This stopped me from playing SMAC. Is CTP-2 any better?

Ralf · October 28, 2000, 05:27

About halfway through playing SMAC i checked the AI-factions base-improvements lists. I had about twice as many base-improvements per base compared to any AI-faction. Also, my base-surroundings where much better developed, and my cities where much more optimally placed on the map. Finally, while i had 2-4 potent quality-units per base - all the AI-bases had upto 4-8 crap units, that drained a lot of resources.
I stopped playing the game, and i never played it since. The victory was already 100% foreseeable, and continuing playing wasnt fun anymore.

How about CTP-2? Now, if any Activision CTP-2 staff-member read this:
I dont mind some minor AI-unit pathfinding problems - i can live with that. I also dont mind some minor quirks and limitations in the diplomacy-area. Some can be patchable, and the rest i can live with.
I just however, *dont* want to relive above SMAC-experience when it comes to bad AI-city LOGISTICS. At least any civilized/perfectionist AI-civs should have about as many city-improvements that i have, halfway through the game, on the highest play-levels. The same goes for the AI city-area development.

Can you guys reassure me (and all the others in this forum) that CTP-2:s AI city-logistics is stronger than in SMAC and Civ-2?
Is it going to be able to keep the city-development pace (give or take) with the average civilized perfectionist veteran civ-gamer out there?

This issue is pivotal for me, then deciding if i shall buy a copy of CTP-2, or not.

Finally, is bigger always going to be better in CTP-2 (the BAB-problem)? Are there any pivotal advantages in having smaller empires instead of larger ones?

Atahualpa · October 28, 2000, 06:00

Read this from the Gamespot Preview:

quote:

The one thing that stuck with us while playing Call to Power II was that the computer was no fool, even on the easy settings. Although you can generally outresearch and outproduce AI empires on the lower difficulty levels, you will not always outprepare or outthink them. When your military clearly surpasses that of other nations, they will no longer welcome major battles against you. Instead, they will look to hit you where you are vulnerable by pirating undefended trade routes, for example, or by building up a strong navy when your strength lies mostly in your army.
During peacetime, you can count on rival nations to build up their military forces as needed to counter any moves you might make. During times of war, enemy armies are generally well organized, with long-range units such as archers and cannon effectively mixed in with frontline troops. If your military is weak, you can expect your frantic pleas for leniency to fall on deaf AI ears. If your military is strong, on the other hand, enemy units tend to beat feet as quickly as possible - even their naval units tend to decline confrontation if possible.

ATa

Ralf · October 28, 2000, 09:12

That is not clear enough. I was not refering to the military aspect of the game. What i am concerned about is the behind-the-scene city-improvement and city-area logistics ONLY.

"Although you can generally outresearch and outproduce AI empires on the lower difficulty levels,..."

What does that mean indirectly, on the higher levels? And how about constantly added city-improvements? Is the CTP-2 going to be able to keep pace with the civilized/perfectionist player amongst us, in the all important terrain- and city-improvement-race???

I want it spelled out directly from the horses mouth!

Atahualpa · October 28, 2000, 10:19

quote:

"Although you can generally outresearch and outproduce AI empires on the lower difficulty levels,..."

To me that means that generally you can not outresearch or outproduce the AI on higher difficulties.

Besides, the perfectionistic playing style is not the best! One that has a good focus on military and science will kick your butt! (but well perfectionistic players tend to save/reload)
In Civ2 this was often the case to me!

ATa

Ralf · October 28, 2000, 11:21

Thanks Atahualpa, but im waiting for a veteran-player civilized/perfectionist staff-member from the Activision team to reassure me on this one.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited October 28, 2000).]

Monkey · October 28, 2000, 21:17

I think WesW has made some significant improvements to the AI build orders and priorities in CTP1 in his Medieval Mod. The last time I played it seemed to be able to space cities out nicely and build improvements like an average human player(ie no massed roads of death). Selecting which improvements AIs are to build are also improved I think. If the game AI is capable of such customizations I don't see why CTP2 could not be any better. Check out the Med Mod if you have a copy of CTP.

WesW · October 28, 2000, 23:59

Check out my posts in this thread: http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum7/HTML/002295.html?12

Believe me, with the Med mod, the AIs will build whatever it takes to kick your a$$.

I believe that the guys working on the sequel will have very competent AIs waiting for us. If not, we can fiddle with the settings on our own until we get something that suits us.

Pyaray · October 29, 2000, 00:28

quote:

Originally posted by Ralf on 10-28-2000 11:21 AM
Thanks Atahualpa, but im waiting for a veteran-player civilized/perfectionist staff-member from the Activision team to reassure me on this one.

It's very difficult to give an absolute answer on this for a few important reasons. The first being that how well the AI plays is a subjective thing. One person may think the AI is too hard while another thinks it's too easy. How well an AI player responds has a lot to do with the events that happen, and therefore how you play directly affects what the AI does, and your play style may be such that the AI doesn't know how to respond. The next being since we don't have access to the AI for either SMAC or Civ2 we can't make a qualitative assesment of if ours is better. And my final reason is that I try very hard to not talk about competitors in any way. I prefer not to say anything about the competition, either positive or negative. Every now and then I will, but generally I avoid it.

In summary, I'm sorry, I can't really answer your question. I feel the AI is very good, and very competitive, but that's a personal, and probably biased, opinion.

Pyaray

Atahualpa · October 29, 2000, 12:38

quote:

One person may think the AI is too hard while another thinks it's too easy.

And exactly that was one of the reasons why difficulty levels were invented!

So to say: Make Deity real hard!

ATa
[This message has been edited by Atahualpa (edited October 29, 2000).]