Does SP Brilliance Make for MP Excellence

[Arrian]

I will probably never be a good MP player, simply because I play Civ for the SP experience. I will be participating in the PTWDemogame, but that's not quite the same as a normal MP game.

ducki,

Me playing against myself would probably be boring - both of me would be building up a solid defense in anticipation of attack, and a good offense in anticipation of an opportunity... waiting to have what we feel is a comfortable advantage before attacking. The result would probably be somewhat of a stalemate.

Believe it or not, I'm actually a pretty conservative player. At least I started out that way. As I learned the game, and came to understand the AI, I was willing to take bigger and bigger risks (which weren't as risky once I knew what to expect from the other side).

Humans are unpredictable, however, and thus my old conservatism would probably come back.

-Arrian

[Jawa Jocky]

If play yourself in a hotseat game you may get some idea of how you would play. Of course the information problem would make the results worthless.

[ducki]

Originally posted by jshelr

I don't necessarily mean defensive units will beat offensive units. I mean that surprise is hard to achieve and that the defense has a huge mobility advantage on its home turf and road (even RR) system.

So, I wonder if some players will build a nice, compact, defendable civ and then build / research, making the diplomacy window the real place that the game gets fought out.

Again, this speculation is completely unencumbered by any experience or facts.

Bear in mind, I was talking about pick-up games. When you play with friends or people you "know" from the forums, I'm sure it will be different.

Maybe past experience with online pickup games is making me a bit too cynical about the average pick-up game opponent.

I'm sure you will see some conservative defensive play, but I bet you'll see a lot more early rushers, especially in games like Regicide and Elimination and Capture the Princess - the psychology being, if I can win early, I am better.

To me, it's kinda like the difference between Boxing and Car Racing. In boxing, if you knock your opponent out early, you win and you win big. In racing, it doesn't matter who is in first for the most laps or even the early laps. What matters is who leads the last lap.

I prefer car racing.

And Arrian wrote:

Believe it or not, I'm actually a pretty conservative player. At least I started out that way. As I learned the game, and came to understand the AI, I was willing to take bigger and bigger risks (which weren't as risky once I knew what to expect from the other side).

Maybe I got my 'poly pros mixed up. I was thinking you were the biggest proponent of ultra-early archer/horseman rushes. Maybe that was rpodos/Theseus or Aeson.

I still think we're going to see "a lot" of very early buildup and rushes by people going for the first-round knockout punch.


But, again, I have to stress that I'm talking about random pick-up games here. Just picking a game out on gamespy.

When you set up a game with a "friend", I'm sure there will be more ground rules and more etiquette/gentleman's agreements.
*chat - Hey, my start spot really blows, cut me some slack for a bit.
*chat - Hey, Rome's killin' me here, can you help?
*chat - Hey, I'm stuck on a 3 city island, let's make a deal.


Anyway, if I confused my ultra-early rush proponent, forgive me. And remember, I am fairly cynical about random pick-up games.

[Arrian]

ducki,

Oh, I'm all about the horseman rush (or war chariots). My main strat on Monarch was the mass chariot upgrade (build 20 chariots, accumulate 400 gold, get hbr, hit shift+U, and lay waste). I also have been doing more with swordsmen (which I didn't use at all until recently) and even warriors. Archers are the units I use the least (except when playing China - they're just so perfect for it).

Theseus will use any unit any time he feels he has an advantage, but like all of us, recognizes the power of mobility.

Sir Ralph is the archer rush specialist.



-Arrian

[ducki]

Ah, thanks.

Early war, and warmongering in general is still new to me and the AU205 game is where I really learned to love the Bow and the Saddle. It's still a big experiment for me, but I do see it's advantages. It's just hard to get used to fighting when I think I should be building.

I'm starting to reassess the value of granaries in conjunction with that and am coming around to the popular belief that the Pyramids is the single most important wonder in the Ancient Age.


Eek! Sorry 'bout the threadjack!
I stand by my assertion that pick-up games will be full of early war, begetting a lot of happy warmongers and frustrated builders. Defense units just became twice as important, and dual units (swordsmen, Babylonian Bowmen, Numidian Mercs, Legionaires, Celtic Swordsmen) just became 3 times as important.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by DeepO


Well, I do. or at least, there is no garantee... I can't imagine a good MP player who is bad at SP (e.g. beating all humans, but can't get past regent on SP), but the other way certainly isn't true. I played some MP games before (not many, and not PTW (yet)), and even if I consider myself decent on SP, I know I totally missed the mark in MP... I got rushed by fellow n00bies, even knowing what to expect. In PTW, you know the rules, but the unpredictability of humans messes all those nice AI strats up, and it will take a while to adapt. Indeed, like NYE (and others) said: if you're good on SP, you know how to squeeze the last drop out of a bad situation, you know how to rush the AIs, but the largest part that is missing is the defense needed in a human game. Add to that the diplomatical options who go a lot farther then the few scripted ones in SP, and you get a whole other game in which you might not do so well.

DeepO

No guarantees, really that is really going out on a limb. Of course there will be learning curves and growing pains, but MP is not some unknowable strategy. Some will need less time to adapt, others more, but the good players will figure it out.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by ducki
I stand by my assertion that pick-up games will be full of early war, begetting a lot of happy warmongers and frustrated builders. Defense units just became twice as important, and dual units (swordsmen, Babylonian Bowmen, Numidian Mercs, Legionaires, Celtic Swordsmen) just became 3 times as important.

I agree.

The situation is very similar to AoE2, I believe: Main difference between a human opponent and the AI is: AI can´t do a well-executed Rush.

One more thought: There will be less Rushing in Pbem games, because I´d expect Pbem players to mostly be Builders.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by vmxa1

No guarantees, really that is really going out on a limb. Of course there will be learning curves and growing pains, but MP is not some unknowable strategy. Some will need less time to adapt, others more, but the good players will figure it out.

I agree with that statement, but it isn't exaclty the first... I don't believe SP brilliance will make MP excellence(=title), but with enough training and going through the learning curve it should be possible for all good SP players to not completely suck at MP. The problem is of course that if you know the AIs are pushovers and you have more fun doing that, you don't want to go stick to MP games in which you will lose the first 50 of so.

How many of us lose SP games? Not that many, I reckon... we all know that if we don't do foolish things, we will win, and playing becomes a style excercise to win beautifully, or from underdog positions. In MP, that's not enirely true anymore, or at least it isn't the first few games you play. There are some general strategies that will work, but no strategy will work all the time, and if the other does something which might appear stupid at first, he could very well win a battle there. I find it very hard to try to assess other players, where the AI doesn't have many secrets for me anymore... which is one of the reasons I joined the PTW demogame to learn from others how to analyse human PTW behaviour... it will work a lot better then to try to do it on my own, playing a lot of games in which I would be the one to lose all the time.

DeepO

[Sheik]

I have played part of a MP game with some friends (We are the same street and our houses are in a row, the game still lags).

When I play the AI I know what I am getting when I trade and I know how I compare with the other AI civs. in MP it was different. I never knew what they where thinking and that bugged me. I wanted to know what they had and how they where reacting towards my civs greatness

[vmxa1]

Well I do not know where all of these MP gods are coming from, but anyone that lose their first 50 games should consider finding something else to do with their time.

[Theseus]

I think SP excellence WILL translate into MP proficiency, for those who choose to go there. Sure, you're not facing AI civs anymore, so you'll make some mistakes... but not too many. C'mon, if you're facing a notorious warmonger, you're not gonna adjust?

I'm lookin' forward to it.

ps: Sorry I haven't been around... new job, and an industry conference.

[DAVOUT]

It is also possible that the players who have played against humans in chess, go, and traditional wargame feel comfortable again in making what I would name *natural* strategic analysis. I think that playing against the AI, although intellectually not really challenging, requires mentally an additional effort to adapt to the *artificial* side of the AI strategy.

[yxhuvud]

I definitely agree with theseus.

Actually, I'd say SP excellence is a REQUIREMENT for MP dito. The simple reason is that a player that is good at SP will have learned to maximize production and to produce enough troops. Just a fact that a good SP manages the workerforce manually leads to a enourmous difference of the speed of the REXing or early warmongering.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Well I do not know where all of these MP gods are coming from, but anyone that lose their first 50 games should consider finding something else to do with their time.

Exactly... why do you think I say I'm terrible at MP

okay, 50 may be an exaggeration, but the first 10 games I played on Starcraft I lost... I never played an 11th.

DeepO

[vmxa1]

Yes but that was a long tiem ago, I bet you would be much better now. Well let me qualify the whole thing, by saving that FPS and RTS is another thing all together. You need a skill that is not required for tbs, that is good fingers. I will stipulate that beating the AI at those games is not the same as beating a human as that human may have better reflexes and more stamina and concentration. Those traits are not required for TBS games as you can take all the time you need. Anyway I know you are well aquainted with how to play Civ.