How playing against humans will be different...

[Inverse Icarus]

i usually dont play random games, i just play within my little group, thats why we have those odd "house rules".

i played civ2 online @ the zone for a while but i got tired of EoN ICSing me.

[punkbass2000]

One of my main anti-warmonger strategies is making early wars less useful. I will do this by never giving in, even if I've lost for sure. I will start disbanding cities and will never, ever pay for peace if the war in question is of the 'oscillating' variety. I'd rather die. If enough people do this, early warmongers will often find themselves with tons of land but no economy or tech. No, I'm not Russian

[Pyrodrew]

By the way, does anyone out here ever play to the bitter end . . . even when you have obviously lost? It's quite fun actually . . . And sometimes you learn a new trick or two

Moreso, it's an AMAZING RUSH when you turn the tide of battle so your mortal foe is suddenly not top dog anymore OR even better if you make a surprising come back!

Unfortunately, many do (& will ) give up after a certain point due to taking the game personally. However, if I am the only human left & playing against a sore winner... then I do abandon them since they are not worthy of learning anything new I might do... in fact even if I am winning I might stop playing if the other person is a sore winner/loser.

[DAVOUT]

If the most common game is 2 humans against 6 AI or 4 humans against 4 AI, I assume that we don?t know which Civ is human and which is AI. I think that this could suggest interesting strategies consisting in imitating the AI behaviour to mislead the human opponents and induce him to do some dangerous moves.

One of the typical strange things the AI does systematically is to ask for a meeting and offer the world map against yours +several hundreds gold. Then you make a proposal offering your world map and asking what they would give; the answer is ALWAYS: world map+3 to 20 gold. Therefore, if I am proposed that kind of deal, I will think that it is made by an AI.

They are certainly much other behaviours typical of the AI which can be imitated.

[aahz_capone]

there's on catch Davout. When in diplomacy with an AI you can see how much gold etc he has, when in diplomacy with a human, you cannot. This is unfortunate as it will make diplomacy take extra long and you will notice who is AI.

But I definately agree with keeping the AI/human identaties a mistery. If anything it will stop sore loosers scream "no fair, you ganged up on me!" Like, duh! thats the point of MAA.

[Inverse Icarus]

abandoning cities is ghetto. i think it's the worst addition to civ as of yet.

[punkbass2000]

Heh, heh, 'ghetto'

[aahz_capone]

I wouldn't mind abandoning cities if you get the workers/settlers for it. Maybe it should cost money (paying people to convince them to live somewhere else). I've only used it a few times when I didn't have the patience to buy loads of workers/settlers to disband a city (and I don't raze cities, I'm a diplomatic type).

[gsmoove23]

ah 'ghetto' I'm a native of NYC living in Britain, give me more lingo I'm homesick

Nothing wrong with abandoning cities, my empire just sees the necessity to reallocate resources, plus defending it is an unnecessary drain on resources. I often do this when I pick up small pointless cities on my frontier through cultural reversion. Its funny when the AI comes around and places another city there and I get it again a few turn down the road.

Thats something that won't be in strictly MP games, pointless settlements. Imagine it, there may actually be unsettled 'wild' places in the game that stay around till the modern age. Races to grab resources that pop up in godforsaken places later in the game.

[WarpStorm]

There is no such thing as a pointless settlement. I build everywhere (just like the AI). Even if there are no resources I use it to increase my chances of a Domination or Cultural victory by building culture producing structures (even if I have to rush build them).

[gsmoove23]

Yuck

that and your communism trick makes for an ugly game

[-proletarian-]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
There is no such thing as a pointless settlement. I build everywhere (just like the AI). Even if there are no resources I use it to increase my chances of a Domination or Cultural victory by building culture producing structures (even if I have to rush build them).

You filthy spammer.

[Inverse Icarus]

RAZING AFTER CAPTURE is great.

ABANDONING WHEN CONQUERING LOOKS INEVITABLE is ghetto.

imagine turnless. when the last defender is standing they abaondon a city.

[WarpStorm]

I have to agree with you. Abandoning just before you are destroyed in pretty lame and should be disallowed.

[gsmoove23]

How do you mean? Is their a way to disband cities other then starving and building a worker or is that what you're talking about? Forgive my ignorance.

I don't see any problem with abandoning cities though, if you know an undefeatable army is coming it would be a valid strategy obviously used to good effect in the real world, as long as it is done with some strategic value and not just to be a pain in the ass.