Alfa Centauri - is it worth it?

[Sonic]

I recently seen a legal Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri in a shop. Legal games (especially TBS) are very rare in Lithuania, so I had to buy pirated Civilization 3, Call to Power 2, Imperialism, etc, because I wasn't able to find legal copies. I thought now maybe could be a good time to support Firaxis (and whole industry) after all. However, I still don't want to buy a game if I won't play it. So, I would like to hear your opinions and recommendations.

I know there are reviews, however I thought I'd better ask here because I will write down here what other games I liked so people will know what games do I like.

First, I would like to say I really liked Civilization 3. However, as a counter, I didn't felt the same about CtP2. Maybe because CtP had poor graphics and interface, also it didn't had good sights like for example city view of civ3 is. How SMACs graphics looksalike?

Second, I know SMAC is set in future. I ussually don't like future games very much (unless they are good ones), so I would like to ask - what kind of units and techs there are in SMAC? Are they something like super-turbo-robots with laser rifles or just tanks, planes, etc?

Third, do you still start in SMAC as in civ (with one city or settler) or do you have an empire immidietly?

Fourth, what terrain is in SMAC? Are there still mountains, plains, or just some laser dunes?

Other knowledge and opinions on SMAC are very welcome. I know not much about the game, except for what I know from a few reviews, which were mostly about story, not about gameplay.

Thank you.

[Method]

there have been several threads on this...look around.

i had a long reply typed up, but it got erased when i pushed the wrong button

civ3 is the worst game i've ever played. way worse than civ2. if you like civ3, SMAC is 10 times better, even thought it takes place in the future.

just on terrain, you have 3 settings, raininess, and rockiness, and elevation. flat tiles make 0 minerals, rolling make 1, rocky make 1 (but 4 with mine). arid tiles make 0 nutrients, moist make 1, and rainy make 2. then elevation determines energy production: 1 per 1000 meters IIRC. you combine rockiness, raininess and elevation to make a particular tile. a rolling rainy tile makes 2-1-0 (nutrients-minerals-energy). the same tile at 1600 meters makes 2-1-1. get it?

[Willem]

If you liked Civ 3, you'll like Alpha Centauri. The AI's not as good as in Civ, but there's a number of features that in my opinion are superior. For instance, you can design your own units, which is rather fun. And diplomacy is more involved. The graphics aren't as good as in Civ, but they're still fairly good. Better than Civ II at any rate.

Whether you'd like the future tech or not is hard to say, though I suspect you would. It mainly involves using different types of weapons and armour with various unit types as a chassis, like infantry, aircraft etc. Plus you have special abilities you can give to each unit. Like Anti-Air and Bombard for instance.

As for gameplay, it's very similar to Civ. You start out with at least one Colony Pod, sometimes two, and a scout, and you have to build your empire from that.

[Adalbertus]

For an objective poll you're in the wrong forum. Most here (I think) have some experience with Civ3 and came back or never really left. For a more mixed answer, you might ask at the Civ3 or off-topic forum (hopefully you won't be flamed for that!)
Personally, I was completely drawn into the game the second time I played it. Not so with Civ3, even if I prefer historical settings. I fear it is some (commercial) necessity in terms of developing time. But you can have a game with many different strategies for the player (SMAC/X) or with better AI opponents (Civ3) - both games seem to go to the respective extremes, at least from the intentions of the programmers. To train an AI for a more flexible gameplay takes more time and would make a game twice as expensive (and it would rot in the shelfs). About graphics, I probably would agree, Civ3 is slightly better, but it doesn't include movies (as in Civ2 and SMAC/X), and the basic requirements of the engine aren't so high. SMAC/X has variable terrain heights which are displayed on the main screen, or course the mapping costs some CPU time. But the thing which is the crown on the game, and gives an atmosphere I experienced mostly in RPG's is plain text ...

(sorry for nitpicking) TKG, an unimproved tile, at the beginning of the game doesn't get any energy. You'll have to build a solar collector or echelon mirror to get energy at all and also the height benefit. a solar collector on height 0...1000 gives 1 energy, on 1000...2000 gives 2 energy, the highest you can get is 3500 with 4 energy.
Even that is not complete, the best you can get from a single tile with luck and planning is 14 energy (not the most efficient to do, btw.) but this is for once you get involved into the game.

So, I would say SMAC/X is worth any money you could pay for a computer game. I put the money I paid for Civ3 (too much) to that I paid for SMAX (not enough) and can happily get away with this. If you feel uncomfortable with the pirated version of Call to Power 2, be happy. I was upset with the game, they made the different difficulty levels the worst way they could (giving a huge start bonus to the AI, which simply sucked later, so that if you survived ancient times by luck there was no more challenge in the game), and there were reproducible crashes which made me going back 10 turns, playing 13, going back 10 ... not really a fun. Civ3 is better, and if only more stable. And even if you paid the company for the game it would go to the wrong place. After patch 1.1 they decided to withdraw from making PC games. (You see I'm really angry about the game).
So, playing Civ3 after SMAC was like moving from a 200m² house to a 40m² appartment, but there is nothing wrong with the game in itself (given a normal level of bugs).
Once I posted a poll in the Civ3-general forum who prefers more strategic options for the player and who prefers a tougher AI. The result was quite balanced. So it's up to you to decide what you want. If you prefer more strategic options, go to SMAC/X and you'll be happy. If you prefer a tougher AI, stay with Civ3.

[Anodyne]

At least the poll is going to the right direction
Down with Civ3!

I'm quite sure that you'll get your money worth of fun with SMAC.

[Nubclear]

Re: Alfa Centauri - is it worth it?

SMAC is infinately better than Civ3.

A virus recently infected my computer. I ignored everything (Even my anthems! ) and tried cleaning the virus out of SMAC first (and it worked! ) as its the best game in my collection.

Civ3.....Well, in order to deal with the virus, i simply deleted Civ3. It's gone now.

[Anodyne]

Adalbertus> There are still ways to make SMAC more difficult for yourself when playing.

For example; Always build what the Governor tells you / Never use all-specialist bases / Never use supply crawlers / etc etc...

[Kassiopeia]

Never use supply crawlers

I never use supply crawlers. I always wonder what the big fuss about them actually is.

[Sonic]

Everybody seems to complain about bad AI. Just how bad it is? Is it declaring war on you for nothing (like civ2 AI)? Is it capable to do all the diplomacy options?

Also, I like text games but only when they are simple. This is why I don't like bad graphiced TBS games - in my opinion TBS games are too hard to have text interface.

[Anodyne]

Originally posted by Sonic
Everybody seems to complain about bad AI. Just how bad it is? Is it declaring war on you for nothing (like civ2 AI)? Is it capable to do all the diplomacy options?

The diplomacy works just fine. And I wouldn't call the AI "bad".
The problem is probably that it isn't as good as a war tactician as in Civ3 for example. I've always found challenge in the game, though.

[Blake]

Over all there is a lot more to see and do in SMAC than Civ3, the AI is a bit weaker but there is more fun things you can do to your opponents which makes up for it IMO.
For example there is a planetary council where you vote for things like "Repeal UN Charter" (no penalties for use of atrocities)...
And there are atrocities, nervegas, planet busters (a kick-ass nuke that erases several bases and leaves a lake), nerve stapling (instant pacification).
Theres a lot more to do in the Social Engineering, choose a goverment, economy, values and future society. 256 possible combinations, dozens of strong combinations.

The factions themselves are much more interesting and distinctive, playing the Human Hive is somewhat different to playing Morgan Industries. The bonuses (throughout the game) are somewhat more extreme than Civ3, as are the penalties.

The AI may suck at tatics but the AI leaders sure have interesting personality, each faction has a different ideology, Diedre of the Gaians will prattle on about protecting the ecology and warn you against using Free Market and Planned economies. Morgan will lament about the economic damage you are causing by your impratical Planned economy (or congratulate you on your Free Market economy). Chairman Yang loves Police state, Brother Lal loves Democracy, these two naturally tend to hate each other (assuming they run their goverment of choice) and no-one really likes sister Miriam and her fundie.

Theres some really fun stuff you can do in SMAX - like free a captured faction leader from another faction - how's that for cool they'll be forever grateful and thus in a permament submissve pact. Likewise when you have a faction down to a couple of bases, they may very well surrender, making them permamentely submissive to you, so you can then rebuild their faction and have a strong, permament ally.

So overall you play against a weaker AI, in a much much more interesting and immersive world.

[BustaMike]

Right now the only response in the poll is that SMAC kicks Civ3's ass. All 14 votes vote this way.

Basically, SMAC is one of the best games I have ever played and Civ3 was a colossal waste of my time (not that I put that much time into it, I couldn't even finish one game it was so bad).

[The Bloody Baro]

I bought Civ3 first than upon many insites into SMAC by Apocalypse in the chat room bought SMAC and haven't touched Civ3 again. Plus tha fact that if your smart enought to create your own faction there are thousands times more options than in civ3. Personally, SMAC kicks Civ3's ass 9 ways up to Paris.

[gwillybj]

Get SMAC.

Play SMAC.

You'll know why soon enough.

[Mr. President]

I think SMAC is much better even than Civ2. It plays like a novel. Each experience is different. There are half a dozen ways to win and a million ways to play. If you get it, you won't regret it.