civ2 was designed to have SP in mind and MP was a nice afterthought. Fact remains ,that a 5-7 player game is almost impossible to complete. Even with very dedicated (and fast) players it's hard to do. In Civ3 there are two major features included : real trade (caravans are scrapped) and culture (refreshing but untested). Two major features that come on top of the normal civ model. Way too many control layers are adding up.

Which is also the reason why I fear for Civ3MP: "It might not be possible to play Civ3 with the full ruleset"

A solution might be that we settle a for Civ3-light with a customizable ruleset.
or
Somehow utilize the waiting time between turns (chatting excluded): setting goto commands for units, city management etc..