08-10-2001 18:14									#1
	Gamespot article on TBS vs. RTS Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I thought I would link this here. Not necessarily Civ related, but still involves the TBS genre (plus there is a poll, hehe):

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/featur...0401/p6_01.html

	08-10-2001 18:32									#2
	Support Apolyton

Nice article.

It's funny that he hasn't yet noticed the computer's constant cheating in civ 2.

But he does know about that one more turn feeling.

	08-10-2001 21:13									#3
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

<em>Disciples: Sacred Lands</em> is quite bad. Extremely repetitive and boring.

<em>Age of Wonders</em> or <em>Warlords</em> are better.

	08-10-2001 22:10									#4
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I like the fact that TBS is winning by a 2 to 1 margin in the poll of course I've already voted three times

I've found Trey Walker's columns and reviews to be quite good; Same goes for Greg Kasavin. Actually the entire Gamespot crew write excellent reviews, the scores seem a little biased toward companies who spend money on advertising, but the reviews are good.

	09-10-2001 01:36									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Whilst many games can easily be split in to the categories of TBS and RTS, turn-based are much more strategic than real-time IMO.

I do enjoy games that are notable exceptions, such as Commandos. Now that is a classic Real-Time game that is not a "click fest, who can churn out armies like Russia and rush the other players first".

	09-10-2001 06:11									#6
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

good article thanks for posting it

	09-10-2001 08:18									#7
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Big Crunch Whilst many games can easily be split in to the categories of TBS and RTS, turn-based are much more strategic than real-time IMO. I do enjoy games that are notable exceptions, such as Commandos. Now that is a classic Real-Time game that is not a "click fest, who can churn out armies like Russia and rush the other players first".

I have always thought TBS is more strategic, while most, if not all, RTS games are primarily tactical in nature. Thought really, they both have a little of strategy and tactics.

	09-10-2001 11:09									#8
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I always like TBS, but I am playing all RTS now. Why? That's what all the companies are developing. It's where all the money is going. They are easier to make and you can get a faster payback. So I am quite excited to see new developments in C3, MOO3, and Stars!

	09-10-2001 14:07									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Most RTS games are nothing mroe than exercises in how fast you can click your mouse. I don't think much of that at all.

There's one exception, and it breaks every rule that's been mentioned. Europa Universalis, a RT game that has as much strategic depth as any TBS game one can mention, including Civ.

	10-10-2001 03:29									#10
	Put an end to popups!

They both have their merits. RTS is fun for a quick blast and war and is enjoyable. But I still state that it has nothing like the draw of a good TBS like civ. Because you are not continually fighting with the clock and you can thus engage in more effective long-term planning, you can produce richer games and although not actually functioning in real-time, is a lot more immersive. So TBS should be the winner!

	11-10-2001 03:23									#11
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

What about Shogun? That's what an RTS should be. I'm really hoping that, they make some others like it, for example Midieval, Roman or Napoleanic version would be alot of fun.

I actually enjoy Warcraft etc. but only single player where you figure out the best tactics. MP always ends up being a click-fest as others have mentioned. Don't get me started on the AI

Last edited by Moral Hazard on 11-10-2001 at 03:28

	11-10-2001 11:29									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Provost,

In EU you're not really "fighting" the clock. You can set it as fast or slow as you like. It is something you are aware of, but if it becomes a "fight" you can reduce it.

Also EU has as much depth as Civ II. For instance, EU actually takes the issue of faith and religion seriously. It is not merely the "opiate of he masses" as Sid (mis)treats it. As much as I love Civ, this has always been a weakness of the game. Also EU has more diplomatic options than Civ II had. It's not a shallow "resource collection" clickfest.

Re: Shogun. I love it too. But it isn't actually a RTS game. It is a turn based game with real based elements (namely combat). Seeing you can automatically resolve conflict and thus skip those elements, it is closer to Turn-based than to RTS.

That doesn't change my opinion of it, BTW, I think its one of the best games I've ever played.

	11-10-2001 20:36									#13
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I love them both. Sorry, but I couldn't vote...

	11-10-2001 23:24									#14
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: In EU you're not really "fighting" the clock. You can set it as fast or slow as you like. It is something you are aware of, but if it becomes a "fight" you can reduce it.

True. You can even issue orders, negotiate treaties, send colonists etc with the game paused. So there is no need for any fight against time. Many RTS don't allow you to do that.

ctrl+ and ctrl- are a much used combination in that game.

	11-10-2001 23:32									#15
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I have never actually played EU, although some of you love it but there have been more mixed opinions about the game. Is there anywhere I can download a demo?

	11-10-2001 23:54									#16
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Damn, quote instead of edit...

	11-10-2001 23:56									#17
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Where in the name of god did this post come from?!

	12-10-2001 00:10									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Deity - 36, 35 , 34.

Good work PH.

	12-10-2001 00:58									#19
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

It was a genuine error, I remember what happened, the damn thing logged out before I had written a post, so I selected the back list to go back to the appropriate screen after I had logged back on, but went back to the wrong window and posted the message again. DOH! Meant to edit it, but instead quoted it...I didn't realise this at the time...

	12-10-2001 01:30									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I believe you, though thousands wouldn't

	12-10-2001 08:02									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

<i>It is not merely the "opiate of he masses" as Sid (mis)treats it.</i>

Yes, it is. It's just that in EU the masses get withdrawal symtoms and don't like the masses hooked on a different variety of the opiate.

	12-10-2001 16:00									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

St Leo,

Umm, no it isn't. Because (for instance) different religions have different tech trees. Different religions have different bonuses that their religions bestow on the nations that follow them. You can only Royal Marry (and thus hope to diplo-annex) nations of the same religion. Etc.

Yes, there's the "opiate" thing too. But it is not SIMPLY that at all. And it certainly isn't swept under the rug as a legitimate historical factor, as it is in Civ.

	13-10-2001 11:56									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Provost,

I don't know where there's a downloadable demo of EU now. They're actually getting ready to release EU2 in a month or so, so if you wait until its out, you can get EU really cheap. Though I see it around now for $20. EU2 is supposed to let you play any nation in the world from 1419-1820. It's supposed to include more religions, and more government options. Its also supposed to let you hire privateers.



I'm going to wait until Christmas to get it, as that'll give me time for Paradox to get the bugs out. Paradox has a nasty habit of needing to release a patch to make their games truly stable.

	13-10-2001 17:32									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

When is EU2 out. Surely not before Christmas?

	14-10-2001 13:53									#25
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Big Crunch,

Actually, last I heard (and I frequent the EU board), they are on target for a Nov 8 release. But I'm still waiting for Christmas. It'll give me time to get wound down from CivIII anyway. I won't be bored with it by then, but I won't be in "I can't play anything else" mode anymore.

	14-10-2001 16:01									#26
	Remove this text

quote: Nov 8 release

Brill

	14-10-2001 18:27									#27
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Provost,

By the way, you said some hate it. Some of the people here? Or some of the gaming reviewers?

Thee are two types of people who hate EU. 1) The typical "I don't want to think gamers" who consider Command & Conquer and Age of Empires "Strategy" games even though one needs about as much long-term thought to play them as to clip one's nails.

2) People who are so wedded to turn-based games that they cannot stand the thought of anything that isn't a click-fest being done in "real-time." Though in reality "continuous time" might be a better description of EU. These same people usualy dogged out another really good game, Shogun, for having RT combat in it, though in the context of that game it was perfectly blended.

Is EU for everyone? No. It's way too deep for the first crowd I mentioned. And if people are really wedded to turns (like some are really wedded to real-time) then you won't go for it either.

But in terms of depth, replayability, and pure scope, only Civ matches it on the first two, and even Civ fails to match it on the last.

Not that its a better game than Civ. Just a different game, with a lot of historical sweep in the truest sense of the word.

	16-10-2001 08:24									#28
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Just thought I'd add a few more thoughts here.

Concerning Shogun, the part that I really enjoyed was the RTS battles. The strategic part was done well and was a nice complement to the battles, but I felt the core of the game was in the battles. I spent alot of time in multiplayer where it was just RT.

EU, I don't hate this game at all. It is however far from one of my favorite games. My gripe centers around the fact that alot of the time you were fixing things like hunting down rebels, or maintaining other nations attitudes and ensuring your alliances were steady. I just felt that my time is gobbled up by maintainence, rather than strategy. Since I have a limited amount of time, I want to enjoy almost every minute of a game.

	16-10-2001 09:30									#29
	Remove this text

Moral,

There are tactics for keeping the level of revolts down without a whole lot of micromanagement, there'll always be some if you're explanionist, but isn't that par of history. I always found it kind of amusing in Civ that you'd take a city and maybe a couple wimpy partisans would pop up, but as soon as you bought a Temple, everything was hunky-dory. As for alliances, I don't know that maintaining alliances isn't a strategic choice. If you try to go to war with the whole world, you'll find life a difficult thing. That's pretty historical.

I haven't found any of those so involving that they kept me from thining strategically. That is, unless I was the Spanish or the Austrians and I had to deal with the Dutch revolt. But in that case, I knew what I was getting into when I chose those nations.