27-03-2001 02:52									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Am I in the Off Topic Forum?


SMACed has some points. I got into the turn based games because of SMAC. So I am probably way too biased to comment. I tried CTP and was bored out of my mind. I just couldn't get into the game and I am a big fan of history. For me the biggest attraction of SMAC/SMAX is the personality of the factions. It helps me get into the game. And with mulitplay, the weakness of the AI is sidesteped. I haven't played CivI or II. I may pick it up in the bargain bins, but for now I always go back and fire up a game of SMAC

	27-03-2001 04:06									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Oh, johndmuller, good post. I think that the native life is a great improvement too that helps the gameplay and makes early colonization a bigger challange. And you're right, the unit wkshop was a bit of a put off for the AI, although I still want to see it in civ3 and or smac2.

	27-03-2001 13:38									#34
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Before I had discovered SMAC, I played a lot of CIV.

The thing, that makes SMAC much more fun to me is that You can get personally involved. In Civ the different factions/nations are all the same, they have no real personality. In Civ, have You ever let a nation pay for the things they had done to You in another game?
In SMAC, I still let Morgan pay for the first time bribing away a city from me with my best troops in my first game on bibliothecarion level more than a year ago He's still my favorite PB target for that
I like the different characters of the factions, and I like to make custom factions, to play with and to play against, a thing You couldn't do in CIV.
And if someone has REALLY pissed me of in real life, I make a SMAC faction after his characters and give him some nice singularity PBs to taste

	28-03-2001 03:47									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

The good ol' personality issue. While SMAC's factions really do add to the overall enjoyment factor in the game (I've mentioned that in a lot of my posts), civ2's aren't all bad. I mean, if Carthage bribes your attacking force to death, I'm sure you'd hate them for a while (I know I did ).

I take it the overall conception of civ is a classic that has outlived its lifespan due to smac's new features, personality, and of course multiplayer. I'm just suprised there weren't that many people who lashed out and declared civ a horrible, old game, but instead gave it the fairness it deserved as a classic that, while beaten by ac, is still being played on occasion. As I've said, I wrote this post to see if you still enjoy playing civ or checking it out, instead of focusing purely on SMAC.

And as for the people who suggested a name change, I think you should recognize the difference between dislike of something and criticism of something. There's a remarkable boundary of maturity between those two.

Keep on smacin', any more comments are welcome.

	28-03-2001 07:06									#36
	Suffering from ads?

Despite the surface impression that SMAC is Civ II on a different planet (as I confess I felt when it first came out), the game has proven to be immensely satisfying. Even with all its faults. I gave it up for almost a year because of the major crashing bugs, returning to CivII scenarios. The gameplay was much quicker because of the simpler graphics but there was still much to be missed about SMAC. I guess the bottom line is that SMAC is more compelling to me for whole games -- the conquering Planet side -- and CivII much more fun with all its elaborate scenarios. Although SMACX fixed my continuous-crashing bug (knocks wood), there remain things I would change if I could press for another patch -- but if I get a spot on the jury, I move for acquital.

	28-03-2001 23:16									#37
	Got spare money?

I love SMAC. But I love CivII too. CivII has a special place in my heart. Playing civII increased my knowledge of history and also made me love history. In fact, it increased my knowledge of geography as well (i used to play the world map and name cities as they are in the real world, thanks to an atlas).

As for SMAC, the design workshop is really possibly what I like the most. But with more possibilities, the AI just becomes an ass. What I cannot comprehend is SMAC's commerce. It sucks. I prefer civ's caravans. The challenges of getting a trade caravan across hostile terrain to establish trade with a rival city. That's one of the little things that make civ2 fun.

All in all, i like both games. SMAC is an improvement over a great game, but it's not just an improvement, it's also a new concept. However civ shouldn't be attacked. After all, it's the predecessor to SMAC. You could say it's the prototype.

IMO, the thing that makes SMAC's AI an idiot is that there's to much micromanagement for the AI to handle. Until an AI that learns from its mistake is developed, a polymorph, regardless of all other improvements, the subsequent versions of the game will probably still be less than satisfying when played SP.

----------------------------
One thing I knoe is that life is short
So listen up homeboy, give this a thought
The next time someone's teaching why don't you get taught?
It's like that (what?) and that's the way it is

	29-03-2001 09:21									#39
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

All I could say is that in SP, civ2 gets the medal, whilst smac is an improvement, it is only as enjoyable when played mp. which is why i'm trying so hard to sigup for more pbems.

	30-03-2001 08:07									#40
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Both Civ2 and SMAC are yesterday games. Get on with it.

Bkeela.

	30-03-2001 08:54									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Now that's extreme. Bkeela, do you mean that SMAC's age is old or the concept is old?

I think videogame ageism is a bit overdone. I mean, AC and civ are classics, but you Bkeela are more concerned with the new junk that developers constantly throw at you. I hope you understand that the $40 spent on SMAC is a lot less than $60 on Red Alert 2 and B&W, especially given their long term value.
[This message has been edited by SMACed (edited March 29, 2001).]

	31-03-2001 01:27									#44
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Bkeela periodically pops his face in here and tells us all how outdated SMAC is and then disappears in the drift and current of the net until he strikes again. He's mildly entertaining because you never know where or when he'll appear and what deragatory statement he'll make. He's like the Dungeon Master in the old Dungeons and Dragons cartoon except he's not very helpful and usually very cranky.

	31-03-2001 03:26									#45
	Put an end to popups!

Methinks the whole reason Bkeela said that was to get a reaction ...

	05-04-2001 14:05									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

You think you've been playing SMAC? Apparently you don't understand
the value of the Design Workshop and how big an impact on the game custom designed units can have. The built-in units are horrible compared to expending a little effort tinkering. Build Probe Foils next time you think you need Alien Artifacts and Network Nodes to win the tech race.

All computer game AIs are crap. Every one of them I've encountered consistantly does stupid things that SP players learn to take advantage of and thus 'win' the game. Even weak humans stop making that same mistake over and over (at some point . So the multiplayer aspect also stands out.

The only thing I'd put SMAC 'on trial' for is the crummy multiplayer support. Prior to SMAC, many games had master servers designed to provide a list of available servers and games, but those abilities were left out. PBEM games are for Rip Van Winkle.



------------------
- turn complete -

	05-04-2001 15:57									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I played Civ1 hard for years, until I eventually got bored and let it alone for quite awhile. I picked up Civ MGE eventually, but was somewhat disappointed that it was almost the same game, though the bug fixes and AI play were much improved. I could still beat the crap out of it immediately, and it didn't remain on my A list for very long. (In fact it remained a distant 3rd to two other CIV type games MOO2 and MOM). SMAC was different enough that I have been playing it for a year and a half with only one three month hiatus. IMO it is a much better game compared to CIV2 than CIV2 was compared to CIV1.

As far as historical gaming vs sci fi are concerned I am a total history nut, with history accounting for about 90% of my reading over the last couple of decades. I also like sci fi, but not nearly as much as history. Another of my favorite hobbies since 1974 is wargaming. It is the game systems in SMAC which make it a better game than CIV2 for me, and like other posters here I actually prefer historical gaming to sci fi gaming.

What keeps SMAC interesting are all of the different approaches that can be used to play the game. Different factions, different SE settings, different strategies. Both games are weak when viewed as solely wargames. They utilize wargame technology from the 1950s and the dawn of commercial board wargaming, with their square grids, rigid zones of control, and very simple comparison combat resolution. Hell, both of these games still penalize stacking (concentration of forces), which even the oldest wargames did not. As wargames both SMAC and CIV suck, quite frankly. But these are not wargames, but strategy games in the truest sense, and as such they are quite good and still are amongst the best ever produced.

What tends to turn me off a bit about the CIV2 forums is the flavor of orthodoxy which some of the posters there exude. I find that SMAC posters are much more likely to have an open mind to CIV than vice versa (making a huge generalization). Yes CIV was a milestone game which captured the imaginations of thousands of people. But the game had a lot of weaknesses as well, and there is enormous room for improvements to the system, which in my mind SMAC proved without that being it's intention. I certainly hope that CIV3 is a great game, but I fear that what so many fans want is CIV2 with new graphics, and that Fireaxis is likely to give them (and us) exactly that. (What could be easier?) I will be careful before I purchase CIV3 that it indeed breaks some important new ground in it's game systems. It won't be worth more than 5$ to me otherwise.