CTP-The True heir to civilization

[DrSpike]

And Civ3 AI isn't really good, it's just that the game has been dumbed down to the level where you don't notice it's inadequacies so much.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Locutus
You're joking right? One could apply many of the same strategies from Civ2 to win in SMAC. Bluntly put, SMAC is just Civ2 with even uglier graphics, unit workshop, SE and a better storyline. It is still a good game, but CtP is a lot farther removed from Civ than SMAC: space & undersea layers, vastly improved combat model, new & better tile imp system, unconventional warfare, empire-oriented approach (city limit, support costs, UI, empire sliders, trade, etc), much higher moddability, macro management, etc, etc, etc. Just because the setting of SMAC is different from Civ2 doesn't make it a different game...

And what difference would it make? You can still play ICS. Many of the same Civ strategies still apply. The underlying population and economic models are the same. So where's the real difference?

[Locutus]

You can't play ICS due to the city limit. There's still some limited room for it in the original game, but it falls apart in the Medmod.

What Civ2 strategies still work? The underlying economic model (in CtP1, not 2) may be roughly the same, but a lot of other things have changed. I don't even know where to begin in explaining the differences between the games (not in the last place because I haven't played Civ2 or SMAC in years), but here's 15 quick but important points:

1. In CtP, the Space & Undersea layers call for completely different strategies. Especially the space layer is very powerful and seriously kicks ass, so you'd better make use of it, or your opponent will...
2. Thanks to the city limit, ICS is pretty much dead in CtP. If you control too many cities in the early game, your empire simply falls apart due to excessive unhappiness.
3. Building roads all over the place is a huge waste of resources in CtP. Roads only serve to connect cities, the resource advantages of Civ are gone.
4. Due to PW and city limits, you need to build far less Settlers and treat them very differently.
5. Unconventional warfare is, if properly exploited, a very powerful weapon in CtP, while it doesn't even exist in Civ.
6. Trade in CtP works very, very differently. It's all about creating monopolies. This affects both trade and city placement strategies.
7. The empire sliders call for a different approach to managing happiness and resources.
8. In CtP, Caravans can't help in wonder building. Rush buying also isn't an option, so that has a drastic impact on decisions of the when/where/what/how of building wonders.
9. The new combat system of CtP means that pretty much all but the most generic military strategies from Civ can be tossed in the garbage bin. Stacked combat is simply too different.
10. CtP does not offer infinite movement on railroad, which has a huge impact on middle/late game strategies.
11. In CtP, bribing units is not possible and bribing cities is a lot harder and more expensive. In Civ2, players could win the game by going into a bribing frenzy, but that would be far less effective in CtP.
12. Though the economy in CtP1 (not CtP2) still works more or less the same as in Civ, Happiness is a very different beast, and requires new strategies for managing it.
13. Trade and science are no longer coupled in CtP, so you can't use trade as a science income. Also, there's a major shift in how much science can be collected from wonders (much less) and city improvement (a lot more), compared to Civ2 (so e.g. Super Science City doesn't work).
14. Rush building is a lot more expensive in CtP, making it a lot harder to build lots of troops fast.
15. The key to success in CtP in 3 words: Slavery, Slavery, Slavery!!!

I'm sure I left out a few important things and made a mistake or two, but the general idea should be clear.

As Solver remarked, using Civ2 strategies in a CtP game will give you a very hard game. In the CtP forums, from time to time we (used to) get Civ2 players, sometimes very experienced ones, begging for some strategy tips because they are getting their ass kicked in CtP.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Locutus
I'm sure I left out a few important things and made a mistake or two, but the general idea should be clear.

As a reviewer of CtP remarked, the game was designed to be as different from Civ as possible, not because they stemmed from fundamental models, but just for the sake of it.

Sure, there are some improvements in CtP, but most things are just different - not better. On the other hand, there are a lot more improvements in Alpha Centauri than Call to Power.

Originally posted by Locutus
As Solver remarked, using Civ2 strategies in a CtP game will give you a very hard game. In the CtP forums, from time to time we (used to) get Civ2 players, sometimes very experienced ones, begging for some strategy tips because they are getting their ass kicked in CtP.

I bought the game when it first came out, and stopped playing after a few hours because the interface sucked. Speaking of which, the interface was also designed differently just for the sake of it.

Sure, I applaud Activision's decision to release CtP 2 into the public domain, as opposed to those IDSA bird-brains.

[Spiffor]

Solver :
I don't doubt the modders of CtP2 have done a terrific job (I've never played the game actually, so I'm just assuming), but the AI of CtP1 was horrible, even lower than this of Civ2 and SMAC.

Civ3 sure has been dumbed down in comparison of SMAC, but the AI has been made better at the same time. Just look how the AI settles at the beginning of the game, and look at how adept the AI is in tech whoring, and you'll see how Civ3's AI is superior to the previous ones.

But I should try CtP2. Now that it is in public domain, is it legal to download it ?

[Solver]

Solver :
I don't doubt the modders of CtP2 have done a terrific job (I've never played the game actually, so I'm just assuming), but the AI of CtP1 was horrible, even lower than this of Civ2 and SMAC.

CtP1 AI is Deep Junior compared to CtP2 AI. Out of the box. I'd say, don't bother with CtP2 out of the box version - Wouter will disagree, but I say that the game may still be worth it, yes, but the AI will ruin it all. Download Apolyton Pack...

[Locutus]

As a reviewer of CtP remarked, the game was designed to be as different from Civ as possible, not because they stemmed from fundamental models, but just for the sake of it.

Sure, there are some improvements in CtP, but most things are just different - not better. On the other hand, there are a lot more improvements in Alpha Centauri than Call to Power.

Yeah, I read that review. IIRC the same reviewer also remarked that the AI in CtP2 was quite formidable and that one of the main reasons why CtP2 would have been completely forgotten a year after release would be because it was much less customizable than Civ2 I'm sorry, but that guy made Dubbya look like a regular Einstein...

CtP is a much deeper game than Civ and this is not a coincidence. The new PW and Trade models were not introduced for the sheer sake of being different than Civ, they were aimed at reducing the tedious workload of managing dozens of Settlers and Caravans. Those systems just plain s*cked in Civ2. I also think that few Civvers can be found who think the CtP combat system is not a huge improvement over the Civ2 combat system. The city limits were not introduced just to be different from Civ, but specifically to tackle the ICS issue. The same with railroads to tackle IRS (Infinite Railroad Sleaze), as we CtPers have come to call it. Roads may in reality increase a city's income, it's really silly to have a major road on every single tile -- a very good reason to make the change Activision made. Wonders in Civ were in the opinion of the CtP design team overall too power and therefor toned down a little. CtP is a lot more empire-oriented, which is not just to be different from Civ, but because a civilization is a lot more than just a collection of cities. The space/undersea layers and Unconventional warfare were added because they filled a gap in the way Civ2 modeled the world.

Need I go on? The changes in CtP are numerous and fundamental (a lot more numerous and a lot more fundamental than in SMAC). They were not just to be different from Civ but, except for the obvious choice in units/wonders/buildings, all tackled fundamental problems with the Civ genre (as great as that genre may be). A lot of issues are based on personal preference: some will like the future stuff and space layer, some will hate it. Some may think PW is a brilliant system, some will prefer moving dozens of Settlers around the map, some enjoy playing terrorist or converting the world to the true faith, some will think unconventional warfare is silly and has no place in Civ, etc. But just because you don't like some of the new systems, doesn't mean they're random and 'just there to be different'.

The new systems are all well thought out and excellently implemented (with the exception of trade, perhaps -- not a coincidence that it was completely revamped in CtP2), and the only reason why some things didn't work great is because the game was rushed out before it was ready. But this is fixed in the mods (as well as in the sequel), proving that these systems do indeed work and do indeed succeed in fixing some of the problems of Civ (and some of which Civ3 still struggles with today).

The first thing any Civ player has to do when playing CtP, is to accept that it is NOT Civ. It falls within the same genre and may share the name, but it's a very different game. Of course, some will like it, some won't. But to say that it is lesser game than Civ or SMAC just because it's different, is hardly a solid argument...

I bought the game when it first came out, and stopped playing after a few hours because the interface sucked. Speaking of which, the interface was also designed differently just for the sake of it.

The interface was one of the most brilliant elements of the entire game! It has received a lot of criticism from Civ2 fans (just because it was different ), but those of us who gave it a decent chance appreciate it's brilliance. One of the 2 key goals Activision strove for with the CtP1 interface was the same goal that Firaxis strove for with Civ3, except that Firaxis failed horribly where Activision succeeded: to be able to play (almost) the entire game from the main map, without having to switch to various screens and windows that interrupt the flow of the game.

In CtP1, you can read almost ALL functions of the game from the main map and the 5 tabs at the bottom. The only things that you can't do (that I can think of off-hand) are diplomacy and changing government. The former is unavoidable and the latter is a fairly rare event. Everything else can be done without interrupting the flow of the game -- very pleasant to play and saves an awful lot of mouse movement and clicking.

The only reason why there are seperate screens in CtP at all is for macro-management: in CtP1, if you have 100 cities and want to add a newly invented building to each and every one of them, it would cost you about 30 seconds and 5ish mouse clicks. In Civ2, it would probably take you half an hour... Even in Civ3 (the last time I played it, which was a while ago), it took me several minutes.

The message system is also brilliant: important messages pop up in the same way as messages in most games: you get a text windows telling you what you need to know. But the slightly less important messages appear as icons in the corner of the screen and can be opened and/or removed with a single click, or ignored until a more convenient time to read them. Compare that to Civ3's system where if you look away from the screen for a few seconds you might miss half a dozen very important messages, or Civ2 where IIRC each and every message opens up and has to be read immediately and closed manually (interrupting the flow of the game). I lost count a long time ago on how many Apolytoners requested the CtP1 message system to be included in CtP2 and Civ3, while it was initially relentlessly shot down by Civ2 fans...

The entire CtP interface is aimed at 2 things: (1) reducing tedious mouse work and (2) avoiding intteruption of gameflow. And although there's always room for improvement, it succeeded cum laude in both areas. I don't know any other strategy game that has a better user interface than CtP1...

Edit: Cum laude is censored?

[Solver]

A word about CtP interface - it really takes some time to get used to, but it shines. CtP2 interface is even better, except for the stupid message tab and a few bugs.

CtP IS Civ, just a different branch of. And yes, CtP is deeper exactly because of the reasons that Wouter outlined. And while I can tolerate the Civ 2 worker system, I can't stand the caravans. Still, PW is much better than Workers - and also more strategic.

In other words - PLAY CtP, kids!

[Locutus]

Spiffor,
Unfortunately releasing to public domain is a big word (or actually 3 big words and 1 small one ), we don't even have the source code for the game itself yet (though we're working on it). You still have to buy it if you want a legal copy, but you should be able to pick it up for somewhere between 1 and 10 Euro/dollar at your local game shop (though not every shop may still sell it).

[Solver]

we don't even have the source code for the game itself yet (though we're working on it).

Been hearing this one for at least a year now . That's all you need though to make the game truly the best in the genre.

[Locutus]

We're actually in constant email contact now, so that's an improvement over a year ago

And yes, CtP *is* Civ, just in a different way than Civ is Civ

[Solver]

Constant email contact? Again you guys didn't let me know .

OK, whatever, I've been trying to go to bed for the last hour. Get lost, Wouter.

[Locutus]

Constant email contact? Again you guys didn't let me know .

Hey, all you have to do is read the forums...

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


As a reviewer of CtP remarked, the game was designed to be as different from Civ as possible, not because they stemmed from fundamental models, but just for the sake of it.

Sure, there are some improvements in CtP, but most things are just different - not better. On the other hand, there are a lot more improvements in Alpha Centauri than Call to Power.



I bought the game when it first came out, and stopped playing after a few hours because the interface sucked. Speaking of which, the interface was also designed differently just for the sake of it.

Sure, I applaud Activision's decision to release CtP 2 into the public domain, as opposed to those IDSA bird-brains.

CtP is my biggest disappointment ever. I also bought the game and from then on my warez-ing went rampant .

To start with, the music was plain horrible. Secondly the new interface was simply annoying... On top of that whenever I founded a city, I had the utmost trouble in improving it... the resource map of the city always looked pretty empty... I had the impression the tiles gave me hardly any food, trade etc..
Maybe it's because I always started in swamps or so... in any case at the first glance I knew already that the game would suck major ass... And it did! Also the graphics sucked... I even preferred civ2 graphs

About the messaging system.. I hate clicking on the messages all the time, I prefer using the keyboard btw. In civ2 I just tapped enter like a maniac so I had no trouble in seeing every msg... Although civ2 isn't perfect and has quite a number of disturbing features (such as masses of enemy ships hugging the coast near your cities, making the enemy turn last as much as 5 minutes sometimes due to the enormous amount of ships).

In general though, I prefer civ2, still play it.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Locutus
I'm not saying that one game is better than the other (though my personal opinion may have subconsciously slipped through in my previous post ), I'm just saying CtP is farther removed from Civ than SMAC. Obviously, SMAC is more different on the surface, but I tend to ignore such superficialties (is that a word?) and focus on more important matters, in which case CtP wins hands-down.

Both games are quite nice and both have some great things that no other Civ game has (e.g. SE and story for SMAC vs PW and combat for CtP). Which game is better I'll not discuss here, but my personal opinion should be obvious to all

Very well stated. CtP is farther emoved from civ than SMAC and I totally agree. Yes, on the surface, SMAC is scifi while CtP is rewriting hisory, just like civ, but SMAC plays like civ and CtP doesnt. Personally, thats the reason why I didnt like CtP and I liked SMAC, but that doesnt mean I'm trying to say one is inferior over the other either. I CAN see how CtP's system could be capable of good game, just that in general, I didnt enjoy the difference.