We already have CIV3...

[PrinceBimz]

You guys need to answer your Call to Power! It practically IS CIV3 if you ask me. Some of you guys are simply missing out on a great game that is more then keeping me occupied until this true CIV3 is released.

[Deathwalker]

It is not Civ 3, but a clone or copy. Not a bad one but not civ

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow

[UltraSonix]

I heard a lot of negative stuff Call to Power (they said is wasn't good as SMAC), so I didn't get it. But I hear CTP2 is going gold soon - isn't it in beta now or something?

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

[Shadowstrike]

CTP isn't what a lot of civvers wanted. It was a radical step, and many of the models in CTP weren't implemented the way we prefered. We want Civ 3 to be a true sucessor to Civ2, and who would know Civ2 best? The players of course!

Shadowstrike is right. I love Civ2. And I waited anxiously for Call To Power to come out. From all I saw, it looked pretty good. But the day I bought it, it was already in the junk pile. For those who never got hooked on Civ2, I can understand why they would like the game.
But I actually think it was more difficult to make the transition from Civ2 to CTP. No city screen, new ways of movement, sketchy diplomacy, as well as an uninformative manual, made it difficult for me to adjust. At least those that never played Civ were starting out fresh. But even some of them must have been lost with the ridiculous warfare that I've heard so much about. Musketeers killing robots,etc. And of course there was the biggest fault of all (which has become a cliche, I know) there were no scenarios! The thing I loved about Civ2 was making my own scenarios.
I only hope that Civ3 makes an easier transition. Heck, I hope CTP2 makes an easier transition. From what I've heard, thats what CTP should have been.

------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu

[Imran Siddiqui]

BOOOOO! CtP (Crap to Play) is NO WAY Civ3!!!!

Boo! Boo! CtP is an imposter!

I think the people have spoken.

------------------
"...The highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy's plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities." - Sun Tzu

[Lonestar]

Burn CTP, burn!!!!!

------------------
"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you"

"Soylant Green is people. PPPeeeoooppllleee!"

[MidKnight Lament]

CtP may not be Civ3, but it's still a fine game, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. It's easy to critisise.

CtP2 sounds like it may be great. But yeah, I'm still hanging out for Sid's Civ3.

- MKL

[Az]

Lament said the true , if you ask me . of course it wasn't the best it could be, but there were some nice things about it , like stacked combat and the change in trade routes .....

Dalgetti

------------------
We don't prohibit smoking . We discourage inhaling .

[Private Viper]

I personally like CtP. I just have to re-think all my strategies to actually get good at it

About SMAC: I never saw the appeal in that game... The graphics were so-so, but that's not the worst part. What I really didn't like was the tech tree and units. I mean, with Civ and CtP you recognized the events and principles of history, but with SMAC... nothing.

"You have discovered a new advance: Snjot-tech. This has gained access to the starlazer-rover"

I love sci-fi, but still... I need to actually understand what I'm doing to enjoy a game.

I like many of the ideas it implements though, hope they develop them further with Civ3, as well as "stealing" some of the stuff from CtP and CtP2 (I didn't say that... )

------------------
Viper
viper@cncnz.com
Command & Conquer NZ

[Temudschin Dschingis Khan]

CTP2 will be quite nice but no match for Civ3! I will buy it, I will like it. Hey, it´s a civ game!
But I´m really longing for the day civ3 is in the stores!

------------------
----Mongolia Rules------

If CTP2 is any good that will be interesting because all the Civ2 MP people will go down there to kick arse with those CTP wankers.


------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Topics (PROT)
Convenor, Threadjacking Appreciation Society (TAS)
Proprietor, Apolyton Tea Shop http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum19/H...tml?date=00:06

[The Kaiser]

CTP is not CIV3. It's not even CTP1. A more accurate description would be CTP 0.5

[Empress]

I didnt' bother buying CTP because I was so disappointed in SMAC

[Shadowstrike]

Progress from Civ2 to SMAC was probably like the one from Civ1 to Civ2. The reason so many people were thrown off by it was its setting, namely the future which people couldn't relate to. In concept, SMAC is excellent. Because the story is "set" people feel like they have lost a certain amount of control.

[Temudschin Dschingis Khan]

Yes, that´s it! SMAC was great but the fractions took a great deal of freedom from the player as the story did!
But nevertheless SMAC has great roots!

------------------
----Mongolia Rules------

SMAC sucked because all the editing tools sucked.

[Evil Capitalist]

So I'm not the only one who didn't play SMAC. And I thought I was the only one.

As a side note did anyone enjoy the description part of the CtP advances- that was one of the few things they did well?

description part?

I don't play SMAC anymore because I couldn't identify myself with the future setting.
Nevertheless it's been a great advance in many aspects.