Multiplayer Taliban...

[Bombax]

Something that occasionally ticks me off on this mostly excellent forum is the way that Multiplayer is pushed as the One True Holy Path to gaming heaven, the Way and the Light. Those of us who prefer single player mode are barely allowed to express our own opinion/preference without having it shot down in flames. This despite the fact that although we're a minority of those who actively contribute to the forum, we are nonetheless - I would imagine - the majority of people who own FoG II out in the real world. Unless of course the number of people who own the game equates roughly to the number of regular MP players?

I accept that for many competitive, high-functioning players the MP route is the one to go down. I accept that it provides "more of a challenge". I accept that it recreates, to a degree, the "feel" of a club game. But for those of us who enjoy a recreational game once or twice a week, playing the AI is really just fine. It presents a reasonabe challenge, a good hour or two's entertainment. And that - bizarre as it may seem - is quite adequate for those of us who are neither grognards nor obsessively competitive...

Honestly, a little "live and let live" and "each to their own" wouldn't go amiss!!!

Cheers,
Bombax.
https://solowargamer.wordpress.com/

[stockwellpete]

Death to the infidel.jpg (9.72 KiB) Viewed 4845 times

[Bombax]

Excellent!

[rbodleyscott]

I have to agree with Bombax.

Leaving aside the fact that the vast majority of players only play SP, and only want to play SP, it does the game no service (and hence reduces the potential future pool of MP players) to say that playing against the AI is pointless because "no AI can give a human a good game." (Despite admitting as an afterthought that this game has good AI as AIs go). Readers could easily be forgiven for reading this as "the AI is no good" when that isn't true.

We get that a player can play better than AI (well not all players) but that doesn't mean that games against the AI are somehow invalid.

Also, MP players can easily get into the habit of thinking that only equal-points games are valid, despite the fact that almost no historical battle was ever fought between exactly "equal points" armies. Allowing the AI some extra points to allow it to challenge an improving player is therefore entirely historically valid.

So please let's have a bit less of the heavy-handed proselytizing by the MP grognards. By all means extoll its virtues, but not by denigrating the SP game.

[Odenathus]

Live and let live, or...

[stockwellpete]

I think the point is that if you transition from SP to MP you are going to have to accept that the game is often completely different in MP and the tactics that you have been using successfully in SP may not work so well (or at all) in MP. The pace of MP games is certainly much faster than most SP games and human players can devise all sorts of skulduggery that an AI cannot possibly emulate (e.g. feints, unit sacrifices etc). So if you are someone who tends to play MP it is good advice to start playing MP as soon as you understand the basics so that you do not have to "unlearn" habits you will develop if you stay with SP too long. If you just prefer SP then that's fine.

[Bombax]

I think the point is that if you transition from SP to MP you are going to have to accept that the game is often completely different in MP and the tactics that you have been using successfully in SP may not work so well (or at all) in MP.

I think that's really a different point altogether Pete, and not something I was addressing in the original post.

Cheers,
Bombax
https://solowargamer.wordpress.com/

[GiveWarAchance]

I used to play MP but found playing the campaigns is radically more fun and interesting. I like having an army that I continue to use in a campaign. And the campaign battles can be easy or hard cause they are historical and most are just right for challenge cause they tend to turn into Rocky vs Apollo bouts to see which side can keep from collapsing onto the canvas the longest.
The AI is quite strong and uses human-level tactics.
The campaign battles feel more realistic with 2 armies approaching and fighting a fair battle, but in MP games I suffered from players not moving for the first half of the game which was most common or doing weird stuff which made the game feel weird and boring. I found that each time I loaded up Fog2, I was looking forward to my campaign game but reluctant to play the MP games.

[devoncop]

If ever there was a thread showing the glorious fact that humans are very different when it comes to perception it is this one.

For the record I am a very long term single player fanatic who has been converted to also enjoying MP immensely for the simple reason that the PBEM++ system has arrived. I am such a neanderthal that I couldn't get my head around how to play a traditional email game but Matrix/Slitherine have made it idiot proof so THANK YOU !!!

[GiveWarAchance]

I agree that the PBEM system in this game is brilliant and is incredibly user friendly. That is actually the reason why I got sucked into MP games for awhile but I soon found that I'm not good at MP games.

[Gnaeus]

Leaving aside the fact that the vast majority of players only play SP, and only want to play SP, it does the game no service (and hence reduces the potential future pool of MP players) to say that playing against the AI is pointless because "no AI can give a human a good game." (Despite admitting as an afterthought that this game has good AI as AIs go). Readers could easily be forgiven for reading this as "the AI is no good" when that isn't true.

This is an important point. People cruise forums to evaluate games before purchasing. Of course no AI is going to equal a human opponent. But for someone looking for a good single player experience, the AI in this game is excellent, one of the best I've encountered in the 25 or so years I've been playing around with computer wargames. I usually pick up a game to supplement some book on history that I'm reading. Personally, I'm more interested in overall historical feel and accuracy (to the extent that is possible) than micromanaging the kinks in the system to gain a competitive advantage over someone on the internet. For my purposes, this is the best computer simulation of ancient warfare that I know of.

So we should be conscious that we are posting in a public forum that is likely to be read by potential buyers, and should therefore be careful in accurately describing the game when advocating for changes to improve it.

[MikeC_81]

I think thread originated from the 'get help' thread where a player wanted to improve and stated that he wasn't planning on playing multiplayer until he had mastered mid level AI.

The response from the MP side of the playerbase is not to do that for reasons already outlined. The truth is that if a player wants to improve, the best place to start is to simply submit to trial by fire in MP. There you will see first hand solutions to problems that one would have difficulty exploring on their own.

As stated if his plan was to move on to MP after mastering mid level AI he will be in for an extremely rude awakening as tactics he used to exploit AI will fail miserably.

No one as advocated for anyone to abandon SP. The only advice ever given is that the AI is not useful as a learning tool beyond the basics. If SP is your thing, then all the more power to you, but understand that if someone is asking for help to improve their game, especially if there is the potential to enter MP now or at a later date, the majority of your SP experience may not be useful and indeed may lead that player astray.

As for the competence of the AI vis a vis potential sales, you ought to call a spade, a spade. Indeed criticism of the AI is often qualified by the statement that it is a normal thing in gaming for the AI to be found wanting by expert level players.

No one is trampling on SP, I have advocated in the past that the Devs spend more time on SP because that is typically where the majority of players will be found and I am interested in growing the player base especially for wargames. That doesn't mean we should hide warts though or pretend the AI is a good trainer

[Ludendorf]

I'd describe the AI on Emperor as a worthy opponent and a good preparation for playing online. It's a bit easy to provoke and has a bad habit of piling up against your frontline Cannae-style instead of going round the sides, but it can at least handle itself. I would say it can end up encouraging players to be a little too conservative; you get used to being constantly outnumbered, and my instinct is still to play defensively even when we've both got equal points when I'm going against a human opponent (though I'm becoming more aggressive). Maybe this is the reason newer MP players tend to camp at the back of the map?

(I've personally never had this happen to me; in fact, I tend to find that most people I face in Multiplayer are quite aggressive players.)

Still, the tricks you learn to beat the AI are still very relevant to multiplayer, even if they need a bit of refinement, and I would consider the Emperor-level AI to be excellent preparation for multiplayer.

[Barrold713]

Prior to the Slitherine FOG2 tournaments, I almost never played any war game MP. It was hassle and all the other reasons one might hear. This goes back to my first computer which was a Commodore 128 upon which I played SSI classics I still recall fondly. I remember the AI taking 15-20 minutes to complete a turn in Battle of Antietam or Battle of Gettysburg.
Having participated in the MP in FOG2 though, I am hooked. The ease of use and the lessons I learn from every time I get my butt whooped make it so worthwhile I can see where it is almost irresistible to evangelize a bit.
I still enjoy all of the things this game does well...the battles and campaigns fought SP are enhanced by being able to play at a higher difficulty significantly due to those tough losses.
Having played games against humans where their mistakes have made me feel like Hannibal's tutor and others where I have managed to get embarrassed by the AI, my view (and your mileage may vary) is that you are missing something by not taking advantage of how easy and fun it is to participate. My final results in the tournaments are nothing to brag about, but I have met some great guys, had a lot of interesting matches, and approach the game differently from the exposure to something I assiduously avoided before and still avoid in most games I play.

[Bombax]

I'd describe the AI on Emperor as a worthy opponent and a good preparation for playing online.

QED!

[GiveWarAchance]

I get whooped by the AI once in a while, and when I do win, I'm down to a few tattered units using their spears as walking canes to keep from collapsing onto the grass.
But I lose more often in Sengoku Jidai which has quite a cunning & ruthless AI and also very big enemy armies a lot of the time.

[Bombax]

I get whooped by the AI once in a while, and when I do win, I'm down to a few tattered units using their spears as walking canes to keep from collapsing onto the grass.

Phew! Glad to hear it's not just me...

[ahuyton]

Yes, this is a very fair point. I did post in favour of MP on another thread but I hope it was not judgmental.

I still enjoy the AI games, especially going through the campaigns and it can be quite pleasant to win against the odds. The AI can be challenging so it is by no means a given that you win.

[76mm]

So if you are someone who tends to play MP it is good advice to start playing MP as soon as you understand the basics so that you do not have to "unlearn" habits you will develop if you stay with SP too long. If you just prefer SP then that's fine.

Gotta agree with Pete here; I actually think that the AI in this game is pretty good, and can put up a good fight at the higher AI levels. The problem is that the tactics you beat the AI with might not work at all in MP. Because I also enjoy MP a bit more than against the AI, I've therefore generally abandoned playing against the AI to avoid mixing styles.

[cyrano]

I nigh never play single player, typically won't buy a game if it doesn't support MP, and desperately want connected MP in both this and Sanctus Reach, but pounding on people for playing however they want to play is weird.

I will always encourage people to play MP because I do think it's better and I like meeting new people, but, again, heavens, don't be weird.