 |
| |
|
|
Mongoose
|
|
Harrisburg,PA USA
Apr 1999
time: 00:29
|
|
Imp 2 is a great game! It ought to be in the collection of any TBS fan.
You absolutely must patch it. IIRC, without the patch , there is a random event (rats) that all but crashes the game.
Replay value is high. There is one map I played that just doesn't work right...no fur anywhere, so the branch of the tech tree that goes off of furtrapping can never be discovered. Otherwise, no map related problems. AI is decent. Graphics are definitely dated. Intrerface is fairly good...couple of hiccoughs, as I recall.
There are hundreds of hours of good ol' TBS fun to be had with this game. It was easily worth the cost when I paid full price when it was released. At the prices you have been discussing here...LOTM is right on the money...a bargain gem.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by War4ever
actually compared to any of those will be just fine....
but compared to civ i guess since its the game i love |
Versus civ 2:
No happiness model, no internal politics. An abstraction to be sure, but not as much so as in other periods (this is the age of absolutism after all)
Diplomacy is not funny and entertaining as in civ - but its important, subtle, and as far as i can tell at this point, fairly deep. Im France, and have alliances with Sweden and Spain, im struggling with Holland for political influence in Germany and Switzerland - the tools are non-aggression pacts, trade, and subsidies.
The economy is realistic and deep - yet less micromanagement than Civ2. To build units i need more or less realistic resources - Cloth + metal + wood plus manpower for an infantry unit, all of the above plus horses for cavalry and horsedrawn artillery, all of the above (not the horses) including lots of wood for boats.
Paper for civilian professionals like engineers and spies. To get the resources i have to use labor to convert raw materials. I extract raw materials from improved terrain - but i need transport access to THAT terrain (or adjacent) . If the access is by land all i need is the road - its assumed that carts, etc are ubiquitous. By sea i need ship capacity. Ship capacity thats used for transport cant be used for trade(exchange) or for Navy (exploration/patrol/fighting)
Combat can be resolved "strategically" i simply move my troops into a province and the computer resolves the combat - or tactically - i fight a turn based battle on a seperate screen. So far ive only fought natives, and i dont have a real sense of how combined arms works - i think they did try to model that reasonably well.
For some grand strategic considerations i'll probably post an AAR of my current game - either here or a seperate thread.
All in all - i think less replayability than Civ - no scenarios for example. Definitely more abstract, less micromanagement. Very little unit pushing. Some historical accuracy in results, but this isnt close to a history sim. not far enough in to judge strategic depth, alternatic ways of winning, but looks promising.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mongoose
|
|
Harrisburg,PA USA
Apr 1999
time: 00:29
|
|
LOTM - Sorry, I don't remember what the problem with the rats was...it has been quite a while! I seem to recall that the event became perpetual. It's supposed to deplete half your grain storage in a once and done event. Again, my memory isn't 100% on this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SnowFire
|
 |
New York City, NY
Jan 1970
time: 00:29
|
|
The economy is realistic and deep
Enjoy that thought while you can. While perhaps the resource manipulation is good, there is only one way to get actual, cold hard cash. That is by killing Indians as fast as possible, and since you don't always quite know where the diamonds or gold are, by sweeping out a fairly large amount of terriotory (preferably in the Incans or Aztecs). Negotiating with the Indians is completely worthless; it requires far much more time, effort, & cash for less reward than just going on a standard conquering spree. You know, Spain didn't have that wonderful an economy in real history, despite Potosoi. It annoys me that this is the only option. Worse, at least on the harder difficulties, you will grow to hate the retreat system which always allows an enemy to retreat, even into your own provinces! It matters not if you hit them with Knights and they have peasants, they can always escape unscathed. Sure, later in the game you can build forts everywhere and put this tactic out of business, but the AI is so bad late in the game it won't matter. The real task is surviving, since at least on the higher difficulties the AI starts out hating you.
And oh yes. The Diplomacy is pure crap. EU has spoiled me, odd as it sometimes behaves. Rarely is it that I have seen so many ALLIANCE MEMBERS randomly turn on me at the drop of a hat... and how it's still impossible to negotiate the end of the war as an alliance. If one side agrees to peace, it must be a separate peace breaking the alliance. That means that once an alliance goes to war, it can theoretically never stop until its enemy is annihilated.
Bah. Imp2 is a game with a lot of potential, and I suppose it was worth the money I paid for it when it came out- but it has SERIOUS flaws that come up whenever I try and replay the game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SnowFire
The economy is realistic and deep
Enjoy that thought while you can. While perhaps the resource manipulation is good, there is only one way to get actual, cold hard cash. That is by killing Indians as fast as possible, and since you don't always quite know where the diamonds or gold are, by sweeping out a fairly large amount of terriotory (preferably in the Incans or Aztecs). Negotiating with the Indians is completely worthless; it requires far much more time, effort, & cash for less reward than just going on a standard conquering spree. You know, Spain didn't have that wonderful an economy in real history, despite Potosoi. It annoys me that this is the only option. Worse, at least on the harder difficulties, you will grow to hate the retreat system which always allows an enemy to retreat, even into your own provinces! It matters not if you hit them with Knights and they have peasants, they can always escape unscathed. Sure, later in the game you can build forts everywhere and put this tactic out of business, but the AI is so bad late in the game it won't matter. The real task is surviving, since at least on the higher difficulties the AI starts out hating you.
And oh yes. The Diplomacy is pure crap. EU has spoiled me, odd as it sometimes behaves. Rarely is it that I have seen so many ALLIANCE MEMBERS randomly turn on me at the drop of a hat... and how it's still impossible to negotiate the end of the war as an alliance. If one side agrees to peace, it must be a separate peace breaking the alliance. That means that once an alliance goes to war, it can theoretically never stop until its enemy is annihilated.
Bah. Imp2 is a game with a lot of potential, and I suppose it was worth the money I paid for it when it came out- but it has SERIOUS flaws that come up whenever I try and replay the game. |
I was comparing it to Civ - ive never played EU, so I cant compare it. I said elsewhere its not a history sim - i had EU in mind when i said that, though i didnt know EU had a more detailed economic model. I guess the advantage of Imp might be simplicity and elegance, though if the strategic choices are that unbalanced that will be a negative. Im not experienced enough to say from my own gameplay.
Of course the reliance on imported treasures for cash is exagerated. In actual history ever Spain was fairly heavily dependent on internal taxes, which dont exist in Imp2. I certainly recognize it as a highly abstract game.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-06-2003 05:39
|