How superior is Call to Power 2?

[Parsifal]

With CTP2's superior combat system, choice of civs and editor, I'm just wondering how much better people think it to be. With all the mods now available, I think that it is infinitely better! The civ3 AI is slightly better than CTP2's, but CTP2 is older and fireaxis' decision to ignore virtually all of the improvements from CTP2 and Alpha Centauri more than makes up for it and makes civ3 one of most the most disappointing games ever!

PS> All you lazis who couldn't be bothered to learn CTP2, your comments are not wanted.

 

[Mr Spice]

Where is the "CTP2 sucks, I love Civ 3!" - option? And if you only want to discuss CTP2, not Civ 3, then other forums are better suited. "All other games" comes to mind, for example.

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by Mr Spice
Where is the "CTP2 sucks, I love Civ 3!" - option? And if you only want to discuss CTP2, not Civ 3, then other forums are better suited. "All other games" comes to mind, for example.

Actually, there is a CTP forum.

And...I only wanted to put the 4 most serious choices in the poll!

 

[Bamspeedy]

I have Call to Power I and II. When I got Call to Power II, I thought it was one of the best games ever. But once I got Civ III, I will never go back to the Call to Power series. Sure, CTP has some good things about it, but there are things about CivIII that more than makes up for it. For mod-makers and people who love creating scenarios, then yes, you will probably have more fun with CTP. But for those who like to just play the standard rules, on a random map, you can't beat CivIII IMHO. CTP I & II are just too dang easy and simplistic!

I would have voted CivIII is greatly better than CTP II, but since there is no option for CivIII to have any edge.....

 

[Higher Game]

CTP was so awful, I didn't bother buying the second one. I got Civ 3 as a birthday present. After playing it for a while, I got sick of corruption and uninstalled it. Months pass... I download a new patch and it reduced the corruption. The game is now playable, and I am enjoying it now. I haven't even bothered with CTP 2, the original was just too awful.

Really, Firaxis has improved and learned a lot from those 2 failures, but they still haven't made a game better than Alpha Centauri.

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by Higher Game
CTP was so awful, I didn't bother buying the second one. I got Civ 3 as a birthday present. After playing it for a while, I got sick of corruption and uninstalled it. Months pass... I download a new patch and it reduced the corruption. The game is now playable, and I am enjoying it now. I haven't even bothered with CTP 2, the original was just too awful.

Really, Firaxis has improved and learned a lot from those 2 failures, but they still haven't made a game better than Alpha Centauri.

Nay, fireaxis learned nothing. If you had bought the 2nd one you'd have realized how superior it really was. But since you didn't, your comments have no value other than as an example of the kind of gaming prejudice which allows a superior game to be outsold by a bigger name.

 

[Civddict]

From this bu**shi* somebody would think Firaxis made Call to Power.
Call to power is not built by Firaxis. It doesn't have anything with Sid Meier. It is stealing of ideas in its purest form. Just using Civilization name which they licensed from Microprose.

And if you don't put all choices that can exist, you better remove your poll. Why you put only answers you want to hear?
I vote CTP2 is terrible and it is not game at all, just an act of piracy.

 

[dojoboy]

I agree, CTP series is not nearly as addicting as Sid's civ series. Sure, mods might make it fun for individuals, but then its not the same game. Is it.

 

[Padma]

I own Civ2, CTP, CTP2, and Civ3. CTP2 (modded) is a better game than Civ2, IMHO. But I haven't even looked at CTP2 since Civ3 came out.

So mine is another vote for your missing "Civ3 is better" option.

 

[uknemesis]

I loved Call to Power 2, especially with it going beyond our time into the future, something I miss in Civ 3.

But with the cultural borders and the better graphics, not to mention many other improvements, I much prefer Civ 3. I will never play CTP2 again, as it just can't compete.

Nemesis

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by Civddict
From this bu**shi* somebody would think Firaxis made Call to Power.
Call to power is not built by Firaxis. It doesn't have anything with Sid Meier. It is stealing of ideas in its purest form. Just using Civilization name which they licensed from Microprose.

Excuse me! I never said that ctp was built by fireaxis! I know it wasn't.
I don't think Meier had anything to do with civ3 either, other than printing his name on the box, showing up for interviews and collecting money for his troubles. Sid seems to be like an old racehorse past his prime. Perhaps it's time for him to go to the knackery!

 

[Civddict]

Perhaps you could make better game since Sid Meier is incapable. This is no Antivision forum.

The civ3 AI is slightly better than CTP2's, but CTP2 is older and fireaxis' decision to ignore virtually all of the improvements from CTP2 and Alpha Centauri more than makes up for it and makes civ3 one of most the most disappointing games ever!

First of all, fireaxis is spelled as Firaxis. You spelled it all 3 times wrong. That means you never bother to visit their web site, or buy any their game. Why should they look at "improvements" of CTP2? It is not their product. They are not followers, but leaders. Your post is misleading, biased and undemocratic.

 

[Higher Game]

CTP1 had so many USELESS units, and some truly idiotic ones like that hippie eco ranger that could instantly kill a city. Uh-huh.

And I know that CTP is a blatant rip off of a classic. Back in the day, Civ1 was as good as it got. Today, people are spoiled and they want to play from 4000 BC to 4000 AD. The future era unleashed so many pointless units you didn't know what to make. It's stupid.

A good point of CTP is that better units require more $ to maintain. But it is still really bad.

And CTP had so many city improvements, you have to be a builder for the whole game to make them all. In Civ 3, there are 3 types of science building and (will be) 3 types of gold buildings, and some happiness buildings added in. In CTP, there were about 20 types of power plants and other garbage. There were space cities and water cities.

The useless units ruined CTP. Units like the caravan and the spy were (thank God) removed from Civ 3, a huge improvement over Civ 2. I will admit that AC had some dumb units, but combined arms were implemented in AC so well it really has more tactics than Civ 3.

 

[Frog Propaganda]

Heh, great job of trolling the Civ 3 forum pal.
Hopefully the mods will come put an end to this travesty of a thread.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Hey, don't diss the eco-ranger! I loved those guys.

Hmm..I just brought out my CTPII tech/unit poster to look at for the first time in 8+ months.

CTPII has 106 techs. Civ3 has about 80, some of which are not required. I can't remember if all the techs in CTPII were eventually required or not (you were allowed more diversity in the order you researched than Civ3, though).

CTPII had 12 governments!! But for the 'more advanced' forms of governments allowed more cities to be built. # of cities and distance was not affected by corruption, just happiness. So in other words, it was a no-brainer to move to the government that allowed more cities.

With so many techs, your units would be obsolete before you even built them!

There were 52 city improvements you could build!! Along with 30 Great Wonders.

CTPII had useless units like the lawyer (used to 'sue' your rival ), which stole money from your opponent. Slavers (capture your workers without war), Abolitionists (frees the slaves), clerics and televangelists (basically a unit that attempts a culture flip ), corporate branch (sets up a franchise to take money from your opponent, I guess this would be like the U.S. culturally attacking the world by setting up McDonald's in every country ), diplomats, etc. Do I really need to continue with the worthless units?

Specialists were more effective in CTP, so I guess give them a point there.

The aggressiveness of the AI in CTPII was so weak! You would get an attack real early in the game, then they would never attack again. Granted, there are mods out there that correct this aspect.

End Result: Civ3

CTP required way too much building and not enough war-fare.

 

[Anglophile]

I have played all five games and enjoyed all five games CTP 1 least of all because of the ridiculously overpowered stealth units (I loved those stealth units like Zouave loves culture flipping). CTP2 was much better and I stopped playing Civ2 to play it. I haven't finished a CTP2 game I had in progress (well, I was going to win pretty easily) when Civ3 came out. For me, Civ3 is the best of the five but CTP 2 did a lot of stuff better than even Civ3, e.g. combat. I never learned to use the CTP editor (note to self - go back and do so) but did edit all the maps because the CTP random map generator was awful - 10% tundra, 20% swamp, 10% desert and 50% water - do the math. I do like the Civ3 editor, play a pretty heavily modded version and am eagerly looking forward to the new editor this Friday. These discussions always degrade into a reasonable facsimile of US public affairs TV shows - one guy incapable of any opinion other than Dubya is absolutely correct, another incapable of anything other than Dubya is absolutely wrong and the firm belief that this somehow throws light on a complex and multi-layered issue. Fact is, both Civ and CTP have the same roots (Microprose) and have evolved along different paths. Both have strengths, both have weaknesses; they will appeal differently to different people. A good use of forum space would be how to incorporate the different strengths into each of the games through the editors to improve the gaming experience of both of the fan bases.

 

[Chris_b_89]

I hated the first Call To Power so much, I would never even think of wasting my hard earned money on the second one. BTW this poll is rigged.

 

[Higher Game]

I'm with Chris here. I payed 50 dollars for CTP when it came out, and I was shocked at how awful it was. I was so glad to hear it wasn't really a Civ title, just a rip off.

 

[Zouave]

Cultural borders are non-historic annoying nonsense.

The graphics with Civ 3? Just superficial lipstick on an old sow.


Cultural Flipping and Settler Diarhea are two of the craziest ideas anyone came up with who was not on hallucinogenics. I assume.


BTW, I paid fifty dollars in November for Civ 3 plus $14 for the joke Strategy Guide, not including tax, and I'm still chapped.

 

[Higher Game]

Get Sn00py's graphics mod. That will fix your problem.

Borders are definitely historic. Every country on Earth has a border. Duh? It makes more since than a huge sprawl of cities.