Give me your honest opinion

[splangy]

Originally posted by hexagonian



Personally I enjoy it, and if you do not care for it, thats your preference. But to come in and call us a bunch of idiots shows that you are rather petty as a person (even if you say you are joking) .

why call me petty, i WAS joking

by the way, everyone here seems to think that i dont like ctp, witch i dont, BUT i still payed for it so i play it. i like 2 things about this game 1- the ability to play with like 16 empires in it 2- the easy to enter multiplay, however thats over since the games mp died long ago but i still play with it from time to time.

[hexagonian]

Splangy,

It does not really bother me all that much if you do think CTP2 is a crappy game. If you do not like the interface, units, PW vs Settlers and so forth, that's your choice. There are games that I play that bother me because of the fact that there are aspects of the game that I hate. (I can think of the AI in SMAC sending waves of probes against my cities when I have Hunter-Seeker, for instance)

The point I am trying to make is that most of the problems you have with the game regard preference issues - things like PW vs Settlers ARE a preference issue. The one valid point you make regards the passive AI, which (at least I feel), has been addressed in the Mod community. You may not feel like that is the case, and you are entitled to say so, but to flat out state that we here in the CTP2 Mod Community are 'insane' because we are doing this is insulting. I may disagree with your viewpoints, but I do not imply that you are 'intellectually challenged' either, and then come back and say that it was all a joke when called to the carpet for it...I am sorry for my own comments, but I am reacting to comments that you initially made.

Regarding Activision's role in all this - yes, it is a shame that they did not support CTP2, but I had already bought it before the bad reoprts started filtering in. If it wasn't for the fact that there was a community of Modmakers here, the game would of been in the dustbin for me. But I enjoy the game immensely now (part of the creation process)

Personally, in looking at the files between MedMod/Apolyton Pack and Cradle, I believe that Cradle's files are more aggressive. If it's not aggessive enough for you, so be it. (Since there are so many features in CTP2 that you cannot stand from a preference standpoint, you probably will not like my mod either.)

But I had a civ2 modmaker (Kull) who has tried my Mod and his comments do speak for themselves...

Originally posted by Kull
Cradle1.1 was an eye opener. First two games the Barbarians just wiped me out before 5000 B.C. Suffice it to say that single units wandering around looking for ruins will meet an ugly end right quick, and you better keep a few units in the home city....militia alone won't help. The third game lasted longer, but the result wasn't much different. Can you say AGGRESSIVE?! I'd played the first iterations of Cradle, and knew how dangerous the Barbarians are....but now it's the AI Civs too! Unlike normal games of CTP, starting "behind" is not a temporary situation! In my case, I was absolutely last on the power graph, and shared a continent with a nasty group of Mongols and a supposedly pacifist bunch of Indians. Of my 10 or so cities, the Mongols took one, the Barbs took my capital, and the Indians (with great huge smiles on their diplomatic faces) surprise-attacked me TWICE and took another five cities. Oh...and these guys were only 4 and 5 on the Power Graph! The only reason I even lasted this long is that I paid the Indians for some Bronze Age techs, but now they are coming at me with Legions and Composite Bowmen (I still have slingers for God's Sake!) and Heavy Cav.....so it's basically over. I could probably whine and play dead and last for another 500 years, but the idea of somehow winning this thing is laughable.

So, if you're a warmonger type and like plenty of action, you BETTER download the Cradle and take it for a spin! Oh.....and in this mod....."Impossible" means just what it says!

Time for a new game on an easier setting.....and if I EVER bump into those ^%&*#@ Indians again, they will be SUCH roadkill!!

[Pedrunn]

Originally posted by splangy
by the way, horses may have trouble climing mountains but troops need supplies wich come from pack animals like donkey and horses, so animals already do climb mountains

Usually these supply animals use roads. And one thing is to make a single animal climb (what already is dificult) other thing is to make a whole unit/army.

Hey, sprangly. Thanks for spice thing ups in the community. One thing i miss since i left the civ3 community are the great debates like this one.

[rooboy]

I don't about the rest of you guys, but the one major thing I miss from the Civ games is moving caravans around to establish trade routes.

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by rooboy
I don't about the rest of you guys, but the one major thing I miss from the Civ games is moving caravans around to establish trade routes.

In my last Civ2 game I had I rhuled the world I only left one or two AI civ alive, because I wanted to get the score. So my cities had nothing to build left and I started to establish trade routes. At first I had to find a city on the other end of my empire that desired that trade good, that was not very easy because the trade manager was not effective enough for 200 cities. The second step was to move the caravan to the other city over the map I allready improved very tile with railroad, because these path finding routine wasn't able to find the best path, so if you did not take a look on that caravan unit it moved very fast on an unimproved tile. So establishing trade routes without moving around caravans is more effective and saves a lot of time. Moving around caravans is wonderfull if you have only to do it one, two, three or ten times. But if you have to do it for hundrets of times, it just gets boring.

-Martin

[Bluevoss]

Actually, I think trade is handled great in CTP2. First, it makes more sense - that scarce good is not just a free tile improvement - its something that you TRADE (that feels wierd to go back into Civ and see a good and realize that it only has an indirect role in commece). Second, I like to "Make it so" approach. If you have a tiny fronteer city that has a valuable trade good, IT dosn't have to build its entire trade network from scratch. Transportation will find IT. So, being about to build caravans elsewhere and use them to ship out a product is far more reasonable.

Trade is great in CTP2 - I've said it before, but I've always been fascinated by the Phonicians building up a trading empire on their famous purple dyes. In Civ, its nice, but it CTP2, its critical. When you get that first route going, you get a welcome cash flow.

[splangy]

Originally posted by hexagonian
Splangy,

It does not really bother me all that much if you do think CTP2 is a crappy game. If you do not like the interface, units, PW vs Settlers and so forth, that's your choice. There are games that I play that bother me because of the fact that there are aspects of the game that I hate. (I can think of the AI in SMAC sending waves of probes against my cities when I have Hunter-Seeker, for instance)

The point I am trying to make is that most of the problems you have with the game regard preference issues - things like PW vs Settlers ARE a preference issue. The one valid point you make regards the passive AI, which (at least I feel), has been addressed in the Mod community. You may not feel like that is the case, and you are entitled to say so, but to flat out state that we here in the CTP2 Mod Community are 'insane' because we are doing this is insulting. I may disagree with your viewpoints, but I do not imply that you are 'intellectually challenged' either, and then come back and say that it was all a joke when called to the carpet for it...I am sorry for my own comments, but I am reacting to comments that you initially made.

Regarding Activision's role in all this - yes, it is a shame that they did not support CTP2, but I had already bought it before the bad reoprts started filtering in. If it wasn't for the fact that there was a community of Modmakers here, the game would of been in the dustbin for me. But I enjoy the game immensely now (part of the creation process)

Personally, in looking at the files between MedMod/Apolyton Pack and Cradle, I believe that Cradle's files are more aggressive. If it's not aggessive enough for you, so be it. (Since there are so many features in CTP2 that you cannot stand from a preference standpoint, you probably will not like my mod either.)

But I had a civ2 modmaker (Kull) who has tried my Mod and his comments do speak for themselves...

calm down! i said NOTHING about your mod! i already said that i do like ctp2 and the only reason im in this debate is A-im bored B-i hate craptivision, infact id love to try your mod, your getting all worked up over nothing .

[splangy]

Originally posted by Pedrunn


Usually these supply animals use roads. And one thing is to make a single animal climb (what already is dificult) other thing is to make a whole unit/army.

Hey, sprangly. Thanks for spice thing ups in the community. One thing i miss since i left the civ3 community are the great debates like this one.

Horseys can always find a valley to walk thrue, or maybe i coud train unicorns to fly over the mountain

sprangly? no sprangly round here

i miss the old debates as well, *sigh* the god old days, right redrumm

[splangy]

Originally posted by rooboy
I don't about the rest of you guys, but the one major thing I miss from the Civ games is moving caravans around to establish trade routes.

agreed !!! in CTP2 you never really interacted with what you were doing, i miss that, settlers, and the gold ole diplomat (that could be a spy AND a ambassador at the same time )

[splangy]

by the way, someone mentioned me not likeing the passive AI, well ive fiddled with the scripts myself and came to the conclusion that the AI could

be really carefull and only attack when its odd were like 10-1
be very agressive and attack a city with a 10% chance of winning
have a nice median were it was like 50/50 and thus it would EASILY be outsmarted by the human ( flanking unit armys attacking from behind and sloughtering attack armys)

so, from my messin with the system, ive concluded that there will never be a ABOVE average AI that can beat you, and, not to be mean, but that quote musthave come from a REALLY "not good" player

[Pedrunn]

Originally posted by splangy


Horseys can always find a valley to walk thrue, or maybe i coud train unicorns to fly over the mountain

Sorry, you are right how could i forget about the unicorns

sprangly? no sprangly round here

i miss the old debates as well, *sigh* the god old days, right redrumm

[splangy]

Originally posted by Pedrunn

hehe

were are all the other people !!!! i like getting an average of three posts off this thread !!

umm ill start a new debate,

uhhhh, civ3 more goodly than ctp2.

there we go a nice intellegent debate should spring up from that one

[Pedrunn]

uhhhh, civ3 more goodly than ctp2.

I started a new thread about it in this forum.

Col Bigspear, after hearing the two sides what have you decide? I know this is not my business but i got curious to know your honest opinion. Dont need to answer though.

[The Rusty Gamer]

CTP 2 vs Civ 2 poll

Why not voice your opinions on the Civ 2 vs CTP 2 poll located at http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=24257.