Polling the differences SMAC vs. CIV: CTP

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Polling the differences SMAC vs. CIV: CTP

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Polling the differences SMAC vs. CIV: CTP

UndertakerAPB posted 02-15-99 01:17 PM ET
SMAC CTP
3dfx- not enabled 3dfx-enabled
600 turns 2500+ turns
Custom units yes Custom units no
Lack Space involvement Has Space involvem
Ocean Cities yes Ocean cities /w
with mag tubes in the sea
Terraform great Terraform lacks little
Diplomacy irratic Diplomacy unknown
75 techs 125+ techs
Governors yes Governors yes
5 paths to victory Unknown
Futuristic Goverments Modern Goverments
7 factions 15 civilizations
5 Atrocities 11 Atrocites
World Proposals Unknown but look
out for them
Build Spacecrafts no Yes
Start wars in Space no Yes
Spacestations no Yes
Now these are a few differences between these two great rivals of the Civilization engine.I purchased SMAC to support the man who started it all Sid Meier,,bbbbbuuuuttttt Civilization: Call to Power has really captured my eye and I have 40/40 vision.I already reserved a copy of CTP: But if u can show good differences between the two I would love to know and so would the world...
Chairman of the Unknown Faction
Undertaker
UndertakerAPB posted 02-15-99 01:28 PM ET
That last post was not formatted properly here it is again...
SMAC
3dfx -no
600 turns
Custom units yes
Lack SPace involvement
Ocean cities
Terraform great and realistic
Diplomacy irratic
75 techs
Governors yes
5 paths to victory
Futuristic Governments
7 factions
5 Atrocities
World Proposals yes
Build Spacecrafts no
Wars in Space no
Spacestations no but do have Satellites
CIV: CTP
3dfx yes if u want to use it
2500+ turns
Custom units no but can adjust
Has incredible Space involvement
Ocean cities yes with mag tube transportation
Terraform lacks a little though
Diplomacy unkown
125+ techs
Governors yes
Unknown paths to victory but leaves u in suspense
Modern Governments
15 civilizations
11 Atrocites
World Proposals unknown but wait and see
Build Spacecraft yes even space transports
Wars in Space yep
Spacestations of course the spacecrafts need to park heheheh
Please give your reasonable differences between the two great rivals....
Prerogative posted 02-15-99 01:49 PM ET
I would consider the space element in SMAC signifigant. Shooting enemy satelites down and acknowledging the power of a good satelite network is very intregal to good warfare.
And, I've never heard of this, can you explain exactly HOW CTP is going to use 3dfx technology? The graphics all look like sprites and extremly simple polygons to me. I don't see how a 3dfx card could help there.
I don't think CTP takes place over 2500+ turns. Remember, the game goes 4000-3000. The first 4000 years would be over 160 or less turns (early phases of old Civ took place over 20 year periods, otherwise you could have spaceships by 1000 B.C.) And things would, most likely, still go at an accelerated rate for quite awhile. I myself would predict CTP will also have a 600-700 turn limit for scoring.
Personally, I think CTP is just trying to do too much. All those techs, all those governments, space, tactical combat, wages, work hours, monuments and wonders affecting gameplay, yadda yadda. While it all sounds nice on paper, so did Communism.
It remains to be seen if Activision can actually get it to WORK. If they can, great. But it certinely is going to be a difficult task.
MarkG posted 02-15-99 02:08 PM ET
Some corrections/additions on CTP
1) No need for 3dfx or anything like that. Graphics may look 3d but really are 2d.
2) 500 turns(5 ages, 100 turns each)
3) Diplomacy almost the same options as SMAC, big difference the lack of anything like smac's council
4) 100+ techs, not 125+(I think)
5) 2 patchs to victory(same as civ1/2, one militaristic and one pacifist)
6) 8 civs, 40 to choose from
7) 11 atrocities in ctp? where did you find that?
Markos, Apolyton CS
civilization.gamestats.com
UndertakerAPB posted 02-16-99 12:57 PM ET
Just because SMAC came out before CTP u shouldn't close your eyes to games which try to compete with there predecessors.And I personally think the space involvement in CTP looks alot more complex and alot more interesting.If u can build spacestations and spacecrafts in CTP u don't think satelittes will also be there.Now the 3dfx enabler is a rumor running around but I won't count on it so I would apoloize for bringing that up.And concerning the units in CTP --COMPUTER GAMING WORLD said it reminds them of the Command & Conquer or Total Annihilation units.Which I personally loved both of those games.The units in SMAC remind me of Railroad Tycoon for christ sake.Now coming to the atrocites there are about 9 to 11 of them these are just a few I found out on there site---- ECOTERRORIST, SLAVERY, INFECTORS, BIOLOGICAL,BIO-CHEMICAL,NUCLEAR,ANTIMATTER, ALL SORTS OF UNCONVENTIONAL WARFARE ARE IN CTP.THEY EVEN HAVE COMBINE WARFARE WERE U CAN HAVE BATTLESHIPS,DESTROYERS,ARTILLERY UNITS AND AIR UNITS COMBINE FORCES ON A TARGET."""Combine Warfare gentleman that sounds very very interesting."Yes the game is from 4000 B.C. to 3000 B.C. probably about 1300 to 1500 turns ,but that is 3X times more fun than in SMAC which ends in 2600A.D there is 400 more years of humanity going on in CTP.Now again these are a few differences between the two,and all I can ask u guys is to keep a open mind and at least download the demo when it comes out and u tell me if I was wrong.We all know Microprose really screwed over Sid.But that shouldn't keep us from buying a damn good stragety game......
will posted 02-16-99 02:37 PM ET
I will probably download the CTP demo, unless I'm too busy with SMAC. If it looks good, I'll buy the game, if only to support the TBS genre. Much of what I've heard sounds interesting, but it seems a little bit too gimmicky.
iratheous posted 02-16-99 03:04 PM ET
I can't wait for CTP. Since they seem to want to add many many useless techs and advancements just to have them (in the same way Total Anhiliation add's many useles units) I certainly hope they have a clinton. i'd like to sue him with my lawyer :p
Prerogative posted 02-16-99 04:55 PM ET
Undertaker, can you please try and use paragraphs next time? Reading everything in a jumble hurts my eyes...
Anyway, Markos himself said that the game takes place over 500 turns. And after reading the Gamespot review it was confirmed by Acti themselves.
Under, I'm not condemning CTP. But you have to admit, it is trying to do quite alot. All those atrocities, all those units, all those special types of warfare, all those techs, the wonders, the way monuments affect gameplay, the new style of government, unbreakable future societies. Undertaker, you have to admit that all of that and more is ALOT to cram into 500 turns, AND get to work. Great ideas are one thing, great realities are another.
I'll download the demo, but right now my view is pretty pessimistic.
And please explain, how do the units in SMAC remind you of RR Tycoon? If my memory isn't too foggy, I believe every train and car in RR Tycoon was a one or two color EGA block. How does that bare resemblance to Deathspheres and Tachyon Rovers?
I've had alot of expierence in bad games and good games. And one thing I've learned is that more doesn't equal better, keep that in mind Undertaker. If CTP is a great game, well great. I'll buy it. But I'm just trying to be real in world full of hype.
agoraphobe posted 02-16-99 05:27 PM ET
No Iratheous, it'll feature a President unit and a Special Prosecutor unit battling it out for a millenium, jes like real life...
But really, since this industry normally wastes 90% of its output on crappy clones and other garbage, I'm overjoyed when it manages to poop out even a halfway decent strategy game. Even if it's not the game of my dreams. It's unlikely that CTP will be a total bomb, so I'll no doubt buy it since I can afford it.
PrinceBimz posted 02-16-99 06:54 PM ET
Here are my opinions on the CTP vs SMAC issue: First lets say Sid Meier and Brian Reynolds are the Civ/Civ2 creators. They ARE the ones who created these great games. Game designing is an "art" that not all programmers have and I think these guys here are some of the best ever. Now I do understand that the CTP team are CIV fanatics, but do they have the knowledge and experience that Sid and Brian have? To try and copy or improve on a design by Sid and Brian seems to be a very tough job.
Now I too am waiting for CTP just as I done with SMAC. Yes CTP does sound really good and the BIG question will remain until the full version has been released, "Can they do it?". As for judging anything right now its really not possible at all. But what I can say NOW is that SMAC passes my tests and I am more than satisfied with it and I am sure that most of the CIV comunity will be. CTP is a wait and see and will remain that way until its release. If its really good like SMAC, then we will have a real CTP vs SMAC debate. But until then, this is an insignificant topic to me.
Apocalypse posted 02-16-99 08:25 PM ET
Just a reply to some of those first observions from Undertaker:
for the space stuff, SMAC has a lot of it so it isn't lacking.
Build Spacecrafts Sort of
Spacestations Yes
SMAC also has moon mining stations
WolfLord posted 02-16-99 10:15 PM ET

Undertaker, CTP may seem like a longer game (4000BC-3000AD), but its still only 500 turns. As for those "atrocities" you mentioned...they are not atrocities in the SMAC (realistically modeled) sense. What you pointed out are just units for unconventional warfare, not atrocities. Also the game seems to be lacking in diplomacy department which is only based off web "research" I did. I too am pessimistic about CTP. Though after reading the designers interview, it does look like it MAY be a halfway decent TBS game.
UndertakerAPB posted 02-16-99 11:37 PM ET
As I found out from the CTP forum most of the unconventional warfare items I mentioned,does automatically trigger war with other nations.

In my definition that is a atrocity,I have yet to find out if sanctions are in CTP but I wouldn't leave it out.And concerning space come on give me break.

The satellites in Alpha Centurai are corny at best.Remember according to the manual those are satellites up in orbit not mining stations.
And according to the CTP designers space has a major involvement in the game engine.Spacecrafts which u can fly to other colonies.You can even establish mining stations on asteriods for christ sake.SMAC has u dead set on one planet.
Cat posted 02-16-99 11:50 PM ET
I'm surprised that UAPB reserved a copy of Civ : CTP purely on the basis of the hype Though this is not a new phenomenon!). All very well to compare features but without having a working copy to play with (to spot bugs and/or find out that some features aren't all that hot anyway) it seems fairly pointless. And I suspect that many of the features in Civ : CTP will be overkill and/or rather pointless. More = Better? .. not always. I'll reserve final judgement until CTP actually comes out.
bradford posted 02-17-99 12:30 AM ET
About the differences between SMAC and CTP, I think that with all the new features CTP is introducing, they are going to mess something up along the way. I am afraid that the new conventional warfare may throw the balance of the game of completely. However, on the issue of spaceflight, i must agree with undertaker. SMAC has a small amount of space but i think that CTP will do that much better.
CTP could be a awesome game if they pull it off right, but that's an awfully big if.
Prerogative posted 02-17-99 12:35 AM ET
*sigh*
Undertaker, Undertaker... are you new to gaming? Or is this just your first time learning about an upcoming game?
Let me critique and counter-point.
1)
CTP space vs. SMAC space:
CTP contains Space Bombers and Space Marines which can move multiples of ten over squares per turn. Meaning Space Bombers could reach Europe from America in a turn or two. And then bombard those cities the next. Is that realisitc? Probably. Is that balanced? Heck no. To me, it looks like the end of CTP will dissolve into helpless deadlocked Space Fighter vs. Space Bomber patrols.
SMAC Satelites are not "corny at best." They are realistic and very important to combat.
Lose all your orbitals? Bam! You're blind, buddy.
Lose your defense sats.? Uh oh, here come the 'Busters.
Set up a big net of Energy/Minerals/Nutrients? What if your rival shoots them down? Your economy plummits, production stops and people starve.
Satelites may not move 20 squares per turn and be able to blow things up, but they are very important to the game.
Other Point:
"SMAC takes place on one planet for Christ's sake!"
Well, err, so does CTP to my knowledge. Y'know... Earth.
The other problem to that, is, are MORE planets better, Undertaker? Are MORE levels of combat better? Is MORE better to you, Undertaker? Under, I said it before I'll say it again. More does NOT equal better. Having three layers of combat going on can get confusing, frustrating even.
"CTP has more [insert stuff here.]"
Undertaker, ever heard of "hype?" Of course Activision is going to plug their own game. Maxis plugged "Sim HMO Director." I can say, with no fear, that Firaxis also plugged SMAC to the extreme. Heck, every game gets plugged and hyped to death. Accepting hype for fact is foolish. Instead, take the idea, dismantle it in your head and think if it works. I was pessimistic of SMAC too, but I played the demo and loved it. The same applies to CTP, it _remains_to_be_seen_ and just swallowing Activision-made Pro-Activision-hype is pure tomfoolery, atleast if you have shallow pockets like me.
"Hey, Activision Gamer says that Activision makes the best games!"
Get the idea?
"Modern Govt's"
They sound silly, and obtuse to me. Governments which I get stuck with for what I did in the past? Isn't that like an anti-Civ idea? I can't have free choice of my means and my goal. If I want a nice future, I gotta be a nice goody-twoshoes guy all the way. Way too limiting for me.

In closing of this tediously long post, Under, alot of things you've listed are more. It is the quality, not quantity, of the features that counts. And the only way to guage quality is to test drive the game. Not read hype from a website or look at screen shots. I took the same stance on SMAC, so I'm no anti-Activision guy. That is why I'm d/ling the demo before making a decision. It's why I d/led the SMAC demo before making a decision.
Gergi posted 02-17-99 02:25 PM ET
Prerogative said it best, "Quality not quantity".
I agree with Prerogative. I just want to echo his thoughts. He explained why he thinks SMAC is better much better than UndertakerAPB's "More in CTP, must be better" argument.
One thing I would add is, with all of that extra stuff in CTP that was not included in SMAC, play balance is going to be VERY hard to maintain. Maybe there's a reason Sid and Brian, two of the best, didn't include that kind of stuff.
Most of the stuff in CTP seems pretty silly to me too. Lawyers and eco-terrorists? While yes, there are plenty of lawyers and environment fanatics, I don't think they would have much of military use... In the case of eco-terrorists, um, if the world doesn't clean up it's act within the next hundred years, we won't be able to survive so for the world to last to 3000A.D or whatever,
the world will be environmentally sound so eco-terrorists wouldn't exist...
Just my thoughts...
tOFfGI posted 02-17-99 02:30 PM ET
You seem to have forgotten the most important difference:
SMAC
Sequel
CCTP
Remake
Nuff said.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Polling the differences SMAC vs. CIV: CTP
UndertakerAPB	posted 02-15-99 01:17 PM ET SMAC CTP 3dfx- not enabled 3dfx-enabled 600 turns 2500+ turns Custom units yes Custom units no Lack Space involvement Has Space involvem Ocean Cities yes Ocean cities /w with mag tubes in the sea Terraform great Terraform lacks little Diplomacy irratic Diplomacy unknown 75 techs 125+ techs Governors yes Governors yes 5 paths to victory Unknown Futuristic Goverments Modern Goverments 7 factions 15 civilizations 5 Atrocities 11 Atrocites World Proposals Unknown but look out for them Build Spacecrafts no Yes Start wars in Space no Yes Spacestations no Yes Now these are a few differences between these two great rivals of the Civilization engine.I purchased SMAC to support the man who started it all Sid Meier,,bbbbbuuuuttttt Civilization: Call to Power has really captured my eye and I have 40/40 vision.I already reserved a copy of CTP: But if u can show good differences between the two I would love to know and so would the world... Chairman of the Unknown Faction Undertaker
UndertakerAPB	posted 02-15-99 01:28 PM ET That last post was not formatted properly here it is again... SMAC 3dfx -no 600 turns Custom units yes Lack SPace involvement Ocean cities Terraform great and realistic Diplomacy irratic 75 techs Governors yes 5 paths to victory Futuristic Governments 7 factions 5 Atrocities World Proposals yes Build Spacecrafts no Wars in Space no Spacestations no but do have Satellites CIV: CTP 3dfx yes if u want to use it 2500+ turns Custom units no but can adjust Has incredible Space involvement Ocean cities yes with mag tube transportation Terraform lacks a little though Diplomacy unkown 125+ techs Governors yes Unknown paths to victory but leaves u in suspense Modern Governments 15 civilizations 11 Atrocites World Proposals unknown but wait and see Build Spacecraft yes even space transports Wars in Space yep Spacestations of course the spacecrafts need to park heheheh Please give your reasonable differences between the two great rivals....
Prerogative	posted 02-15-99 01:49 PM ET I would consider the space element in SMAC signifigant. Shooting enemy satelites down and acknowledging the power of a good satelite network is very intregal to good warfare. And, I've never heard of this, can you explain exactly HOW CTP is going to use 3dfx technology? The graphics all look like sprites and extremly simple polygons to me. I don't see how a 3dfx card could help there. I don't think CTP takes place over 2500+ turns. Remember, the game goes 4000-3000. The first 4000 years would be over 160 or less turns (early phases of old Civ took place over 20 year periods, otherwise you could have spaceships by 1000 B.C.) And things would, most likely, still go at an accelerated rate for quite awhile. I myself would predict CTP will also have a 600-700 turn limit for scoring. Personally, I think CTP is just trying to do too much. All those techs, all those governments, space, tactical combat, wages, work hours, monuments and wonders affecting gameplay, yadda yadda. While it all sounds nice on paper, so did Communism. It remains to be seen if Activision can actually get it to WORK. If they can, great. But it certinely is going to be a difficult task.
MarkG	posted 02-15-99 02:08 PM ET Some corrections/additions on CTP 1) No need for 3dfx or anything like that. Graphics may look 3d but really are 2d. 2) 500 turns(5 ages, 100 turns each) 3) Diplomacy almost the same options as SMAC, big difference the lack of anything like smac's council 4) 100+ techs, not 125+(I think) 5) 2 patchs to victory(same as civ1/2, one militaristic and one pacifist) 6) 8 civs, 40 to choose from 7) 11 atrocities in ctp? where did you find that? Markos, Apolyton CS civilization.gamestats.com
UndertakerAPB	posted 02-16-99 12:57 PM ET Just because SMAC came out before CTP u shouldn't close your eyes to games which try to compete with there predecessors.And I personally think the space involvement in CTP looks alot more complex and alot more interesting.If u can build spacestations and spacecrafts in CTP u don't think satelittes will also be there.Now the 3dfx enabler is a rumor running around but I won't count on it so I would apoloize for bringing that up.And concerning the units in CTP --COMPUTER GAMING WORLD said it reminds them of the Command & Conquer or Total Annihilation units.Which I personally loved both of those games.The units in SMAC remind me of Railroad Tycoon for christ sake.Now coming to the atrocites there are about 9 to 11 of them these are just a few I found out on there site---- ECOTERRORIST, SLAVERY, INFECTORS, BIOLOGICAL,BIO-CHEMICAL,NUCLEAR,ANTIMATTER, ALL SORTS OF UNCONVENTIONAL WARFARE ARE IN CTP.THEY EVEN HAVE COMBINE WARFARE WERE U CAN HAVE BATTLESHIPS,DESTROYERS,ARTILLERY UNITS AND AIR UNITS COMBINE FORCES ON A TARGET."""Combine Warfare gentleman that sounds very very interesting."Yes the game is from 4000 B.C. to 3000 B.C. probably about 1300 to 1500 turns ,but that is 3X times more fun than in SMAC which ends in 2600A.D there is 400 more years of humanity going on in CTP.Now again these are a few differences between the two,and all I can ask u guys is to keep a open mind and at least download the demo when it comes out and u tell me if I was wrong.We all know Microprose really screwed over Sid.But that shouldn't keep us from buying a damn good stragety game......
will	posted 02-16-99 02:37 PM ET I will probably download the CTP demo, unless I'm too busy with SMAC. If it looks good, I'll buy the game, if only to support the TBS genre. Much of what I've heard sounds interesting, but it seems a little bit too gimmicky.
iratheous	posted 02-16-99 03:04 PM ET I can't wait for CTP. Since they seem to want to add many many useless techs and advancements just to have them (in the same way Total Anhiliation add's many useles units) I certainly hope they have a clinton. i'd like to sue him with my lawyer :p
Prerogative	posted 02-16-99 04:55 PM ET Undertaker, can you please try and use paragraphs next time? Reading everything in a jumble hurts my eyes... Anyway, Markos himself said that the game takes place over 500 turns. And after reading the Gamespot review it was confirmed by Acti themselves. Under, I'm not condemning CTP. But you have to admit, it is trying to do quite alot. All those atrocities, all those units, all those special types of warfare, all those techs, the wonders, the way monuments affect gameplay, the new style of government, unbreakable future societies. Undertaker, you have to admit that all of that and more is ALOT to cram into 500 turns, AND get to work. Great ideas are one thing, great realities are another. I'll download the demo, but right now my view is pretty pessimistic. And please explain, how do the units in SMAC remind you of RR Tycoon? If my memory isn't too foggy, I believe every train and car in RR Tycoon was a one or two color EGA block. How does that bare resemblance to Deathspheres and Tachyon Rovers? I've had alot of expierence in bad games and good games. And one thing I've learned is that more doesn't equal better, keep that in mind Undertaker. If CTP is a great game, well great. I'll buy it. But I'm just trying to be real in world full of hype.
agoraphobe	posted 02-16-99 05:27 PM ET No Iratheous, it'll feature a President unit and a Special Prosecutor unit battling it out for a millenium, jes like real life... But really, since this industry normally wastes 90% of its output on crappy clones and other garbage, I'm overjoyed when it manages to poop out even a halfway decent strategy game. Even if it's not the game of my dreams. It's unlikely that CTP will be a total bomb, so I'll no doubt buy it since I can afford it.
PrinceBimz	posted 02-16-99 06:54 PM ET Here are my opinions on the CTP vs SMAC issue: First lets say Sid Meier and Brian Reynolds are the Civ/Civ2 creators. They ARE the ones who created these great games. Game designing is an "art" that not all programmers have and I think these guys here are some of the best ever. Now I do understand that the CTP team are CIV fanatics, but do they have the knowledge and experience that Sid and Brian have? To try and copy or improve on a design by Sid and Brian seems to be a very tough job. Now I too am waiting for CTP just as I done with SMAC. Yes CTP does sound really good and the BIG question will remain until the full version has been released, "Can they do it?". As for judging anything right now its really not possible at all. But what I can say NOW is that SMAC passes my tests and I am more than satisfied with it and I am sure that most of the CIV comunity will be. CTP is a wait and see and will remain that way until its release. If its really good like SMAC, then we will have a real CTP vs SMAC debate. But until then, this is an insignificant topic to me.
Apocalypse	posted 02-16-99 08:25 PM ET Just a reply to some of those first observions from Undertaker: for the space stuff, SMAC has a lot of it so it isn't lacking. Build Spacecrafts Sort of Spacestations Yes SMAC also has moon mining stations
WolfLord	posted 02-16-99 10:15 PM ET Undertaker, CTP may seem like a longer game (4000BC-3000AD), but its still only 500 turns. As for those "atrocities" you mentioned...they are not atrocities in the SMAC (realistically modeled) sense. What you pointed out are just units for unconventional warfare, not atrocities. Also the game seems to be lacking in diplomacy department which is only based off web "research" I did. I too am pessimistic about CTP. Though after reading the designers interview, it does look like it MAY be a halfway decent TBS game.
UndertakerAPB	posted 02-16-99 11:37 PM ET As I found out from the CTP forum most of the unconventional warfare items I mentioned,does automatically trigger war with other nations. In my definition that is a atrocity,I have yet to find out if sanctions are in CTP but I wouldn't leave it out.And concerning space come on give me break. The satellites in Alpha Centurai are corny at best.Remember according to the manual those are satellites up in orbit not mining stations. And according to the CTP designers space has a major involvement in the game engine.Spacecrafts which u can fly to other colonies.You can even establish mining stations on asteriods for christ sake.SMAC has u dead set on one planet.
Cat	posted 02-16-99 11:50 PM ET I'm surprised that UAPB reserved a copy of Civ : CTP purely on the basis of the hype Though this is not a new phenomenon!). All very well to compare features but without having a working copy to play with (to spot bugs and/or find out that some features aren't all that hot anyway) it seems fairly pointless. And I suspect that many of the features in Civ : CTP will be overkill and/or rather pointless. More = Better? .. not always. I'll reserve final judgement until CTP actually comes out.
bradford	posted 02-17-99 12:30 AM ET About the differences between SMAC and CTP, I think that with all the new features CTP is introducing, they are going to mess something up along the way. I am afraid that the new conventional warfare may throw the balance of the game of completely. However, on the issue of spaceflight, i must agree with undertaker. SMAC has a small amount of space but i think that CTP will do that much better. CTP could be a awesome game if they pull it off right, but that's an awfully big if.
Prerogative	posted 02-17-99 12:35 AM ET sigh Undertaker, Undertaker... are you new to gaming? Or is this just your first time learning about an upcoming game? Let me critique and counter-point. 1) CTP space vs. SMAC space: CTP contains Space Bombers and Space Marines which can move multiples of ten over squares per turn. Meaning Space Bombers could reach Europe from America in a turn or two. And then bombard those cities the next. Is that realisitc? Probably. Is that balanced? Heck no. To me, it looks like the end of CTP will dissolve into helpless deadlocked Space Fighter vs. Space Bomber patrols. SMAC Satelites are not "corny at best." They are realistic and very important to combat. Lose all your orbitals? Bam! You're blind, buddy. Lose your defense sats.? Uh oh, here come the 'Busters. Set up a big net of Energy/Minerals/Nutrients? What if your rival shoots them down? Your economy plummits, production stops and people starve. Satelites may not move 20 squares per turn and be able to blow things up, but they are very important to the game. Other Point: "SMAC takes place on one planet for Christ's sake!" Well, err, so does CTP to my knowledge. Y'know... Earth. The other problem to that, is, are MORE planets better, Undertaker? Are MORE levels of combat better? Is MORE better to you, Undertaker? Under, I said it before I'll say it again. More does NOT equal better. Having three layers of combat going on can get confusing, frustrating even. "CTP has more [insert stuff here.]" Undertaker, ever heard of "hype?" Of course Activision is going to plug their own game. Maxis plugged "Sim HMO Director." I can say, with no fear, that Firaxis also plugged SMAC to the extreme. Heck, every game gets plugged and hyped to death. Accepting hype for fact is foolish. Instead, take the idea, dismantle it in your head and think if it works. I was pessimistic of SMAC too, but I played the demo and loved it. The same applies to CTP, it _remains_to_be_seen_ and just swallowing Activision-made Pro-Activision-hype is pure tomfoolery, atleast if you have shallow pockets like me. "Hey, Activision Gamer says that Activision makes the best games!" Get the idea? "Modern Govt's" They sound silly, and obtuse to me. Governments which I get stuck with for what I did in the past? Isn't that like an anti-Civ idea? I can't have free choice of my means and my goal. If I want a nice future, I gotta be a nice goody-twoshoes guy all the way. Way too limiting for me. In closing of this tediously long post, Under, alot of things you've listed are more. It is the quality, not quantity, of the features that counts. And the only way to guage quality is to test drive the game. Not read hype from a website or look at screen shots. I took the same stance on SMAC, so I'm no anti-Activision guy. That is why I'm d/ling the demo before making a decision. It's why I d/led the SMAC demo before making a decision.
Gergi	posted 02-17-99 02:25 PM ET Prerogative said it best, "Quality not quantity". I agree with Prerogative. I just want to echo his thoughts. He explained why he thinks SMAC is better much better than UndertakerAPB's "More in CTP, must be better" argument. One thing I would add is, with all of that extra stuff in CTP that was not included in SMAC, play balance is going to be VERY hard to maintain. Maybe there's a reason Sid and Brian, two of the best, didn't include that kind of stuff. Most of the stuff in CTP seems pretty silly to me too. Lawyers and eco-terrorists? While yes, there are plenty of lawyers and environment fanatics, I don't think they would have much of military use... In the case of eco-terrorists, um, if the world doesn't clean up it's act within the next hundred years, we won't be able to survive so for the world to last to 3000A.D or whatever, the world will be environmentally sound so eco-terrorists wouldn't exist... Just my thoughts...
tOFfGI	posted 02-17-99 02:30 PM ET You seem to have forgotten the most important difference: SMAC Sequel CCTP Remake Nuff said.