Multiplayer Unrealistic.

[E_T]

The Problem is ...

Most likely the pathfinding routine. If you, during your turn, do something that requires the pathfinder to run, then there is a lag created. But, because you move at human speeds, the pathfinding lags aren't really noticeable overall. When the AI takes there turn, esp. if there is a war, the lag becomes very noticable (because you see it all at once). Now add MP to this lag; the communications IP overhead, the Type of cummunication (33K to ADSL/Cable), the Server state (light to heavy load) AND the Pathfinder being run on all connected machines and what would "likely" happen would be even slower than it is in SP. Even different screen sizes would have an effect.

The "best case" would be to not have ANY AI's play in the Game, but still you will have to contend with any/all associated Pathfinder delays while in the process of doing something else. And what about the Barbs?

What's the "cure" for this?

A Client/Server version that would have the Meat of the Pathfinder (and the game) on the server machine and just have the Client mostly used as a game terminal? That would really create a problem if the server has several games going at once.

Or how about a distributed computer approach to the MP/Pathfinder problem? But then how do you reconcile the different machines connected at different speeds issue? Split the work up in proportion to these things, but what happens is someone drops out? Do you start from scatch if that happens?

I think that the best playable solution is some form of middle ground between the two. If you make some form of change within your view area (non-FOW), then your machine should do the pathfinder calcs for that section only, then relay the results to the server. If the applicable path requires going into the FOW, then the Server should determine whos machine would run that part of the pathfinder. The server would also be responsible for all Mutual players FOW pathfinder. And during the AI turns, if any, break up the pathfiner between all of the players machines.

Just a thought on why MP hasn't been done yet.

Maybe, the pathfinder needs to be more intuitive, i.e. don't worry about computing a lot of paths if only a few are affected by player actions. I think that Fraxis should Open Source it's pathfinder Algorythm, so that true MP pathfinding could be hashed out. This might also have an effect of speeding up the SP game, if a more code efficient (robust) approach is thought of.

E_T

[Kaak]

like i said, a bit unrealistic

[Solver]

Ming makes good points.


Slowness... why? I have not experienced slight slowdowns even in the Modern Age. I play on Standard Maps with 8 civs. Once I tried Huge Earth Map and 16 civs, yes, that got unplayable about the end of Middle Ages - I just couldn't stand the wait.

In standard games, as soon as it gets late, I turn off enemy moves.

PBEM... good MP option, but long. PBEM Games take at least 10 months to complete, and in each PBEM game then, someone drops, replacements come and so on. It's not as fun as live action.

I use to play AOE 2, and that's some fun MP action, where we join, play it out for an hour or a bit more, and have the game played. I don't like AOE2 as much as Civ, but the MP experience there is better. On the other hand, AOE 2 has virtually no SP, while Civ 3 has.

I don't know for how many hours will Civ 3 multiplayer games last. But I assume that, with a cable connection or better, it should be quite OK. Also, Firaxis is implementing some interesting server technolgies, with Game of the Day, etc. Sounds good.

[DrFell]

'Thats not what happens. 99.9% of the time a person flips the switch when somthing goes wrong with there civ. They will come back a week later in the lobby "Oh I lost my ISP, na I dont want to continue"'

They don't usually leave against me... I play duels normally. Even if they do leave (about 1 in 10 or less games, and I win about 95% of my games) I know I was whipping their ass anyway so it doesn't bother me.

'PBEM they can't realy do it. Well they can ; but after you formed a friendship over a year or two on the ACS threads. They feel guilty about it. So I think PBEM is a better Idea. '

PBEM is so slow. I like to play 2-3 games in a night, maybe more. Not one every 6 months! Sure, put PBEM in there, but there needs to be a 'real-time' MP option too.

'The "best case" would be to not have ANY AI's play in the Game, but still you will have to contend with any/all associated Pathfinder delays while in the process of doing something else. And what about the Barbs? '

That's the reason for MP, so we don't have to play against dumb AIs. In civ2 MP I never played with AIs, the only time being when accidents happened (some guy leaves the game, or the host set the game up for too many players). I don't use barbs either, and I also don't really use goto. But I still find the game lags a bit on MY turn. There's even a slight wait before moving units, which is infuriating!

[ffej]

There is a lot of good points here, both for/against MP. For those who are against, all I can really say is fine, whatever floats your boat. When multiplayer comes out, just dont play it

I think they should just release a turn based MP patch, and then figure out a way to make it more viable. Some of us will take MP anyway we can get it. I am used to the turn based system of multiplayer (from the days of Civ2Gold and dare i say.. CivNet). I think we just need something to do during the wait times, such as city-location planning, some kind of "World Leader" chat, and options to review and plan, so when it is our turn, we already know what we are going to do.

The one thing I noticed is that the AI takes a REALLY long time once a big game gets going (for crappy AI, kind of disheartening). I'm running a 1.2GHz AMD, and 512MB of RAM, and it still takes a while (not as long as on my other mahine, a PIII 500 with 256MB), but again, thats is something I can live with.

Me and 4 friends played many games of Civ2Gold, and your right, it does take time to get people together for that, if they can play at all. That is why I always had at least 3+ multiplayer games going on, so if 1 of the 4 cannot play, then we have a 3 player game going on too, if 2 cannot play, then the other 2 play their own game.

Yeah, it is kind of a crummy system, it takes a long time, and even more problems than I can't think of now, but it all fades fast once you and your human ally out-think the other two human players and are able ot land an invasion force, or sneak a sub with nukes on board past one of your friends naval defenses, just in case he gets cute .



Ffej-drooling-at-the-mouth-for-multi-civ3

[philler]

Why am I hearing all those things about MP problems, client/server architecture, etc...?

it's a turn based game.
you play your turn normally. then your opponent does so, and meanwhile you can do whatever you want with your civ except move units, which have already moved. You can modifiy what zones are worked by your workers, trade techs or resources/luxuries, modify the science research rate, change your cities' production, etc. whatever you could have done during your turn, actually.

One thing you shouldn't be able to do is change a production that was scheduled to end at the beginning of next turn, or to change a production for something that will be available at the beginning of next turn (if for instance you're building an university which will be done in 3 turns, and an opponent sneakily attacks you, you cannot change the production for a rifleman that will be available right at the beginning of your next turn. you have to wait until your actual turn and the rifleman will be available at the beginning of next turn, just as it is for the time being).

I've played CTP over network a couple of years ago, and as far as I can remember it worked pretty much like that.
there was no problem at all, and I don't even think the game was slowed because you would keep all your micro-management for when it's not your "turn".

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DrFell I'm looking for a good MP type game, because IMO SP is nothing. It's going to be a long time before they design AIs for games like this which can challenge a human.

I suggest you pick up a copy of CTP2 and load a couple of the free Apolyton mods on to it. With the mods the game is very well balanced and sorted out plus you have a stable MP version where you can match wits against a large community of fellow players. Cheers.

[philler]

as for the mods thing, well, you simply make sure all players have the same mods before starting the game.

even I could write that piece of program.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by faded glory
Thats not what happens. 99.9% of the time a person flips the switch when somthing goes wrong with there civ. They will come back a week later in the lobby "Oh I lost my ISP, na I dont want to continue"

It's no problem really. If a player leaves then the AI just takes over his spot on the other players continue; either way you are still better off then in just a SP game.

[godinex]

Unrealistic...

[Ãœber KruX]

Originally posted by faded glory



Thats not what happens. 99.9% of the time a person flips the switch when somthing goes wrong with there civ. They will come back a week later in the lobby "Oh I lost my ISP, na I dont want to continue"

PBEM they can't realy do it. Well they can ; but after you formed a friendship over a year or two on the ACS threads. They feel guilty about it. So I think PBEM is a better Idea.

well i'm fortunate to have over 20 Civers in my local area, so i can beat their face in if they dont continue / quit.