Early in my MP days i loved the gardens, but typicaly now i don't build them fast enough and am often beaten to it...... so i adapted a better strat.

The wall is something i never built in SP but will do so if i can't get Sun Tzus..... wall expires too early but it allows you to crank out cities like the gardens does.

great library is nice for larger MP games...
if you play MDL rules then oracle is as good as any of the happy wonders which are always nice to have or atleast one anyways

I have learned not to rely on those so much as making a huge effort for Adam Smiths which for me is as close to a must as possible.
Leos and SOL cannot be underestimated either especially if you need the upgrades to protect yourself or like an early fundy or commie govt
Of course late in the game i like Manhattan which i will always build if possible

I may give an ally one if I know somebody might beat me to building it. That way, there is a hope that the wonder will be "kept in the family"

I agree that MP games are much less predictable than games against the AI. I can win the same way in every game against the AI; MP is much more interesting because you're playing competent opposition!

I have given and received "key" techs to allys with the understanding that the wonder attached was mine or their's.Its better than an ally that withhold technology for fear of missing "their" wonder.If you must have certain wonders,just let me know and I will help you anyway I can to secure them.I can build something else that will useful to our alliance.

I'll never forget an arena match that rah and I were in. You know, the first person you meet is you ally, unless he has met somebody else...

This relates to the Wonders effort. If my ally has more cities than I do, then I am naturally going to steer the "whole civ" Wonders toward him/her. Conversely, I expect that the single city Wonders are going to as naturally be mine. The larger civ gets Mike's and Hoover's, the smaller gets ST and JSB's Cathedral, etc.

On my own, though, I really care for Leo's, Mike's, and Hoover's. It wonderful to see warriors become riflemen (eventually), settlers become engineers, and caravans become freight. Mike's advantage is known to all, of course. I like Hoover's for the production gain, and I usually need it about then to launch into some serious late city improvements.

In the early game, it just seems like it is more worthwhile to build granaries and city walls city by city rather than all at once with Pyramids or GW. I'm usually too interested in building settlers and libraries or marketplaces in the early stages.

Mostly, I try to go horse-bronze-monarchy, followed by whatever wonder techs are handy, and untaken.

Now, there was one game where I was playing with two newbees, and had a little fun with them. For example: I sent one of them on a merry chase to establish contact, all the while secretly building MPE. Then I got the other one with the old Theology/JS Bach trick: I was one turn away from finishing Bach's, so, right after he finished his turn, I traded Theology to him for Gunpowder.

Need I say more?

Also, sometimes, when I'm playing a friend or tribe-mate in a duel, and obviously losing, I'll just do some wacky stuff, just for the heck of it...like the time I built GL and GW in my duel with War4Ever, or the never-ending loop of endlessly bribed and counter-bibed invasionary fleet...MP games can be so much fun when you're losing!

I've been doing well, thanks to free internet service providers.

I'm normally online (and on ICQ) late at night (after 10 PM Central Time) most days...right now I don't have too much time online (in the normal hours of the day), so mp-gaming has been off, but I'm sure we could arrange a duel sometime.

MP, however...

Primary objective is get a sciencetific advantage with enough military tech to get you adaquet defense. Wonders can be useful, but again so what. Let your strategy hinge on two wonders and you'll fail. Let your strat hinge on snabbing up as many as possible and you'll fail. Use a combonation of wonders for some particular aim- such as overseas campaigns, have Magellan and Sun Tzu. For scientific pursuit, Great Lib and Marco Polo [fill in gaps in pursuit of techs]. But never, ever say I need this wonder to defeat so and so. You don't NEED any wonders, save one happy wonder. King Dick with Shakes is a nice combination in a democracy, as you can base a hundred units out of that city [I don't remember when Dick runs out- it may not be forever].

RAH

Sometimes, for the hell of it, I like to build Oracle, and build it when its useful to me. Usually this just drags me down, but hey, in SP you have to give the computer whatever advantage you can.

I'm talking about those situations where you start building it with EVERY intent of switching it over to something better when the technology becomes available to you. And then forgetting to switch it over. (don't laugh, I've seen it happen before to somebody during a MP game)

Also how do people generally go about lining up a game? I've noticed various boards which look as tho' they run or facilitate MP but have also seen folk issuing casual challenges.

I can honestly say that I coined the term.

I second what Ming said: MP is an entirely different game than SP. Reading the multiplayer forum will help you with some of the strategies and tricks, but there's no substitute for actually playing. An arena game might be a good idea for a first game if you find an experienced ally - you can then pick up some tips while playing the game.

Particular thanks to DaveV - the importance of the preferred time to play point simply hadn't entered my head before I read your post. Do'h.

As to deservedness - well I have to say that Apolyton is by some considerable distance the most companionable spot upon which this undeserving soul has had the good luck to stumble, on or off the web, in many a month of Sundays. No doubt the efforts of Ming and those others who help to run the place go some way to explaining this but (partly because the Civ2 strategy forum is the jewel in the crown in this regard) I suspect that love of the game may actually be some sort of flag more easily attaching to a civilised or part way civilised person than to a plonker. Nice if it's true - before visiting here I would have been a bit defensive about admiting a passion for a mere computer game - and an ancient one at that. Having seen the quality of my fellow addicts, no more I think.