A Few Questions

[Atahualpa]

Depp: Actually I LOVED Homm3!!! I still love it! The music is awesome and it is quite good balanced!
Homm3 however was the first game i had from the homm series. And I think its the best and most polished and most balanced.
I tried Homm2 but I didnt like it. First of because of the ugly graphics and then because in Homm3 you could do lots more than in Homm2

homm3 ROCKS!!!!
Especially the music and sound stuff! i would rate it a 110% (in the sound section).

The sound is soooo cool! When you enter a inferno city for example. Man it killed me!
This game really killed me.
You know, I just stay there in this city for hours and listen to the music (which repeats of course).
And then change to a dungeon city and listen to the theme there.
The game rocks the game is great the game is awesome!!!!!
Never has there been a game where the sound part was so awesome.

Battles are also fun.
I also did create a small scenario. I play it all the time. Actually its the only map I play.
I created a small map and put loads of resources on it. Above surface the land is divided with a mountain where the red player gets the above land and the blue the beneath. Then there are 2 underground tunnels which connect to the underground where the brown player waits. The brown player has the whole underground for himself. Though that doesnt mean he is the strongest, the prob is that he can be attacked from 2 sides!
And that you cant meet your enemies that soon I have of course installed some special monsters

Most of the stuff is random so the game is different every time you play it. It can be that you have an avantage but it can also be that you have a disadvantage.
Only the AI seems to have some probs with it. Especially the start is real hard! You have to fight some very difficult battles!
Oh and as I dont like to have to much heros the map is designed to play best with only one hero (or 2).

Of course there is a holy grail too and this is by far the biggest advantage you may get! The chance are 25% that you get the grail. 25% that the other player on the surface gets the grail and 50% that the sous-terrain player gets the grail.

Though it is managable to make it without the grail.

My brother (a real expert) made it in less than 70 days I think (on impossible difficulty level). He got rank Arch Angel (the highest rank I believe).

If anybody wants the map drop me a mail: atahualpa@gmx.at

Ata

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-20-2000 02:22 PM I trust sid's judgment. Hes the master. he made this game and i trust what he will do. These ppl did not. They in essense 'stole' his idea, tho his lack of presense is felt quite a bit, imo.

civ1 is based on a board game. did sid 'stole' their idea too?
[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited November 20, 2000).]

[Jen Dragon]

Who stole whos idea? Brian Reynols, in an article i read by him, somewhere, described where the idea came from. Empire, a simplistic game of cities producing a few types of units land, air, sea. Then there came all sorts of BBS onlin games that had plague units, nukes, a ton of units, research. So they, Brian Reynolds and Sid, comercialized the idea polished it up, added several ideas, tech tree, timeline, like Avalon Hill,...then you get Civ I. Without Brian's input, I'm holding my breath hoping Civ III will be a leap forward. Its kind of like Talon Soft taking credit for thier battleground series when SPI's Terrible Swift Sword had almost the exact same system down to the CRT.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Hmmm, I think Civ2/SMAC are the best games in the series.. Oh btw, I liked SMAC's graphics better than CtPs (not lying... 3d map was just AMAZING). And I think the story aspect of SMAC made it the best game out there, but there is just something about playing history, which is why Civ2 is tied with it.

[Blade Runner]

Harlequin,

An example:
If you remember the whole RTS mania strated with the Westwood Dune II. Yeah, I know Westwood is in the ring recently with the Red Alert 2, but nobady can argue i.e. AOK or Starcraft are better RTS games than the C&C serial.
Do you seriously think without the Dune II we have today AOK or Starcraft? I don't think so.
Do you think only Westwood have right to develop RTS games? Do you refuse to play a good RTS just because it is not Westwood product? (Provided you bother to play any RTS game.)

I read somewhere: Only seven original stories exist (known by ancient civilizations many thousand years ago) , everything else is only a remade of the originals.

I hope Sid will check out CTP2, and he will use the good ideas for his new masterpiece. I am sure we (players) just profiting, if there is competition between the two companies. I also hope, CTP3 will be better than Civ3. (IMO CTP2 is better than Civ2.)

Blade


[This message has been edited by Blade Runner (edited November 21, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Blade Runner (edited November 21, 2000).]

[Chaos]

true you didn't call anyone stupid. I apologize for that. It's just that your opinion is quite strong and comes off a little condescending.

[Depp]

Empire, god how I played that game. It was amazing fun and you could pay it hotseat as 3 players.

You had cities which could only build units, but you had air/navy/army in the game so it was strategical as well.
The civilization board game and later the advanced Civ computer/board game has little incommon with Sid Meiers Civ really. bot it's still fun.

I hope Sid makes a very different Civ 3, since Civ 2 was dull compared to when you first played Civ 1, the real masterpiece. Actually, when I go back to the classics it's Civ 1 i turn too.

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by Zardos on 11-20-2000 02:32 PM I agree, Sid is the master. But soon the apprentice becomes the master. . .Ok I'll stop, but there are too many Kung Foo references to pass up. Civ II was definately a better game than CTP -- because it was polished. CTP should have been a beta version of CTP2. But even though Sid is the master, he can't think of everything, and his ideas are improved upon to some extent with the CTP games. Setting up Armies (versus one on one combat all the time). Units belonging to the empire was an improvement in my opinion -- it gave the impression that you are running an empire, not a collection of cities. Production works, not settlers (again the empire thing). Etc. But there is no doubt that Sid came up with the original, but who's to frown on some enhancements. Its all a matter of perspective. [This message has been edited by Zardos (edited November 20, 2000).]

This is quite true. To each his own i suppose. But the core statments i can not dispute. You are wise grasshopper

Harle

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by Blade Runner on 11-21-2000 04:05 AM Harlequin, An example: If you remember the whole RTS mania strated with the Westwood Dune II. Yeah, I know Westwood is in the ring recently with the Red Alert 2, but nobady can argue i.e. AOK or Starcraft are better RTS games than the C&C serial. Do you seriously think without the Dune II we have today AOK or Starcraft? I don't think so. Do you think only Westwood have right to develop RTS games? Do you refuse to play a good RTS just because it is not Westwood product? (Provided you bother to play any RTS game.) I read somewhere: Only seven original stories exist (known by ancient civilizations many thousand years ago) , everything else is only a remade of the originals. I hope Sid will check out CTP2, and he will use the good ideas for his new masterpiece. I am sure we (players) just profiting, if there is competition between the two companies. I also hope, CTP3 will be better than Civ3. (IMO CTP2 is better than Civ2.) Blade [This message has been edited by Blade Runner (edited November 21, 2000).] [This message has been edited by Blade Runner (edited November 21, 2000).]

Your missing my point. Does every RTS look identical to dune? i think not. Hence why did ctp take so much from civ rather then rebuilding it from the ground up? ill tell you. to capitolize on the civ name and brand. Hence my statment.

Compition is good i agree. But taking someone elses work and just adding,editing to it and calling it yours is wrong.

Hope that clarifies

Harle

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-20-2000 04:08 PM Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-20-2000 02:22 PM I trust sid's judgment. Hes the master. he made this game and i trust what he will do. These ppl did not. They in essense 'stole' his idea, tho his lack of presense is felt quite a bit, imo. civ1 is based on a board game. did sid 'stole' their idea too? [This message has been edited by MarkG (edited November 20, 2000).]

They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more.

Harle

[wheathin]

Actually, Activision bought the rights to the Civ name for one game. And there was some legal wrangling over that too... but still, Activision can claim the "Civilization" name legally. Note that since they only had one game to use it on, they used that game to launch their own Civ franchise "Call to Power", and CTP2 does not include Civ in its title.

More importantly, since much of Civ2 and most of SMAC were Brian Reynolds' work, and he won't be involved in Civ3, how good can it be, Harlequin?

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-22-2000 02:03 AM They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more.

how sad.... you're loosing a great game due to the lack of two words on it's box...

[Locutus]

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-22-2000 02:03 AM They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more.

Well, I didn't see the name of that board game maker on the box of Civ1 either... And who said Sid never approved CtP? Did you ask him? A few days ago a guy from Firaxis (don't quite remember his name) came by these forums to announce they had a copy of CtPII too, so it's not like they resent Activision or anything...

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-22-2000 11:43 AM Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-22-2000 02:03 AM They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more. how sad.... you're loosing a great game due to the lack of two words on it's box...

"great game" is subjective. Once i read reviews from my trusted sources i shall make a final call, but even then it'll prob wait until civ3 come out and compair the two.

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by Locutus on 11-22-2000 03:57 PM Well, I didn't see the name of that board game maker on the box of Civ1 either... And who said Sid never approved CtP? Did you ask him? A few days ago a guy from Firaxis (don't quite remember his name) came by these forums to announce they had a copy of CtPII too, so it's not like they resent Activision or anything...

Did sid have ANYTHING to do with ctp? Im pretty sure he didnt. Thus its not authorized by him. I am not saying sid hates ctp or such. But i doubt he thinks its a quality game by his standards either.

Harle

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by wheathin on 11-22-2000 11:38 AM Actually, Activision bought the rights to the Civ name for one game. And there was some legal wrangling over that too... but still, Activision can claim the "Civilization" name legally. Note that since they only had one game to use it on, they used that game to launch their own Civ franchise "Call to Power", and CTP2 does not include Civ in its title. More importantly, since much of Civ2 and most of SMAC were Brian Reynolds' work, and he won't be involved in Civ3, how good can it be, Harlequin?

This is just a long, wasteful thread waiting to happen. We could spend the next 100 yrs debating how much of civ is BR and how much was SM idea. We will prob never know so lets not even go there.

Harle

[Harlequin]

After reading the Daily Radar Review im pretty underwhelmed. seems more like civ 2.5 then anything really ground breaking. They semmed more negative then positive about it. But will see what pc mag has to say about it before i make any final decesion.

Harle

[Dark Renown]

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-23-2000 01:49 AM Did sid have ANYTHING to do with ctp? Im pretty sure he didnt. Thus its not authorized by him. I am not saying sid hates ctp or such. But i doubt he thinks its a quality game by his standards either. Harle

Just because he didnt work on it doesnt mean it not authorized.

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by Dark Renown on 11-24-2000 01:06 PM Just because he didnt work on it doesnt mean it not authorized.

Your kidding me right? ummm you realize what you said makes no sense?

Harle

[ak]

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-22-2000 02:03 AM They got the blessing of the board game maker if i recall correctly (avalon hill). Until i see sids name on the ctp box its just a pretender to the throne and nothing more. Harle

As I recall, Activision got the rights to the Civ name for one game. It was a very shrewd business move to kick off what could be another franchise series. As of CTP2, the Civ name is dropped. I passed on CTP bkz of bad reviews, but was jonesing for a new Civ-type game too badly when I walked by CTP2 at a store. I bought it and love it. Although it still has some relatively minor quirks, I am so glad I don't have to deal with 50 pop-up windows, reassigning unit support to different cities etc. - the ugly side of Civ2. It's a new game now. It's not Sid's game. Get over it. Checkers, Chess, and Go may have all had the same common roots.

Too bad you got burned with CTP. As for your final decision, Harle, don't buy it now. Check the boards again in a few weeks and then make another final decision.

BTW, do you have a little shrine to sid in some corner?

[Darkknight]

i have never played ctp 1 or 2 and I grew up on civ 1 + 2 and i'm a great sid fan even got gettysberg to see what he's like designing RTS games, I didn't get ctp because i thought it was just another takeoff like TOT and it's only now that i'm realising maybe i was wrong with ctp maybe i should have gotten it because now i'm reading all this on CTP 2 and all the reviews and just look at any screenshot or forum and you can find at least 10 things different between civ and ctp in each one of them.I am personally drooling at the mouth waiting for this game to get here and i hadn't even heard there was a ctp2 coming soon until 2 weeks ago.

I agree that sid is the greatest game designer of all time and even if he is your god it doesn't mean you can't buy any other game just because his name isn't on the box.

Just try out CTP2 and when civ3 comes out buy that too.
CTP2 is probably increasing civ3 sales cause now more people are into TBS games and can't wait for the next to come out(civ3)...

Long message i'd better stop.

------------------
" mind over body "

[Mercantile]

In reality i would think sid should be happy to see what ctp2 is like. This way if he is smart, he can play the game and see what all the flaws are and send his grunts to Apolyton to see what the GAMING community thinks of the game, not those idiotic reviews by RTS gamers. This allows him to (hopefully) make a better game out of civ3. No one stole anyones ideas, and although ctp was a bit of a flop, i hear from many people who think ctp2 is what ctp was supposed to be. It sucks to get burned by games, but download a warez of it and if you don't like it, delete it, and if you do like it delete it and BUY it.

There is nothing wrong with fresh blood to a series like civ. Civ2 is a great game for 1996. A civ upgrade like civ2 from the origional will not be satisfactory this time around in 2001 or 2002 , whenever they release the damm game. I say enjoy ctp2 for what it is, another vision of civilization by accomplished designers, and quit trying to compare apples and oranges, it doesnt' work.

Difference is a good thing for the consumer, don't be afraid of change !!

------------------
Do you shovel snow in your birkenstocks?

[thud632]

this, this whole damn topic, this whole winding never ending debate, i think, is THE best thing about Civilization, regardless of what manifestation of it you may be playing.

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by ak on 11-26-2000 02:25 AM As I recall, Activision got the rights to the Civ name for one game. It was a very shrewd business move to kick off what could be another franchise series. As of CTP2, the Civ name is dropped. I passed on CTP bkz of bad reviews, but was jonesing for a new Civ-type game too badly when I walked by CTP2 at a store. I bought it and love it. Although it still has some relatively minor quirks, I am so glad I don't have to deal with 50 pop-up windows, reassigning unit support to different cities etc. - the ugly side of Civ2. It's a new game now. It's not Sid's game. Get over it. Checkers, Chess, and Go may have all had the same common roots. Too bad you got burned with CTP. As for your final decision, Harle, don't buy it now. Check the boards again in a few weeks and then make another final decision. BTW, do you have a little shrine to sid in some corner?

Im talking BEFORE that recent legal mess. Civ1 is loosly based on a board game by avalon hill (AH is known in war gaming and RPG circles). Sid got the rights to the name from AH to based a pc game on it.

What your talking about is the recent legal nightmare that really was moot before it begain. As none of the parties involved had sid or his team working on it. Thus really isnt civ.

I have respect and appreciation for sid. Hes done amazing things for the genere. Some of you should give him the same as if it wasnt for him you wouldnt have ctp.

Harle

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by Darkknight on 11-27-2000 08:43 PM i have never played ctp 1 or 2 and I grew up on civ 1 + 2 and i'm a great sid fan even got gettysberg to see what he's like designing RTS games, I didn't get ctp because i thought it was just another takeoff like TOT and it's only now that i'm realising maybe i was wrong with ctp maybe i should have gotten it because now i'm reading all this on CTP 2 and all the reviews and just look at any screenshot or forum and you can find at least 10 things different between civ and ctp in each one of them.I am personally drooling at the mouth waiting for this game to get here and i hadn't even heard there was a ctp2 coming soon until 2 weeks ago. I agree that sid is the greatest game designer of all time and even if he is your god it doesn't mean you can't buy any other game just because his name isn't on the box. Just try out CTP2 and when civ3 comes out buy that too. CTP2 is probably increasing civ3 sales cause now more people are into TBS games and can't wait for the next to come out(civ3)... Long message i'd better stop.

Im not going to buy something becasue a few biased ppl on this msg board said i should. I am awaiting the reviews. And the one i have seen thus far, daily radar didnt say anything really great about it to make me want to run out and buy it. It was a pretty much 50/50 (mixed) review. I rather not spend my cash on a 50/50 game.

BG2 is still keeping me busy anyways until civ3 comes out

Harle

quote: Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-28-2000 02:26 PM Im not going to buy something becasue a few biased ppl on this msg board said i should. I am awaiting the reviews.

i think we are beggining to forget the meaning of words here....

what does "BIASED" mean, and why are the people who like "biased", while the rts-lover ign reviewer and the civ2-is-the-best-game-in-the-history-of-mankind-there-should-be-no-other-game-after-it gamepen reviewer "unbiased"?

i think you're biased towards player reviews

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-28-2000 03:11 PM Originally posted by Harlequin on 11-28-2000 02:26 PM Im not going to buy something becasue a few biased ppl on this msg board said i should. I am awaiting the reviews. i think we are beggining to forget the meaning of words here.... what does "BIASED" mean, and why are the people who like "biased", while the rts-lover ign reviewer and the civ2-is-the-best-game-in-the-history-of-mankind-there-should-be-no-other-game-after-it gamepen reviewer "unbiased"?

The reviews of CTP1 was right on the money. they all said the same thing. and if i read the reviews BEFORE i wasted my money on CTP1 then id be $50. richer with one less over priced coaster. Thus i am inclined to take a wait and see approach.

Forgive me if dont want to get burned again.

Harle

[Harlequin]

quote: Originally posted by MarkG on 11-28-2000 03:12 PM i think you're biased towards player reviews

Probably

Harle