Turnless multiplayer mode: What does this mean to you?

[Harovan]

Their no-comment mode in the last chat was promising enough. In the February chat they were in the i-don't-know mode. Personally I don't wait for this XP as anxiously as everybody else does. I will buy it though, when it comes out, no doubt on this. But I don't like speculations about what it contains. This might lead to certain expectations, which might (and probably will) be disappointed.

[Todd Hawks]

It just means that the guys at Gamespot didn't understand what was meant and/or the one who gave the interview didn't express himself clear enough.

I'm quite sure that there won't be RTS-like elements in Civ MP.

Maybe simultaneous turns like nye suggested.

[WarpStorm]

Re: Turnless multiplayer mode: What does this mean to you?

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Second, there is no way that I can move my units efficiently because Firaxis has yet to create true stack commands.

There will be improved stack commands. As far as the rest of your complaints, time will tell.

[Stuie]

I think turnless probably means that units regain their expended movement points over time, and the years progress in certain time increments. Building would work the same way, with number of shields produced by a city applied in time increments rather than turn increments. Thus, the game is constantly progressing without the need for "turns". Kind of a marriage between turn based and real-time.

[gnome]

Personally I was fond of the MP in Civ2 and SMAC without any kind of simultaneous movement. I like to seriously micromanage my cities, and I thought the pacing of the game was excellent, when it was my turn, I was moving units, and when it was other players' turns, I was managing my empire.

The new "turnless" mode might be interesting, but I hope that they make it optional. The reason I play CIV instead of RTS games, is because I wish for the victories to go to the best decisions, not to the fastest actions.

[klesh]

Anyone ever try simul mode with civII? Y'all remember when that thing was discovered within the game, right?

My guess is that it will play like that.... but work.























maybe.

-FMK.

[Tuberski]

My guess is that turnless means you are stuck in 4000 BC throughout ther entire game.



However they do it somebody won't like it.

[Jon Shafer]

Well, as far as being able to manage 100+ cities with 300+ units in real-time... I've very skeptical. The only way I see this turnless stuff work is if they get 3/4 of the way to Civ IV in the process of making the XP.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by MarkG
we'll see
my guess is that they wont be in "talking-mode" before E3(may 22-24) though....

my guess is that they wont be in "talking-mode" until the apocalypse (sp?). no comment

[Eroberer]

Re: Turnless multiplayer mode: What does this mean to you?

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Lets say I am in turnless MP mode and having oh, 20 cities and 100 units to manage what do I do. I have to use governor's and automate workers first of all.

Second, there is no way that I can move my units efficiently because Firaxis has yet to create true stack commands. So, you have to rush to try to manage....but

I am fairly certain that with all the delays (please wait) that we have in SP that the game will simply freeze up at times. So the agravation of being under pressure to move quickly and having to endure the dead time. Stress. Bad.

BTW, looks like PBEM/hotseat got left out in the cold. Damn Firaxis to hell if they do that.

Man you're dumb.

Edit: Upon reading your post, I retract the above statement. You're actually, in all probability, correct.

[civman2000]

if there isnt hotseat i'm going to scream ...I rarely played civ2 mp with people, but I enjoyed playing scenarios as all the civs against myself...ok i'm weird but I plan to do the same with civ3

[vee4473]

Could it be that the developers of civ3 are basing the turnless game on the assumption that most games will be short war games ,(like most RTS online games are, where you build quick armies and rush your opponent), which will eliminate civ's quickly and therefore eliminate the need to make a multiplayer turnless game that can handle more than only a few civs that are huge empires without significant delay?

hmmm...

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by civman2000
if there isnt hotseat i'm going to scream ...I rarely played civ2 mp with people, but I enjoyed playing scenarios as all the civs against myself...ok i'm weird but I plan to do the same with civ3

but wouldnt you know your own sneak attacks? lol

[notyoueither]

Yes, but when the surprise works it's quite the coup.

[Thrawn05]

Turnless MP.... Sounds like someone at Firaxis has been playing LucasArts' Rebellion.

I think it will be very similar. Everyone plays like a TBS, but the turns are X seconds long, then a new turn appears. Within each turn, you get to move your units and such, and have to wait a few seconds to move them again. If you don't do it within that amount of time, you basicly missed your chance to move it.

If there are AI's playing on the map, they will be better at it since they can do everything in one shot basicly.

I can just imagin' Diplomatic discussions. It's going to take you 2000 years to discuss trading world maps with the timer set up high!