Printable View
The first one. It's one of the first games I played again and again and again-- I played it from 2004 right up till when I caught the RTW bug in 2006.
Anyone else thinks it's awesome like hell? I played the second one briefly, and it was pretty good once I got past the whole star-systems-close-together thing, but I lacked the hardware to play it properly.
I though it was okay. Not bad, but not great either.
The AI was pretty good, and I appreciated the planetary governors. I didn't like that planets under 15Q were useless, however, nor that ships couldn't be grouped into actual fleets.
Also, I hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate hate HATE Terror Stars! I'm rather dismayed they're being reintroduced in the new Twilight of the Arnor expansion of GalCiv 2. :whip:
Well, Terror Stars aren't there every game, are they? I mean, considering the expense, I normally don't build them unless I'm really drowning in cash and far ahead the other races.
No matter how many new races they introduce, the first five will always be my favourites. They actually have distinct personalities, and their interaction with each other (and the player) was pretty cool. The Drath and Korx were nowhere as interesting, nor were the Iconians and the Thalans.
Also, although the graphics were admittedly a little simple, the depth of the game is impressive, especially if you elect not to go the Conquerer path. I like how they will grovel for peace if they're losing a war, or demand tribute if they happen to be the overlords. There's nothing more satisfying than tipping the balance of a long war by cajoling a major trade partner to join the war on your side.
I've always wanted to know how complex is the portrayal of space combat in gal civ 1. I think I've seen moo-like top down combat somewhere?! Ok, I'll accept that - but only if the actual mechanics of combat are as realistic as possible. I've never liked th huge 40 + ship "firing lines" from endgame moo...
Terror Stars aren't that bad in the TA expansion ('m playing the beta). They're intended as a mopping-up device for the late game stages, when you're already winning. With a few TS's roaming around, you don't have to waste time micro-managing troop ships and invasions for the last battles. Also they're just plain fun to use, especially if you're playing an evil race. ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Martok
They take a long time to build, so they can't be used as a sneak attack weapon by the AI unless you're not being careful monitoring enemy space. They have no defenses and have to be protected by a fleet, so they're easy to defend against, if your military can handle the enemy military at all. Take out the escorts, and any TS is a sitting duck.
If you don't want them in the game at all, it should be easy to mod them out with the new tech tree editor (see below). Just remove that whole line of research for all the races, and nobody can build them.
The big change in the TA expansion is that all the main races now have unique racial tech trees. A lot of the tech from the earlier game version is still there, but not everyone gets access to the same earlier tech, and every race has some unique techs that can't be traded or stolen. It means you now have to adopt different strategies for different races. That adds a lot of depth to the game. Unfortunately the unique racial techs don't extend to ship weapons and defenses, for the most part. It's the same rock/paper/scissors setup of lasers, mass drivers and missiles, with just a few names changed here and there. Some races do get additional, unique defensive techs though, which are interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirinus
There will also be a tech tree editor for setting up tech trees from scratch for any custom races you design. That should be interesting, although I'm sure there will be limits on what you can "invent" for a custom race. That part isn't in the beta yet, so I don't know exactly how it will work.
I didn't play the original version, but the tactical combat couldn't have been very good because it's very basic in the current GalCiv2. It's just eye candy to reflect the underlying number-crunching. You have no control over anything, you can only watch. Ships are way too close together, and maneuvering is unrealistic (no difference in apparent tactics between small ships and huge battleships). Weapon fire looks odd because weapons are fixed in place and not in turrets, but they still shoot in all directions. This isn't GalCiv's strong point, although the way you can design your own ships with 3D parts is way cool. It almost makes up for the silly space combat animations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikpalj
The real "action" in the game takes place on the strategic map and the diplomatic and economic management screens. So you'd probably want to skip the combat animation sequence if you're a purist and looking for realistic space combat... although I'm not sure that's ever been done well in a computer game!
Homeworld and Offworld Resource Base did space combat pretty well, I think.
But yes, I agree-- the real kick in the game isn't in the ship combat, but in the empire-management. I find it refreshing that the AI isn't simply given more money or something like that. With most games, we approach the AI with certain expectations-- even in RTW, for example, we expect that the AI will do some crazy, illogical stuff because of the coding, but in GalCiv, it's actually possible to treat the AIs as another human player. For example, if you're wondering what the AI might do, you only have to think: what would I do in this situation? and the AI will do just that, or some other clever manuever that might make you go "Oh snap!"