 |
|
Gavrushka
|
 |
Darlington,Co. Durham,UK
Apr 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
Faded just raised a pretty relevant point..... yeh I know, I saw the flying pig too...... Being good at MP, does not mean being good at PBEM, in fact often the opposite is the case... There is no other way to put it..... I SUCK at PBEM, but am rarely beaten at Internet Games... Now I have played a couple of PBEMers online, and beat them, and beat them easily.... Hopefully I will play Lung, the leader of the PBEM Rankings soon, and he expects to beat me easily, and the reverse is likewise true.... So why is it, after all it is the same game, that Excellent PBEMers are worse than newborns online, and Excellent MP players are truly awful at PBEM... 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Gavrushka
|
|
Darlington,Co. Durham,UK
Apr 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
I think all answers are equally valid.... and a combination of them all comes somewhere near to explaining why - It helped me understand the difference in my games.... In Internet Play, I stick to the most ridiculously simple strategy.. WHATEVER happens... In PBEM play there are many additional factors to take into account which edit play style...
And yeh the fact that in PBEM there are more players, different map sizes, and allied support.
Bird again, a very valid point, many Internet Players play PBEM but the reverse does not hold true.... And experience of MP will obviously help gameplay - I am sure Keygen will not mind me saying that the first time I played him on a regular map on MP, he fell a long way behind, I was Modern as he went rennaissance.. the second time I played him his gameplay had improved considerably.....
Swissy is one of those players that is good at both, he seems better able to bring in the elements of both game styles and amalgamate them well..... I have a Strategy for Internet Play which does not vary.... it is outright aggression, whereas Swissy is able to bring many of the subtleties of PBEM play into MP.
It will be interesting to see how Lung Fairs.... It sounds very much like he is likely to be a very good Internet Player.... It is almost like PBEM is a refined and improved form of Internet play.... BUT personally I prefer Internet Play.
Bird, the great thing about Internet Play is that u can play for 45 minutes, and have played the equivalent of 3 Months of PBEM. I appreciate you are busy with family and work.... Likewise here, and I must admit I have been playing too much on a weekend.... But thats mainly because I work very very long hours during the week, and with a Wife 300 miles away I am not as distracted by family concerns... In July/August, I am buying a place in London for my wife (she's renting at the minute) and will be flying down there every Friday Night, so it looks like that will be the end of my Internet days forever.... 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Keygen
|
|
Athens, Hellas
Jan 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
I think that the rest covered the issue well so let me sum and perhaps add some few points.
The key to win in both PBEM & Internet is growth.
If you have grown well you can claim victory successfully.
Well grown civilizations always win while badly grown ones always lose regardless PBEM or Internet play.
The difference between PBEM & Internet is speed. And what makes speed differs are a) the total number of players involved, c) the diplomacy between them and c) the map size.
PBEM games are usually between 5-8 players, mostly in huge or gigantic maps. When many players are involved some sort of diplomacy is inevitable. Alliances can slow down or nullify the plans of a strong player to attack another weaker because the latter is backed by another one or more players. Tech exchanges between weaker players in science can keep them in the same level of another, stronger player in science therefore nullifing any technological advantage. As result, diplomacy can cause in many instances a game to last longer while without it would end sooner. Larger maps also greatly help a game to last longer. It takes more time to meet another player, more time to attack and more difficult to back your attack in great distances. PBEM games in large maps always survive until leter ages because technologies that nullify distances comes in a late stage. Also more player means more time since you have more opponents to handle, usually with different play style. Adding all the above it is obvious that fast growth is not critical and a relatively slower growth player might win the game.
Internet games are usually played between 2-3 players in small or regular maps. Therefore diplomacy is nullified due to lack of players and the game is accelerated due to the lack of space that is caused by the size of the map. Aslo the opponents you have to face are fewer. Therefore fast growth is critical and the one that grows faster is the one who wins the game.
Try to play a PBEM in one on one game in a small map and use your Internet play style. You will win. Try to play an 6-8 Internet game in gigantic map and diplomacy permitted and you will see a huge difference 
Note that by saying growth I don't mean just population/cities.
I mean an overall growth: Population/cities, production, gold, science, military. It is not essential to excel in all above during the entire duration of a game but to have a good overall and know when to maximize the one or the other to win.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Keygen
|
|
Athens, Hellas
Jan 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
BTW Garry, what would you say for a long Internet game with 6-8 players in a gigantic game? Has anyone ever dared to try that?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Grandpa Troll
|
 |
I owe..I owe..it's off to work I go
Jul 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
I have found that in MP games, 2-3 humans is best.
I enjoy plying and yes have quit a few games but played tons since game first came out over 3 years ago online. I understand more and more what goes into a game now, having played the great Gavrushka, The unstopppable Jack-Boot Facist Pig Faded Glory   I mean Superb Military Might of Faded Glory  , I have been whooped by the best and freely admit it. I dont care for 4-5 humans
too long of turns,UNLESS you put on something like 6-8 sec per city, I mean, you start with say 8 sec, then each city built you get an additional 8 secs PER, great for me, bad or someone whom is rmmaging around the country side with a Kazillion units, thats REALLY a bugger!!..when a turn take 3-4 minutes PER PLAYER!! UGH!!!!! and resynching comes into play. Reg map is best, then you can find each other pretty quickly. Most know I prefer a settlers/stealth units excluded game. I enjoy either a 3 city challenge or 9 settlers . Renaissance start. I have had most fun playing a 1 on 1 match with the like of Erni and Attila and Patryn. I also enjoyed playing Faded Glory one-on-one except he lies and I dont care for that! When i say he "lies" I am not attacking him, he knows what i mean. we say no attacking for say 40 turns. I place a unit on a good, he "accidently" kills it, laughs it off and then keeps that good tile for himself. But overall, i wouldnt mind playing him again. 
I say Mp is a great school of hard knocks learning, whereas PBEM is nice, but drags out, plus the "cheating" looking at turns thing people talk about  
Oh well, I say MP and "Come and Git Some!!"
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-04-2002 04:42
Why in earth can't I just win the money
?
.... The Apartment is in the Girlfriends name, man U are living on borrowed time...
....
|