PEBACiv - Game 4

[John]

Tonight marked the start of our fourth PEBA Civilization V multiplayer gaming session! Here are the settings:

• Map: Continents
• Map Size: Small
• # of Players: 6
• # of City States: 6
• Game Speed: Standard
• Era: Ancient
• Raging Barbarians
• Turn Timer Enabled
• Disable Start Bias
• List of civs:
  • Bill - Aztecs
  • Dan - Siam
  • Jason - U.S.
  • Jim - Persia
  • John - Germany
  • Michael - Rome

As you can see from the score, Germany is doing squat-all. Persia, on the other hand, had a brilliant start. Led by the mighty Jim, they've expanded throughout the western portion of our world's main continent. Bill is enjoying life as the Aztecs. He's on his own smaller continent with Dan. The two of them are getting along famously, eating bananas and wearing cotton shirts. Oh, and Bill eats the hearts of barbarians and drinks their blood, but hey... nobody's perfect.

Our next session will be Monday night, and you'll have a report from me as soon as it's done!

[Jim]

Good game so far. I'm wondering how the diplomacy will unfold in this game. There has already been some minor skirmishing between US and Germany and Persia and the US. I think tensions will rise as the minimal available land evaporates.

[Bill]

Interesting being on the other side of the fence. In PEBA 2, I got pulled into combat way before I wanted to while the IIS was peacefully enjoying their existence. So far, Dan and I are getting along swimmingly though we haven't really had a need to irritate each other yet as so far we've had enough land to do what we need.

So far, the Aztecs are moving according to plan, though I've had to expand more than anticipated due to a lack of luxuries near my capital. It slowed down our happiness briefly, but now we are back on track.

I do really like the Aztec sacrifice ability and, as noted, nothing goes better with a banana in the morning than barbarian. The Aztecs will be sad when they dry up.

I'm a little peaved that the city-states near us are both militaristic. I find them the least useful of all in general.

[Jason]

We (the US) hit a stale spot right now. For much of the start, we led the pack with our growth. However, our location on our map has limited growth potential and we are smashed up against the Romans, Germans, and two city-states. Hopefully we can fully cover the area we are in up through the northeast in our next session.

Persia declared war on us extremely early. I think Jim was trying to kill my settler. Little did he know, I had him well guarded by a few warriors and he backed off quickly after his scout took some damage. No units were lost, and with a small "tax of 10 gold" he paid me off for peace. I am not sure I want to dance with those guys moving forward though - they have clearly populated the most cities and have an army that seems substantial in comparison to the other Civs around us.

As for Germany, John attacked and raided a camp that I was working on eliminating. Cost me the 25 gold and XP. This was VERY early in the game and we decided to make them pay by "offing" one of their only attack units early. I have found that even losing 1-2 units very early can effect your nation's growth substantially. Peace ensued quickly after, only to have Germany declare war on the United States a few decades later. The result? The same unit that was responsible for the death of the German warrior was killed trying to defend himself and the United States. You reap what you sow I guess! Peace was made once again, and for centuries since the two nations have not bickered or battled.

The United States have no intentions of offensive military strikes any time in the forseeable future. We hope we will be able to work closely our neighbors to collectively grow our culture and technology. That said, we will be fully prepared to defend our nation if provoked.

So far, this is my favorite game of the 4. While we had some initial technology difficulties, I am finding that people are managing their turns much more swiftly. Makes the game flow better! Can't wait for Monday!

[John]

Well, poop. As all our gaming group members know, we weren't able to play tonight because of technical difficulties. Technical difficulties are all too common with Civ V. It's to the point where I think we need to determine whether it's worth it for us to keep banging our heads against the wall.

My feeling is that Civ V multiplayer is a.) wildly fun when it works, and b.) not ready for prime time. Now we've proven that we have a great group of gamers here. I really enjoy meeting up with you guys every Monday and Thursday night! I think it might be a good idea if we take a vote on how to proceed here. We can:

1. Keep trying with Civ V.
2. Halt our Civ V sessions until a multiplayer-focused patch or, more likely expansion is released.
3. Seek a new, available multiplayer game to replace Civ V.
4. Temporarily disband our gaming group until one of our "Big 2" gaming options - Diablo III and Guild Wars 2 - is released.

I'm 100% open to your suggestions. I'm definitely willing to keep trying with Civ V if you would like to. I'm also willing to consider the alternatives. Nothing is off the table. Let me know what you'd like to do. We'll look over the responses and go from there!

[Bill]

My initial thought, even before you posted the choices, was 3. Though I don't know what that game would be.

I was looking around a little before coming here. Can you play private Starcraft 2 games? Or is it MMORPG subscription based?

[Hitmen]

1. Keep trying with Civ V.
2. Halt our Civ V sessions until a multiplayer-focused patch or, more likely expansion is released.
3. Seek a new, available multiplayer game to replace Civ V.
4. Temporarily disband our gaming group until one of our "Big 2" gaming options - Diablo III and Guild Wars 2 - is released.

I agree with John, the game is a blast, when it's working properly

As for our options, I think we should put it on hold till we finally get a damn multiplayer patch that fixes the many issues in multiplayer solely. But in the mean time I think we should try to find a replacement game to entertain us as well. As John mentioned I enjoy the Monday/Thursday night games.

As for the Big options, I am all for Diablo 3 when that comes out, but it will be some time still. As for Guild Wars 2, part one was a great game, although a MMO is not something I think would work well with our group. MMO's in themselves can be insanely demanding.

As for looking for other options now, probably a good starting point would be what kind of games people enjoy. There are tons of strategy games, first person shooters and such out there, but would help to figure out what people are into before I start just randomly throwing suggestions out there.

I was looking around a little before coming here. Can you play private Starcraft 2 games? Or is it MMORPG subscription based?

Do you mean just matches against each other? In that case yeah you can play private games with just our group, such as 3v3 maps, free-for-all and the such and it is not an MMO subscription. I also fancy the game and series myself and consider it one of the better RTS's out there.

With the game we could have the option of playing just regular maps of versing each other but we could also play the tons of custom maps available. The down side is I am not sure the game is something everyone would enjoy as it does require some skill I would say.

[Bill]

As for looking for other options now, probably a good starting point would be what kind of games people enjoy. There are tons of strategy games, first person shooters and such out there, but would help to figure out what people are into before I start just randomly throwing suggestions out there.

Yeah, that's a good point. It might be hard to find another game we all like. I know my repertoire is pretty limited on PC. In fact, Civ V was probably the first PC game I bought since I got my PS3 like 3 years ago. But in general, I like strategy and RPG games. Real time aren't my favorite, but I haven't really played one since the original Age of Empires. I think I bought AoE II and never even played it...lol.

[John]

For my part, I enjoy pretty much any kind of game - I wouldn't put any restrictions on the kind we can consider. I'm terrible at RTS games, but it's kind of like choosing civs in Civ V - I like being surprised and trying something new. So you can count me open to any and all suggestions.

I suppose if I had my druthers, I'd lean towards ones that allow for some socializing time. Civ V, for all its flaws, does allow for that. As a Guild Wars vet, I appreciate that game's multiplayer because it, too, allows for socializing while playing. Frantic action games are also fun and I'm not at all opposed to them, but if they allow a little talk time (kind of like Alien Swarm did, if you remember that, Michael), then I'm more on board.

[Hitmen]

Alien Swarm wasn't bad, best part its free. But would only allow for up to 4 players at a time I believe. And there is no real content other than custom made stuff after you finish the few levels.

As for game types. Like John I am up to most anything. I've recently beta-ed World of Tanks with my brother, which is a FPS (first person shooter) with the twist that you are all different tanks spanning through history. It can be a lot of fun but it has been in beta for ever, and still is. You could get in free at any time if you wanted since it is in open beta.

I like Starcraft as well, but for me it was more for the story campaign and the custom games. Actual RTS versing part, I am not that great at. I am ok, but nothing to fawn over as some times it all is a bit too fast for me.

My only problem with MMO's is that they can be a huge investment of time if you get to enjoying them, which I have in the past. There are tons, and I mean heaping tons of free ones out there if we were so inclined as well as the obvious pay ones but they seem to me like the type of game that you can't just play a couple nights in a week. That is why I don't believe they are our best option, but if we decide on an MMO I don't mind giving it a crack.

So games for me mostly are strategy games in general, just so I don't pin it down to only RTS games. I don't mind some shooters here and there, and I do love my RPGs as well. Although I don't know many RPGs that would allow us to multiplay without trying to be an MMO.

[Jason]

I am not much of a gamer. I would prefer a game that does NOT revolve around fastest action and/or fingers... I am also not really a fan of first person shooters.

I would be open to something that is turn based strategy, or a game that we work together in. Even some sort of MMO would be enticing -- as long as we limited the time we played to our current schedule. I'd give anything a shot though - and that includes continuing to try with civ 5 if that's what everyone wants.

[Jim]

My vote is to keep trying with Civ V. But it seems I'm in the minority.

I guess I'm open to exploring other games.

I have been playing some of the Paradox games (Europa Universalis III, Hearts of Iron, etc..). I think some of those games have multi-player options, but there's a bit of a learning curve. I don't remember folks complaining on those forums, so I think they are pretty stable and a group of dedicated guys willing to meet on a regular basis is what works best for those games.

I guess I'm open to trying whatever game others like.

[John]

My vote is to keep trying with Civ V. But it seems I'm in the minority.

Not necessarily. Jason indicated he was open to continuing with Civ V, and I'm not opposed to the idea, either. Dan hasn't sounded off yet. That said, I'm also open to the idea of different games, and my tastes are wide open enough that I won't put up roadblocks to any specific genre on my end.

[DanD]

I would be up for doing some brainstorming for solutions and try to tackle Civ one more time. If that doesn't work, maybe we would be better off playing something else until then.

I used to play a bunch of RPG, FPS and RTS games a while back, so I'm up for pretty much anything. I have an Xbox 360 and a PC platform-wise.

I bought the RTS "Sins of a Solar Empire" about a year ago, but I honestly haven't played it yet. Some of my college friends played it together and it seemed like they had fun with it. Here's a a video review from IGN. It looks pretty epic. It looks like it might not be a frantic as some RTS games.

I would be wary of MMO games since I don't know if it would be worth the monthly fee for the amount of time I have to play. However, if the group feels very strongly about one, I might give in. (Though I refuse to play WoW )

[Hitmen]

Sins of the Solar Empire is actually a really good game. Although I think it could chug and get demanding computer wise once you started massing huge fleets and had massive galaxies to worry about. I haven't played it in a long time now though.

That and I lost count on the expansions. Think we would have to be on the same page expansion wise for all to play multiplayer? Not sure, but that would be a cool game to play.