"Call to Power 2 is a significantly better strategic military game than Civ 2."

[MarkG]

just loaded the page, i just had to post the thread http://www.dailyradar.com/reviews/game_review_1098.html

lets read the actual thing now...

[MarkG]

back to reality

quote: The graphics in Civ 2 are at least as good as in Call to Power 2

what???

[Dauphin]

Its not a confusion of CtP-1 with Civ2 by any chance? Thats my only explanation.

[MarkG]

now that you say it....
no clue, it refers to civ2 so many times it's hard to believe he made that kind of mistake

then again...

quote: The diplomacy system has not significantly improved, or changed, since Civ 2.

huh?

[Mad-Kat]

I put a lot of this down to one of my main complaints about CTP II. It's very dry and bare bones. It's missing all the fluff and hooplah of Civ II. Even though it's actually deeper and more complex at it's heart, this gets missed by it's bad, (well dry anyway) presentation. It really would have been nice to see a portait of the person you're addressing or his representive along with approprite demeanour towards you. If it had these details and more stats and fluff in general, along with the excellent core gameplay it posseses, it would have been recieved far more warmly by the general, RTS, pretty lights, minded public. For me it doesn't ruin the game, but I miss some of Civ II's unneccesary but pretty screens.

Agree?

This time round I'm eagerly awaiting mods for the cosmetic things like this and hope they leave gameplay alone.

[This message has been edited by Mad-Kat (edited November 22, 2000).]

[WesW]

The guys at Daily Radar are the ones who used to run, what was it, PC Accelerator, or PC Extreme? I used to read the mag just because they were so hilarious. They never reviewed anything other than action games. I was very surprised that they even bothered to review Ctp2, and not surprised that they were unqualified to do so properly.

[Garth Vader]

Comparisons to Civ 2 are valid, as this is a Civ style game. In other threads here people were complaining because it was being compared to RTS games, which is a valid complaint.

But since this is a TBS, civ building game I for one want to know how it stacks up against Civ 2 and SMAC. So far what I have read makes me inclined to get it, although I didn't get CtP.

[MarkG]

garth, it goes without saying that comparing ctp2 with civ2(and smac) is the proper thing to. only thing though, the comparisons should be correct
i'll quote again

quote: The graphics in Civ 2 are at least as good as in Call to Power 2

[Mad-Kat]

quote: Originally posted by DarkOrder on 11-23-2000 12:53 PM Mad-Kat, you can check an AI's demeanor toward you at any time in the diplomacy manager.

Oh, I know Dark, but it's just a boring line of text. That's my whole point. Where is the graphic of a leader looking pissed or happy?

[DarkOrder]

Mad-Kat, you can check an AI's demeanor toward you at any time in the diplomacy manager.


Smooshies

[Tiberius]

quote: The graphics in Civ 2 are at least as good as in Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-22-2000 07:17 PM what???

I don't know how the CTP2's graphics is, but I liked more Civ2's graphics than CTP's.
Of, course, that's only my opinion.
[This message has been edited by Tiberius (edited November 24, 2000).]

[MarkG]

quote: Originally posted by Tiberius on 11-24-2000 06:32 AM I don't know how the CTP2's graphics is

check the screenshots page in the ctp2 section

[Judge]

I agree completely with Mad-Kat in that I really miss the quirky advisor videos and piccies of your enemies in Civ2 as well as the throne room/palace upgrades although they served no real purpose they just added that bit of extra interest. Can we have them back please!

CTP2 seems to have gone a bit umm serious!

On the other hand almost everything else is better, the AI seems better, the diplomacy much better, the graphics are improved and the gui (once you get used to it) is considerably easier and in general quicker to use.

I've been playing the game on hard level on a gigantic map with 7 computer players for some time so far up to 2060AD. I have seen some odd problems with the AI which may relate to the difficulty level but I'm not sure. Sometimes the AI just doesn't attack even with a far superior force and often just doesn't take advantage of easy conquest situations which it seems to make great efforts to set-up!

I have had a few annoying situations when one of my cities is being bombarded - I can hear it being bombarded but I have to search my entire (now 36 city) map to find the right damned location!

I have noticed that the AI seems to mysteriously "know" which of my cities have a low number of defensive units but well computer AI always cheats in one way or another...

In general I think any fan of Civ 1 & 2 will think CTP2 is an improvement, for me it adds all the good things that were in CTP1 and removes all the bad....

[Tiberius]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-24-2000 06:50 AMcheck the screenshots page in the ctp2 section

I saw the screenshots, but only from some screenshots I can't really make an opinion if I like it more than Civ2's or not. I presume I should play the game and speak only after that. After all, graphics should be not only beatifull, but also well linked to the interface and gameplay.
I understood that the graphics of CTP2 is not very different from CTP's. In that case, maybe I'll still love more Civ2's graphics. But that's not really important. Gi'me good gameplay, improved diplomacy, trade, city & empire management, and ... you know, all the other "good-civ-game" stuff and I'll be happy.

Reading the reviews and comments so far, I guess I'm gonna play this game . After all, there is at least one year left until the release of Civ3. I must play something in the meantime

[DarthVeda]

As far as graphics go, the ones in Test of Time and Call to Power are about even (minus the GUI which looks better in CtP2).

As far as strategic combat goes, call to power is far ahead of civ2 and only a smidge ahead of SMAC.