What are the major differences in tactics between single player and multiplayer? For example, when I play alone, my cities are relatively lightly defended, usually two defensive units fortified plus one offensive unit on sentry. I imagine this would be suicidal in multiplayer.

Also I imagine the diplomacy is a lot different. Are humans any more trustworthy than the computer?

IMHO, the major difference between SP and MP, given a reasonable standard of human play, is that your oppo is about 130 times (minimum) more difficult. Humans won't, for example, continue to hurl under-strength units at your city's defenders on mindless suicide missions.

For many, many other reasons (a lot of which will no doubt appear in this topic), but mainly connected to the stupidity of the AI, I reckon SP and MP are totally different games. In fact, IMHO, MP is where this game really takes off into the realms (I hope) its creator envisaged.

As for trustworthiness, it depends with whom you play. I suspect, on balance, human trustworthiness outstrips the AI's. I'd like to think so anyway.

The only way to find out is to play!

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

Humans have tactics not always good ones but they are more inclined to use them. Plus humans are huge caravan and dip users and unlike taking an AI city.... if you take a human one expect huge attacks on your newfound city the same or very next turn...

Alot of humans are poorly defended especially in the beginnig and you maybe able to walk in and take a few cities quite easily.

Humans tend to ally themselves with the first person they meet.... makes it easier to leap frog ahead in science.

rule of thumb.... if someone won't ally with you... it probably means they have met someone else.... in which case if your unit is superior just attack them. MP is about team work so find a partner and dosy do because if you don't someone else will.

------------------
War is the answer when you need to strike first.

War is the answer when you think you should strike first

war is the answer when you think others may strike first.

Being an ally actually means something! paying a civ to attack someone actually means something!

2.Taking advantage of terrain.The ai doesn't seem to recognize the difference between mountains and flatlands.

3.Pre worked settlers.

4.Building on good defensive terrain-hills,mountains,forrests.The ai is always on flatland

5.Using diplomats to turn attackers into defenders.I've only seen the ai use this tactic in a limited way.

Regardless, there's a hell of a lot of fun to be had along the way.

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

Allies that mean something... Two allied human civs that understand the concept can just kick butt.

Real warfare. Human players that have any experience what so ever can fight far better than the stupid AI. Humans attack in bunchs and waves... the AI attacks one unit at a time, unless their just happens to be two units in range on the same turn.

Many human players focus on building the Happiness wonders in Deity games. The AI doesn't really seem to care to build the happiness wonders.

Important in a MP game is a GOOD alliance, not always best to ally with first person as you may not be able to trust them long term.

As I always play Raging hordes, defenders is always first priority , but then expansion rapidly is target....

------------------
Rasputin The Mad Monk, Lover of the Russian Queen

Is pillaging a good tactic in multiplayer?

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591