EU2 compared with Civ2, EU1, Civ3.

[lord of the mark]

Ok heres a thread that might get some interest here at Poly.

im a reasonably experienced Civ2 player, including hisotrical scenarios. When i get a new computer, I''ll probably get Civ3 and/or EU2. Ive heard a fair amount about Civ3, and debates about whether it is an improvement over civ2, including gameplay and historical accuracy issues. I heard some about EU back when it came out. I know EU2 expands the time period, and is supposed to have better documentation than EU1.

How does EU2 compare to Civ2. How does the release of Civ3 change your view of EU vs Civ. How about impact of EU2's improvements on EU changing your view.

One frequent poster to civ3 and earlier to civ2 forums has claimed that for any given historical situation, a more fun scenario can be done with Civ than with EU (of course he is frustrated by absence of scen design tool in civ3) I tend to find historical accuracy part of the fun.

So what do y'all think?

LOTM

[Dauphin]

I prefer EU to Civ2, although Civ2 certainly has more flexibility in scenario design.

[uglyduck]

The EU games cannot really be compared with the Civ series. They are entirely different.
Just one big difference:
In the Civ series you can start out as a nomad tribe in a seemingly empty world with not much going on and get into the game slowly.
In EU series (because of the starting date) you start out in a world already filled and very, very busy. You are up to your neck in it right from the start and *that* is what new players sometimes find overwhelming.
EU2, IMO, makes EU look like a demo. The whole concept is expanded, not just the time period, with flavour added with Events, Leaders etc. New Events and Leaders are being added all the time via Patches and they can also be added by the player.
It really is a different experience to EU1 and more absorbing.
As for historical accuracy - EU series is of course more historically accurate than Civ as it was written to be that way. However it will not follow history completely as the player has options to change history. If you want real historical accuracy then you would have to get a history book. It would be no fun playing EU if the result was preknown.
EU1 is now in the bargain bins - I would suggest you try that first. As I have said it will serve as a good demo (and tutorial) for EU2 should you decide you like the concept.

[ravagon]

If the Mods see this it might get bumped to the Community section methinks but oh well...

In a broad sense EU/EU2 are much much better at portraying their targetted historical period but much less robust than the civ series in how they can be adapted. No ability to start from scratch on a random map or anysuch. True the main map is hidden at the start but unless one is geographically challenged nobody is going to go hunting for large continents (later to be called the Americas perhaps? ) in the Indian Ocean.
No Star Trek: Dominion war scenario's/Mods either, or not unless one has an overly large imagination anyway.
Of course, that is how they're supposed to be.

On the civ3 issue I wouldn't touch the thing with an 11 foot pole-shaped thing unless they actually release the (working) scenario editor that was supposed to have been included. At the moment all anybody can do is modify the graphics/rules. No scenarios whatsoever in case that was your preference.
And don't even think about the civ3 limited edition unless you like the tin. Thats all you're paying for.

Both EU2 and civ3 still seem to be going through the bugfixing/game tweaking stage which is a bit unfortunate but I guess inevitable in today's market.
EU2 seems to be closer to being a finished product but that may simply be due to Paradox' greater willingness to discuss their progress. Nobody really knows how far Firaxis is from the final version of civ3 (Although Markos apparently has "sources" ) with all the bells & whistles intact.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by ravagon
If the Mods see this it might get bumped to the Community section methinks but oh well....

Does this sub-forum even have a mod?

[Carolus_Rex]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin


Does this sub-forum even have a mod?

AFAIC, nope.


Well, I've played the EU series non stop since December 2000.

I love the game(duh!) and I doubt I'll ever try CiV(never actually played it! ).

Though I hope Blizzard will make Starcraft 2 sometime.


AFAIK, it's all like UD says, which makes these threads a bit silly.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Carolus_Rex

Though I hope Blizzard will make Starcraft 2 sometime.

Agreed, Starcraft is a brilliantly addictive game, and ideal for on-line multiplayer.

I'll be glad when I get broadband to avoid those painful lag and disconnects.

[Carolus_Rex]

It's the only game whose addiction I can compare with the one I have for EU.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin


Does this sub-forum even have a mod?

There was a thread a week or so ago asking for links to a dl site for EU2.
It disappeared rather quickly and I don't believe in coincidences ie: Big brother is watching

[uglyduck]

Yep, I noticed that and was rather pleased with the speed it was dealt with

[Dauphin]

Thats because it was reported to senior management. There is no specific mod as far as I know.

[Leonidas]

Civ2: tons of scenarios. . .

Civ3: just the main game is available. It's still going through its growing pains. . .

EU2: very polished game. Tons of events, replayability, comes with scenarios, and new mods/scenarios are being created. This game offers you a real bang for your buck. It's constantly being tweaked, updated. . .

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by Carolus_Rex

Though I hope Blizzard will make Starcraft 2 sometime.

*FP is waiting for SC2*

*starts holding his breath*

...

*still holding*

...

*beginning to turn blue*

*passes out*

---> SC2??? i wouldn't hold your breath.

it would be cool though, wouldn't it? warcraft 3 should be good while we're waiting though.

[WFHermans]

www.kazaa.com is a Napster for everything....

[Shadowstrike]

Each game has its ups and downs. I've enjoyed EU2 more for its customizability (you can practically change everything but the map and the basic framework) and nitty-gritty details of history (especially obscure events), but I still recall playing Civ2 scenarios over and over (Civ2's scenario capabilities contributed to its success, it practically had a team of free patchers who produced high quality work for public enjoyment).

[The Rusty Gamer]

EU2 is due here (NZ) in a few days. I already have EU1.

Is it worth me buying EU2? If I buy it, I take it it encompasses everything that was in EU1 so I can take EU1 to a second-hand store and sell it to get a bit of money back right? There's no point in me keeping both versions is there? There's nothing in EU1 that isn't in EU2?

[Kyle]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin


Does this sub-forum even have a mod?

I applied many months ago, but there "wasn't enough traffic/posts to necessitate one" (paraphrase from a certain ACS owner).



At this point in time, I'd rather play either of the EU games over any of the Civ games. Could be that I'm just burned out on the Civ style gameplay, but here we are anyway.

[uglyduck]

No - its the other way around There is a lot in EU2 that isnt in EU1.
EU2 makes EU1 look like a trainer for EU2......... having mastered EU1 you should have no problem in getting into EU2

[WFHermans]

Rusty Gamer is exactly right. EU2 is EU1 with a longer playing period (1419-1820 instead of 1492-1792) and many extra options like Missionaries, many more historical details etcetera.
Paying money for it is not a good idea though. Because you pay but don't get any reaction to emails, eh Uglyduck. And they don't allow you to read info about bugs on their forum if they don't like you.