Joint Spaceships and Alliance wins for multiplayer

[Alexander's Horse]

One thing about the current game is that it comes down to a zero sum game - only one civ can build the space ship, only one civ can conquer the world.

This is okay for single player but it is a bit of a problem for multiplayer where players tend to ally. In the current game, allies must eventually split to win.

Wouldn't it be better to at least have the option of alliance wins, either through a sucessful joint space mission or successful joint conquest of the world?

------------------
Don't flog a dead horse!

[UltraSonix]

From what I've seen of multiplay (I don't play it), I thought the games are pretty much over by like 1AD. Do game even advance to the spaceship age?

edit: I'm surprised, though, that allies can't do a joint victory by conquest like in singleplay SMAC. That option should definitely be included in Civ3 multiplay.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary...
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited October 10, 2000).]

[Alexander's Horse]

Have a look at the civ 2 multiplayer forum. I was in a game that just finished - went all the way to spaceships. Its rare but it does happen.


------------------
Don't flog a dead horse!

[Deathwalker]

In a computer game doesn't this mean that the computers players would allie themselves and win straight away as they have a habbit of forming allainces.

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow

[Alexander's Horse]

No, not really. Good multiplayers tend to seek alliances, so if you have 4 players you get 2 alliance etc. The bad part in the current game is you work together with someone for most of the game but you can't win together. In big multiplayer games this is a pain. Also, "tribe" or "team" play is very popular but the current rules don't allow for this, so people opt for the powergraph etc., which isn't very satisfactory.


------------------
Don't flog a dead horse!
[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited October 10, 2000).]

[Hannibal3]

Hey, I say why not? Works in Age of Empires. Only one thing, I don't think normal alliances should be able to have a joint victory. I suggest a final level of diplomacy called Federation or Confederation. This is when 2 or more civs become one. They maintain control over their own cities and any units that come from them as two states would, but they share money, technology, and can help with construction of wonders, etc. Wonders would in turn affect both players. So they can both contribute to a spaceship and can win as a team. Thats my suggestion.

------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu

[Nemo]

personally, i always wanted see this option for single player, too. but i have no idea how you would win if this was to be implemented.

------------------
"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."
-Michael Sinz

[Rasputin]

Gets my vote. the mutiplayer side of civ 3 has had little discussion so far, unfortuantly too many people have only seen the bad side of MP and tend to paly mostly Sp now.