The Planetary Extreme Baseball Alliance

I had fun playing with you all. I think that last final game was a good one. I'm hoping that the Civ V multi-player will be improved and we can resume playing at some time in the future. Good luck with Diablo guys.

Thanks guys for a great gaming group. While the end of the last game got a little dry, I fully enjoyed both the merriment and mayhem in each games.

On top of the problems we encountered, it seems to me that full Civ games don't really lend themselves to playing in groups like this, if only just because they take so long. A typical solo game probably takes 10-20 hours from start to finish (depending on settings of course). The online games probably take twice that. It's just a lot of time for one game.

Warriors wrote:On top of the problems we encountered, it seems to me that full Civ games don't really lend themselves to playing in groups like this, if only just because they take so long. A typical solo game probably takes 10-20 hours from start to finish (depending on settings of course). The online games probably take twice that. It's just a lot of time for one game.

True, especially when one or two people in the group are eliminated early on. They either have to sue for peace and play a crippled nation the rest of the way, or they have to sit out subsequent sessions.

Was it just me, or was the game engine actually kind of snappy last night? There's usually noticeable lag for me between the time I click an order and the unit actually moves. It was almost instantaneous last night.

I didn't mind the long, drawn-out games at all, actually. In fact, I'd say that's part of the allure of multiplayer Civilization. Lots of games can give you that "quick in, quick out" experience, but Civ lets you carry a storyline over multiple sessions, which I think is fun.

What isn't so fun is that Civ V is programmed in a way that requires everyone currently in the game to be present in order for the game to be launched. That restriction takes the joy out of the drawn-out nature of the gameplay. Now you've got to cancel sessions if even one member can't show up, which puts pressure on everyone. There needs to be a way for the AI to fill in for given sessions where a player can't attend, which would allow the games to progress at an even pace. I don't think the slow pace of the game would be minded nearly as much if members of the group could have confidence that twice a week, there will be progress made.

If Firaxis can fix that issue - and I'm quite certain it will take an expansion or two to achieve, if it's achievable at all - then I would be thrilled to return to multiplayer Civ V. There's a ton of potential in the game, but they simply have to make it more multiplayer friendly. The online portion of the game is simply not in an acceptable state at the moment. I'll be monitoring developments. If something pops up on the multiplayer front, I'll let you all know.

I am with John on this - I like the lengthy games. Reminds me of the days when I left the monopoly board out for months at a time and played a few hours a week with my friends.

As for the last session, I have never seen what a nuke can do. I was trying to position myself to see what it could do as we counted down the turns to the UN vote. What I forgot is how long and how many units it would make each turn. I should have asked John to just let me drop the A-Bomb or maybe I could have used it on one of my own tiles. Anyway, it dragged the game out an extra 45 minutes which I wish I didn't in hindsight.

As for the game itself, I would LOVE it if:

-There were virtually no connection issues
-It was truly turn based. I know some would argue that during war time, it should be hectic - like war is. But to me, it becomes just a screen-jumping, fastest finger game like any other... I will never be good at those. It leaves virtually no time to strategically make moves and think - which IMO is what a turn based simulation should be about.

All and all though, I am glad we played. I am hoping we may be able to get another side game started down the line - particularly if they can fix the connection problems.

Jason, you pretty much summed up my feelings. Rest assured that I will be monitoring the development of Civ V multiplayer. If they work out the kinks, I will alert the group and we will jump right back in. I'd even be willing to purchase an expansion, though it irks me to "reward" the shoddy development of the original to get the game working right.

I recently started playing a Hot-Seat game with my wife, which brought back memories of this game. Good times

Sad to see we lost the images in the server migration though Though it looks like one picture of Banana Mountain survived!!

hahahaha...yeah, not every day you can sign off as Lord Montezuma of the Banana Island Jungle People...

And I think you buried the lead there....YOUR WIFE PLAYS CIV WITH YOU?!?!?!??!?!?!
Dan is my hero. Lord, I can barely get my wife to play anything beyond cards.

Yeah, she's a fan of some strategy board games so I had her try Civ. She loves it

I had so much fun with these sessions. Would love to do something like this again, be it with this game or another. It was good times, connection issues be damned.

I do miss me some Civ as well. I haven't played it much since our sessions ended as playing it solo lost it's luster.

Ooooh I'd be down for this

What is needed for playing multi player?
(I have only played solo)

Thoroughbreds wrote:What is needed for playing multi player?
(I have only played solo)

The interwebs, and Steam I believe?

When did CIv go to Steam? I swear I searched steam for anything civ over the winter.