 |
| |
|
|
AI_Scripter
|
|
California
Nov 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
OK, I've played two games now and I have a pretty decent feel for the game so I thought I'd take a stab at reviewing it. So here goes...
As the title suggests, I've come to the conclusion that this game is mainly going to be fun for beginners - beginners to the genre and beginners to CTP2. Once you're used to the interface, tech tree, etc., you'll find that the AI presents no challenge whatsoever. If you're into mod making (like I am) or multiplayer, then it will have more lasting value.
Previously, I played SMAC, but had never played any other Civ type game before. So initially, I was having fun with this game just because I didn't have too much practice playing these types of games. But by the time I reached 1000 AD in my first game, I knew that I would never again be challenged by the AI. How dissappointing! 
The positive player reviews that have come in so far, are probably the result of not playing enough. Unless you are really awful at these games, or you just like winning without being challenged, you're going to be bored after playing 1 or 2 games of this.
Besides having a pathetic AI (like SMAC did too), it's also pretty buggy. If it's buggy, then why are some people saying they've had no problems? Well, perhaps they just haven't done as much with their game or maybe they haven't been as observant, or maybe they've just been plain lucky. For example, some bugs only seem to occur under certain circumstances. But will you be so lucky?
So then, what's good about CTP2? You know, it's funny, because I had fun with this in the beginning, but now I'm having a hard time thinking of good things to say about it. So if you'll forgive me for this, I think I'll just continue to tell you what I don't like about it. There's already plenty of positive stuff you can read elsewhere, right?
My first game was on the default medium level and I had some problems getting going, but nothing too serious for an experienced troubleshooter like myself.  First off, the same song kept repeating over and over and over... Well, I fixed that with someone's help here. But once I got going, I was having lots of fun. Of course, I didn't know what I was doing yet either.
I was playing as the Hebrews and the most powerful civ by 1000 AD was the Cubans. But for some reason, they never really attacked me (a unit or two did). So I decided to send a bunch of fire triremes and blockade Cuba, expecting them to try and sink my ships with some of their own. Well, after a few hundred more years I realized they weren't going to touch my ships, so I got bored and decided to go on to the impossible level. Surely it would be more challenging, right?
Impossible? No, impossibly easy! In this game I was the Americans and there were 3 other civs (that's all I wanted). Also, there were no barbarians, since I didn't want the barbarians roughing up the AI and in general, making progress take longer. Some time early in the game, I noticed a Korean slaver pop up near one of my cities. I had no stealth units of my own, only a warrior who was out and about, scouting the area. Supposedly, these units aren't supposed to be visible without another stealth unit around (did I read it wrong?). Oh well, my warrior had him for breakfast, end of story. (I've seen lots of these kinds of bugs too, besides this one.)
I decided to go for an early conquest victory, just to keep from wasting too much time, so that I wouldn't find out in 2000 AD that the AI won't be able to challenge me. So I built up 10 cities and formed a 12 man army and decided to march on Israel. I asked for their map and when they refused, I threatened to declare war, so they gave it to me (they were stronger than me at this point - of course, I'm not saying they shouldn't have done this - just that they did.) After getting their map, I proceeded to take each of their cities one by one with my 12 man army (there were only three Samuarai's in this army - the rest were archers and warriors). After capturing each city, I would let my army stay there for a turn and regain all of their health, and then I would proceed on to conquer the next city. I lost only a few troops and replaced each loss immediately. Within a very short span, Israel was mine (this was around 500 BC).
I won't bore you with the rest, but it was just as pathetically easy to conquer the other two civs as it was Israel. Yes, I know that some people have found RANDOM occurrences of intelligent behavior, but overall the AI is really, really, awful. Am I getting repetitios now? Sorry.
So that's it folks. Should you buy it? If you like multiplayer, maybe (but maybe that's buggy too?), or if you like to do mods, maybe. If you're new to the genre or just aren't that good, or you don't care if the AI isn't much of a threat in any way, then maybe you should. Or maybe you should wait for a patch, so that you will be less likely to have problems. But, if you're a veteran of these games, you may want to steer clear. Then again, maybe you just need a quick Civ type fix?
So, would I buy it if I were given a second chance? Yes, but that's because I wanted to try out a game like this and didn't want to wait for Civ III. Also, I like doing AI stuff, and thought I might have fun there. I might also try out multiplayer (if it works?). But if I were just interested in single player fun, and fun for more than a game or two, I'd definitely steer away from this game, patch or no patch.
So if you buy this game after reading this review, don't say I dind't warn you first.
P.S. - I forgot to mention the manual. Of course, that's not hard to do since the manual hasn't come out yet and it will cost extra.  Oh wait, there is a manual in there after all! But seriously, I read through it, and while it helped a little, it's mostly useless. Read the forums here if you want real help, since the manual hardly explains anything at all. OK, I'll stop.
[This message has been edited by AI_Scripter (edited November 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
colorme
|
|
great review! But then I'm as biased as you are.
Now, if only someone from activision could comment why the AI couldn't have been made better, I'd get $10 worth of my money back.
They were pretty active answering questions, and in general building up hype about the game. Why won't they come console us, now that we HAVE bought the game??
|
|
| |
|
|
|
if you find the game easy, win on the world map on impossible level(the standard map is on medium but you can make another version of it for impossible) with the Australians and get back to me so that i do it too...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Chronus
|
|
Well, I'm disappointed. I was bouncing back and forth between "buy it" and "don't buy it" but, unfortunately, I think this thread will seal it. I dislike doing this since I don't like downing something I haven't even tried. Maybe I'll buy it if AI reviews really go up or when the game shows up on the bargain racks.
I have observed a growing list of people who complain that the AI is too easy. Now, a person NEW to the Civ genre is beating the "Impossible" level??!!
AI_Scripter - thanks for the notice. Please do yourself a favor and try out Civ2.
More reviews, of course, are welcomed. I guess I'm still trying to find reason to buy it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ak
|
|
Interesting review, AI. Since you've played this and SMAC, but not Civ2, what games do you consider to have good AI?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
arghh!!! why didn't I see this review before I bought it.
I have one comment though. I'm betting everyone sayin it is too easy has beaten civ2 (or smac) on diety/transcend level. I have yet to win civ2 or smac on the highest level (only the second highest level). I'm not a big micromanager, I just like to have fun building up a civ. Yes I like a challenge, and I consider myself a good at warfare, but I don't micromanage all of my units to the finest detail. So I guess I'll find out if it is any good. Hopefully some people can come up with some mods to spice things up. Believe it or not there are people who have not beaten civ2 on diety. I have beaten smac scenarios on transcend, but not a regular game. I'm not someone who opens up cheat mode to see how the ai operates (or doesn't operate). I'll play it like it is supposed to be played. Having no knowledge of what your enemy is going to do.
But the multiplayer review (another thread) is just horrible. I surely hope they fix all of that. multiplayer may be the only place to go for a challenge. I'll just use single player for my builder fantasies.
[This message has been edited by Dissident Aggressor (edited November 28, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AI_Scripter
|
|
California
Nov 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ak on 11-28-2000 08:09 PM
Interesting review, AI. Since you've played this and SMAC, but not Civ2, what games do you consider to have good AI?
|
Good AI? Hmmm... ... ... still thinking ... Well, I'm stumped. Actually, when I first played SMAC, I thought it had a really good AI. But I hadn't played a TBS game since Empire Deluxe for the Amiga computer back around 1986. My point here is simply that this AI may be decent (or even good) for a beginner to this genre, but I've yet to play against an AI that would qualify as good once you've gotten at least sort of good at the game.
Last year, I bought Age of Kings (AOK) and enjoyed it for a little while, but quickly found the AI to be incompetent. So, I spent the next 7 months writing an AI script for AOK which turned out real well and made the game more fun to play. Although I had no control over the tactical AI, at least it allowed me to alter the strategic AI. It was a definite improvement, but it still sucked overall because of the tactical AI's incompetence. But at least it seemed a little more human like. Isn't that what we all want a little more of? To feel that the AI is acting somewhat human like (intelligent and unpredictable)? Also, while we all want to be able to win, isn't it more fun when you're also afraid you might lose? Where's the joy in winning when you know you can't lose?
So I'm hoping that CTP2 will allow me to customize this AI sufficiently and allow me and others to make it more fun to play, but since I don't yet have any documentation (I hope Activision provides this soon) for it and don't have CTP1, I have no idea yet what will be possible. I guess I'll have to pop on over to the creation forum and ask the experts there what they think might be possible.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Why is it playing on a world map is on medium. this has to be the stupidest thing ever put into a game. It took me longer than it should have to figure out how to play on the world map. You know it wouldn't be copyig from civ2 if they just had a button that said start on premade map. And then let you select difficulty.
But I ask about the world map. It did ask me for a difficulty? is that not the actual difficulty? This interface is not very good. I'm trying though, well maybe not- I'm here posting. The learning curve shouldn't be so steep. And where do you find out how many credits you have to use for public works? My head is starting to hurt from this game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
check the Call To Power 2\ctp2_data\default\aidata folder for the ai related text files
most of them have some comments in them....
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-11-2000 03:46
|