A newbie in MP would like to know some things

[unmerged(36774)]

As a newbie in MP I would like to ask some things

1. Must all players have same settings (difficulty, speed..) or will the host pass these values to all players?
2. When you pause, will game start automatically after some time has passed?
3. Do I need to save the game, if I'm not hosting?
4. What if your game crashes, how to join back? Must other players save and exit the game before you can join back?
5. Strategic differences between playing against AI or human?
6. Is there any point using 'Improve relations' diplomatic option for a human controlled country? You can trade and be allied with a human controlled country even if your relations is -200, if both players are willing to.
7. Is it much harder to get resources from the world market in MP than in SP? Obviously it depends on many things, but in generally.

If you have played MP, feel free to tell about your experiences.

 

[Strategist]

1. It will be automatically be equal to the hosts settings, however counters on/off is free to change in-game.
2. It can only be unpaused by the pausing player for the first 30 seconds, after that it can be unpaused by all players, however it wont auto-unpause.
3. No, and by the way, non-host saves tend to be filled with errors.
4. If one of the players drops the others get a msg. The host should then save, and rehost. Ussually the host doesnt crash, except in events like the CE.
5. Quite a lot, look on Vickywicky for Memnons MP strategy guide
6. As long as both human players are there relations can be -200 wihtout effecting anything, however when a player has to miss a session, the AI may DOW you etc, thats why I always try to keep good relations with my friends.
7. Also check Memnons MP guide in Vickywicky. I can say you that goods to improve RR, and iron tend to be hard to get early on, also players may boycot MPs, weapons, ships, or regular clothes/ furniture, to penalise your industrial/army growth. Therefore, each player should try to become fully self-sufficient, which can be quite hard, and will be the reason for most worldwars

Good luck with your game. Too bad I can't play on sundays, as I start to become quite a MP veteran

 

[Lamprey]

Good info, I disagree on 2 points:

3) It's a good idea to save when not hosting. 90% of the time your saves will not be used, but the one time when the host forgets to save or crashes first without getting a chance, you'll be a hero.

5,7) Memnon's a great player and has contributed a ton to the Vicky community, but his MP guide sucks when it comes to diplomacy. Bear in mind that this is my personal opinion, as invalid in the eyes of Memnon-minded players as his is in mine.

He basically advocates never trusting your MP partners and always considering - heck, planning - to stab them in the back. In my MP experience, this has proven to be a near-sighted strategy. Stabbing an ally in the back is a great way for a quick gain, but you likely won't get that person to ally with you again. Ever. Even with +200 relations. In fact, you'll make an unflinching enemy for the rest of the game. Other humans will see what happened and will also not support you easily.

My advice on this front would be to, yes, plan for allies stabbing you in the back and, yes, do break alliances - but never without reason, and never be the one backstabbing. If you're allied to a country that's weak and not likely to become a major player, meaning the alliance is more of a liability than an asset - sure, dissolve it, but ONLY in a time of peace, with a good reason and when that ally is in no immediate danger.

Even when you're in a position where you can't easily help - say, Germany allied to Austria that's attacked by the OE or to USA fighting England, help when you can. You can send 100 divisions south to Austria, and you can sneak shipa past the royal navy loaded with troops to help the USA, or to steal the UK's colonies making them either divert troops and attention to you or to use as bargaining chips in the peace table.

Standing by your allies gains you a trustworthy reputation means that 1) other countries, even enemies, will treat you with respect, 2) it will be easier to form alliances or mediate wars you're not a part of, and most importantly 3) you're unlikely to ever end up without allies. MP wars are never 1vs1.

I've only been in one long-term MP game with Memnon, me as Germany and him as Russia. Early on, Russia was allied to nearly everyone at some point. By the late 1870s, a rock-solid Germany/Austria/Spain alliance was gaining power left & right while two smaller alliances, UK/USA and OE/France/Russia were in second place. When France/OE/Russia attacked Spain France was about to be knocked out of the war with a separate peace and OE/Russia's shaky alliance was deadlocked by UK/USA's support for Ger/Spa/Aus; while neutral, their navy was still helping us move troops and keep Russia's navy in port.

All this because Russia, having rubbed many the wrong way, was viewed as untrustworthy and generally the "bad guy" against whom anyone would mobilize. It was due in a good measure to Germany's campaign of villification of Russia but also to Russia's machiavellian politics.

 

[Strategist]

Says the person backstabbed by Memnon

Well, I agree with you that you can better gain a permanent alliance then only one to backstab later. However I myself wouldnt mind to ally a backstabbing player, and I did in that game (I was the OE). Too bad that game ended to early after Memnon dropped...

One note, Russia is the nation that always tend to have to fight wars on its own, as it is a bit overpowered in the game. Therefore, it might have been a different story if Memnon had played, say, France. A nation that is usually good on allies, and I think that backstabbing france is a lot easier to forgive then backstabbing overpowered Russia...

 

[Lamprey]

True. It was much easier to have a scheming Russia everyone was afraid of and a weak france on the other side than having, say, a France that would always try to sick Russia+Austria on me.