Retooling Thought and Strategy for Multiplayer: An Early Musing

[DrFell]

I'd be suprised if in 4-way games, everyone will trade with everyone else. That would be foolish at best... it's only to your advantage preventing other humans from reaching government techs and denying them resources. 4-way games tend to get 'polarised' but if someone is exchanging techs with their opponents then it would only hurt them.

I'd trade some techs, but never maps. Trading maps with non-allies is a sure way of getting yourself killed.

[DeepO]

I'm not saying it happened all the time, but in the 2 SMAC MP games I played it surely did. And there were some very seasoned MP players in there, it was not my idea... the first game I was lucky that someone contacted me, and, surprised as he was that I only had my starting techs, he offered half of his tech for my map (which, at that time, only revealed my starting position). Out of pure compassion, I guess (the human factor!)

It was a lucky move of his: I was playing the Spartans, got lucky with the first datapod I opened (rover), and discovered he was my closest neighbour. If he hadn't shared his tech with me, I would have slain his university city in the first 10 turns of the game. Now I returned the favor, and just asked for the rest of his techs

It was too bad that SMAC MP was so unstable, I never played more then 30 turns before crashing out of the game. So I can't comment on how later tech swapping happened... but speaking personally, I'll gladly exchange ironworking for horseback riding with every Civ that doesn't start right next to me. If two players reason like that, the others can't stay behind.

DeepO

[colinf]

Sounds like a variation on the 'prisoners dilemma'

....if you're going to trade with someone else then I cant afford not to since I'll be left behind in tech.

Since I don't know if you're trading with someone else or not, I'll have to trade just in case you are.

Ergo - everyone will trade.

Turtles will lose to alliances.
The fun bit comes when you stab your partner.....

(I used to LOVE across the boad Diplomacy (the game) - pure strategy and psychology).....

[jshelr]

Yea -- we're all going to have to read John Nash's work. Maybe just seeing the movie will be enough.

[Franses]

I played many CTP Internet and PBEM multiplayer games. Tech trading only happened between alliances and than only with utmost caution.

Because researching a tech gets cheaper when everybody else has it, tech trading in CIV3 will even be less popular, I guess.

I do expect luxury resource trading like "you get me silk, I give you spices".

[Nakar Gabab]

Of course, it depends on the climate of the game. Get 4-8 warmongers on one map, and you'll see tech trading over someone's dead body. Get 2-3 of those people as amiable traders, and suddenly EVERYONE will pretty much need to trade.

It's an interesting variation on tech whoring - playing the tech spoiler in MP by shopping techs around to those that don't have them. It not only keeps people out of the lead, but it also forces their hand and creates the need for trade (or the need to shut you down, if they think they can pull it off).

And of course, the guy who starts the trading racket profits immensely. *Unless*, of course, people refuse to BUY his tech...

[W4r_Machine]

If trading with everybody else doesn't work, try the opposite. I guess it depends on who you play it with.

I'll gladly give up tech for tech+/-cash as I see no problem with it. I may think twice trading tech that leads to GW or "powerfull" units, but other than that, I see no problem.

Worst case scenario is, you trade a tech that provides GW which you started building a couple of turns ago and you got beat by the one you sell it to.

Or two, you sell a tech that is a steping stone to a more advance unit and the buyer mass upgrades his older units to invade you.

[DrFell]

Or three, he builds thirty advanced units with the tech you just gave him and takes over your whole empire

[Nakar Gabab]

But here's the rub, folks, look at where some of the techs bottleneck!

Iron Working - Gotta have IW for Construction. Gotta have Construction for Aqueducts and to get out of the Ancient Era. Are you honestly gonna trade IW to someone, unless they have NO iron? Think on this for a second.

Horseback Riding - On the way to monarchy. Warmongers take heed. Trade this one? Maaaaaaaaybe.

Literature - You don't "need" it. Yeah right. GL won't be as useful, but everybody's gonna need the libraries. Expect this one to be hard to get, PARTICULARLY because it's not a prereq.

Theology - Bottleneck for Education and the Democracy branch. Also lets you build the Sistine Chapel. Who in their right mind is going to trade this one (unless they already have Sistine and a comfy lead)?

Feudalism - Everybody's going to research this, probably on their own. Pikemen, Sun Tzu's, and the bottleneck for Chivalry. I can't see myself trading this one.

Invention - Leo's, and the path to Military Tradition. This might be more salable, but not by a lot.

Steam Power, Medicine, Nationalism - You've gotta be kidding me. When the Industrial era hits, all bets will be off. Do you want to give your opponents railroads? Let him get that much closer to hospitals? Give him the riflemen he needs to stave off your cavarly? Suuuure you do.

[punkbass2000]

IIRC, Horsebacking riding is not on the way to monarchy; it's a dead end tech. Perhaps you mean Warrior Code.

[FrustratedPoet]

Re: Retooling Thought and Strategy for Multiplayer: An Early Musing

This is a fantastic thread!

Originally posted by Nakar Gabab

Expansionist: Talk about more powerful! This may be the trait that stands to gain the most in MP. Tech trading in the early game is going to be notably stunted as everyone tries to beeline towards their pet techs (GL, Horseback, Iron); if there happen to be barbs on the map, and therefore huts, you stand to get a leg up right away. Even without huts, expansionist gets some nifty benefits. Knowledge will be power when it comes to the MP game, and scouts give you tons of knowledge before anyone else can get it. Furthermore, scouts can be used as suicide recon during times of war, letting you see garrisons, note troop movement, and pillage vital resource links. Having a better map than anyone else is key as well, since a black map to a human player is a complete mystery. Scouting for resources and luxuries allows for early denial strategy plans, and even the slightest leg up in city placement means that much more efficiency over the next guy. You can argue that the benefits taper off in the late game, but any good Zulu player is going to blink and ask "What late game?" while they bulldoze you with impi and horsemen.
CONCLUSION: More Useful

Something else that should be mentioned here is that, as ever with the Expansionis trait, the importance of map-size.

I agree with you that Expansionist will be a more desired trait in MP than it is in SP, but I think it will become a must-have trait on large and huge maps (maybe standard too?).

There won't be many simultaneous MP games on the big maps because of computer speed issues, but it would be quite possible via PBEM.

If you're playing a PBEM game on a large or huge map against several other human players then everyone will want to be expansionist. The other great Civs such as Japan, China, Germany and Egypt could find themselves relegated to the 'second division' of desired civs because everyone would want to be an expansionist civ - especially the Aztecs and Zulu's for their good UU's.

just my £0.02.

[Transcend]

If my trading partners are on a far away continent, why won't I sell them these techs for a bunch cash and let them slug eatch other out?

The multi-player civ game reminds me of China before the first unification in 221BC, where one kingdom had to defeat at least six other almost equally powerful kingdoms. How Chin managed to achieve that should be a very interesting lesson for winning the game.

[DAVOUT]

FrustratedPoet,

How are allocated the civs to the players in a MP game ?

[FrustratedPoet]

good question DAVOUT.

I'm not sure, but I suppose that each perosn simply gets to pick what Civ they want to play in the same way they would for an SP game.
This raises the problem of having more than one person picking the same Civ.
Maybe in MP there is no restrictions on the number of people who can play as a single Civ.

I hadn't really thought about that issue, though.

Does anyone know the answer to this?

[W4r_Machine]

So the croud is somewhat devided: traders and non-traders.

Trading importants techs are out of the question, it simply wont happen 'cept for those rare occurances.