CTP: The Best Civ, or TBS, Game Ever?

[Monkey]

titania,

i don't want to be rude here but this sounds like a classic case of "civ2 paralysis" where the player is unable to play civilization anyway other than the way civ2 had made it.

I still haven't figured out the whole thing with trade and caravans which was super easy on Civ II.

Caravans super easy on civ2? Definitely not! You've got to manually move those camels from place to place. In ctp all you do is build a caravan and try and build up monopolies in cities. Ah... I see you asking but what the hell is a monopoly. Play the tutorial and find out! CTP is not civ2... it's civilization but it's not civ2. It's an entirely different game.

With CTP, I still can't figure out what tech I need in order to get my settlers to build roads for crissake.

This proves that you obviously havent played enough CTP to make any judgement. Again play the tutorial and find out.

With CTP, I can never figure out if I've got units that need to be moved.

Sounds like you still have version 1.0 of the game. Autocentering was fixed in version 1.1. get version 1.2.

With Civ II I understood exactly which technology I needed in order to get to the next advance.

I'm interpreting this two ways. One, you want the exact tech tree as civ2... you got to be joking right? Defeats the purpose of buying a new game right? If you wanted something that is exactly the same as civ2 then why did you buy CTP? Why not just stick with good old civ2?

Two, it is hard to tell which tech lead to which because there is no advisor which tells you exactly which tech to research to get to your goal. Ok i admit the tech tree is hard to learn at first but I've got a few suggestions. 1)Pull out your tech tree map... that's what it was made for. 2)Use the great lirary often. You can trace back the tech tree just by clicking on the appropriate branches of the tech. Very useful IMO.

Sorry, but I have given it several tries and I still kinda hate it and I have to agree with Alexander's horse that it just sucks.

Don't take AH's word like it's the bible. From what i know the horse doesn't even have CTP anymore and I don't think he's even played it enough to make a definite conclusion on the state of CTP. He's just here to attract attention because he couldn't find enough attention in the OT forum. If you've read some of his stuff in OT you'd know what I was talking about. Of course AH will put up a defense by saying he's made some contributions to the civ3 threads and yes I will acknowledge that but that is still no excuse for downing a game he knows next to nothing about. Please don't be another Alexander Horse... if you still don't like it then it's your personal opinion... please don't try to ram that personal opinion down other people's throat.

Try downloading the patch 1.2 + apolyton pack + the apolyton hack in that particular order.

[skorpion59]

Titania,

Listen to Monkey and try it again. And again if necessary. It will be well worth it.

I was brought up on classic Civ (Civ1, Civ2) also. When I first got CTP, I thought it was terrible. I couldn't even get past the interface. I didn't understand what was going on. I didn't understand trade and heaven forbide, PW. What the heck is this PW thing anyway. SO I threw it on the shelf. Well, I just couldn't keep playing Civ2. I came here to Apolyton and started checking out the forums. (Not near as much info then as there is now.) I thought I'd give it another shot. Guess what? I still didn't get it and I still couldn't get past that @#$@#$ interface. On to the shelf again but I kept cruising Apolyton. People were talking about all this cool stuff and I wanted in on it. So, again, off the shelf. This time it stayed on my computer. And hasn't left since. It wasn't the easiest thing but slowly I picked up on the interface, then the techs, then the trade & PW. Eventually, I even got over my 'This isn't Civ2 so I just won't like it' attitude. I'm a tried and true CTPer now. It is in my blood and I wouldn't give it up for anything now. Keep at it and don't just give up.

BTW, I play Civ2, Civ2:TOT, SMAC and CTP. All are on my computer and stay there. Most of my game time is CTP but every once in a while I will stray. Generally, I don't get into the which game is better and which game is worse threads. I have a very simple phylosophy. All the games are unique to themselves and there is a place for them all. They all have great points, they all have good points and yes, they all have bad points. Accept them for what they are, change them with mods/scenarios if you can, but most off all, play and have fun. Isn't that what it all is about??????

[Nordicus]

Yes! Thank you. That's what I've been saying. So, it's a bit more complicated and it's not gonna spoon-feed you like Civ2. That's no reason to decide it's a piece of s**t--hey, if you give it a couple weeks with the best stuff in there and you still don't like it, hey, you tried and gave it fair go. Fair enough. Stick Civ2 back in or find something else--it's probably not your game.
Some people (*ahem* horse *ahem*) would rather either stumble around in ignorance or complain than ask for help. And it's really easy to hate something you don't understand.
But we can be better than that, can't we?

[Utrecht]

Hmmmmm, this brings me back to one of my original questions.......

How can this game be that much fun of it takes so much effort to get into it. For me games are fun not work. I have a job for that.

Additionally, how good of a game can it be if it is necessary to install Custom mods to "fix" game balance issues that the manufactures steadfastly denies exist.............

Now, the game is certainly easier to understand if you do go through the tutorials.

[Nordicus]

Ooooh!
You want the fun sort of game that does not require any work or effort.
Alright. I see now. Yeah, the kind that you remove from the box, insert into the CD-ROM drive (or is that the 'self-inserting' type?) , and then you sit back and do nothing and be entertained....
Hmmmm. I zink vut juw vant is called TV. Yaw.

O, excuse the sarcasm, but I found that amusing. And I'm a smartass, so whatta ya gonna do....
"How can this game be that much fun..." Well, I don't know. I don't play the game so that I can laugh hysterically for hours on end, I play it to be challenged, to build a nation, take over a few others, etc...that's me. I think that's fun...some people consider beating an old lady with a stick fun--I am not one of them. Some think...whatever.
I guess fun means different things to different people.
I dunno, some people seem to be mad at the company and take it out on the game. And some think that's fun. O I don't know.

You seem to want convincing. I can't convince you that it's fun, so I'm not going to try. It just is or isn't. I think it's personal preference. And I don't think you're *whatever* if you don't like it. Hey, that's okay. I don't like apples. An apple-lover is gonna think that's weird. So be it.

Yeah, the tutorial does get into everything, I agree.

Later.

N.

[titania646]

Well thanks guys for all the replies and encouragement. But I believe the original question was something about this being the best strategy game ever. Or something. And I have a whole library full of games that didn't take three or four tries to really get into them. There are lots of games that are loads of fun right out of the box and don't require downloads and fixes to make them fun. CTP is not one of those games. I've read all the posts on this thread and you are all obviously very passionate about this game even though you have all admitted at one time or another that the game is no good without all this tinkering and fixing and tutorial-taking. I have a shelf full of games that I did not once have to take a tutorial to enjoy. Civ I and II come to mind. Someone asked why did I get a different game if all I wanted was another Civ II. You can't really be serious. The great thing about Civ II is that it took a lot of what was great about the original Civilization and deepened it and made it better. New features were added and some things that I miss from Civ I were taken away. But not enough that I didn't enjoy playing it. I guess I didn't want a Civ II, but I was looking for a Civ III. And I think CTP attempts to be that by trying giving us more units and more wonders, etc. But it's still a game that IMO took one step back before taking two forward. I'm not trying to cram that viewpoint down anyone's throat, or even change anyone's mind. It's just my opinion. One day I will probably try CTP again. Maybe with the fixes you suggested. And who knows, I may become one of the converted. But for now, my vote stands. It is NOT the best game ever. And BTW - pardon my ignorance, but what the heck is SMAC?

[skorpion59]

Titania,

SMAC - Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

It is a sci-fi civ game. The original idea was it took over where Civ2 left off when you landed your spacecraft on Alpha Centauri. This is another good game which I would suggest trying. It has some pretty cool points also and the diplomacy can't be beat. But then again, I like them all. Hope you find what your looking for.

Sorry for taking the thread off-topic.
Don

[This message has been edited by skorpion59 (edited November 04, 1999).]

[Nordicus]

Nah, it's not Off-Topic, Don....

But just in case


...

[Nordicus]

Okay, fellow Civers.
We've heard the complaints, know about the bugs, the *ahem* reasoning about how it's the 'worst' game of all-time, but this is question here: Is it the best Civilization, or Turn-Based-Strategy, game ever?


1. Best Civ game?

2. Best TBS?

3. If you don't have an opinion about either or don't think it's in 1 or 2, what's something you like about CTP?


What do you think?

------------------
"There can be no maximum of creation without a concomitant maximum of destruction, no supreme good without supreme evil"--Heller, paraphrasing Nietzsche.

"Stimpy...YOU...EEEEDDDDDEEEEEIIIOOTTT!!!"--Ren.

"Ich Wollen Antreffen Das Heilmittel!!!"

"I SHALL FIND THE CURE!!!"--Nordicus, about WAIS (Wandering AI Syndrome).

"Like Wes said...."

[Nordicus]

*bump*

[wesley32]

I believe SMAC is the best civ game out there. Most people don't think they will like it because is science fiction, well I hate most science fiction, not a fan of Star Trek etc, but I loved SMAC. If most people got past that, the AI is much better in it.

----------------------------------
Visit Humanitythe game, the Civilization II takeoff at http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/F.../humanity.html

[Nordicus]

I dunno, many have stressed that SMAC's AI is similar to Civ2--and that AI didn't seem all that bright anyway. Civ2 had the same problem with wandering, for example; the difference is that the Civ2 AI was more obsessive regarding fortifying units around cities. So....

------------------
"There can be no maximum of creation without a concomitant maximum of destruction, no supreme good without supreme evil"--Heller, paraphrasing Nietzsche.

"Ich Wollen Antreffen Das Heilmittel!!!"

"I SHALL FIND THE CURE!!!"--me.

"Something"--Someone.

[Big Dave]

The thing I like the most about CTP is that even with all the very fertile minds at work in these forums no one has come close to customizing it to death. There's always something new that can be done, making this many games in one.

[Nordicus]

Big Dave:
Oh, you said it! I know I have yet to begun to defile all of the files!
Yeah, but that's so true. There's still a godzillion things that can be tweaked and otherwise improved--and not to mention tons of code lying dormant, not yet activated. Activision...activated...?
Anyway, well put!

[The 1212 Problem]

Lets put this in perspective. Is CTP the greatest CIV game?
Well, frankly no.
In fact it is the lowest in the line of CIV games.
The fact that it dismantled what CIV had created and had bugs and had crazy ass stuff (Phalanx anyone) automatically in my opinion sends it ot the back of the line.
But im gonna state the true reason why. IT CAME OUT AFTER CIV I AND CIV II AND IT ONLY MADE MARGINAL STEPS FORWARD AND LARGE DINOSAUR STEPS BACKWARD.
CIV I is the most original game ever created for its time. Could you play any other similar game for the computer with the depth of CIV. NO!!! I was 8 when I first played CIV. I think that for its time it was great. Same goes for Civ II. This game really kicked butt. It was the as if CIV was resurrected and made into a better game. And im sorry to say this to all you CTP fans but SMAC is next in this line of kicking butt. I think the Renoylds design is the single greatest system for CIV games.
The old saying goes if it aint broke don’t fix it. Was CIV II flawed in a lot of ways, the way CTP is. NO!!! Does it need much improvement? IMHO no way in hell. Maybe if you never played CIV II then you would look at CTP and say” this is a good game”. But once you play CIV there is no going to a different system.

On top of that this “open editing” Is a laugh a minute. Is the game really that bad that you have to edit it to work in a normal way. I am reminded of Comand and conquer red alert which was very open ended. I changed a hell of a lot in that game to make it more fun/different/exciting. The game was good the first time out of the box and I didn’t have to edit a thing. And you talk to bongo about driver incompatibilities?
Shouldn’t a game come with the latest drivers to ensure that it works when you play it.

Heres my question to you. If you were to buy a game now (CTP) , in 1996 (CIV II) or in 1991 (CIV I) based on what other games at to offer at their respective times what would you choose?

MY vote goes straight to CIV.

And to Nordicus. NHL 2000 cost $75?($45 where I live) Holy Moly what is this world coming to?