Posted on: October 17, 2010
Casca_O
Bestätigter BesitzerSpiele: Rezensionen: 2
The Non-Conformist's Civilization
There is nothing this game has done that the equivalent Civilization game has not done better. It is a game that was simply trying to cash in on the popularity of Sid Meier's frankly genre inspiring game without any of the historical consideration. We all know how Civ works: Turn based, socioeconomic development, World Wonder building, technological advancement and world domination. There's little need to explain that. But we can look at each of those elements in turn. Turn based: One might not think there's much to be said for turn based strategy but look at games like Master of Orion, Civilization and even a handful of RPGs ad you can see there are a lot options available to you. Call to Power makes this system clumsy. From time to time, at completely random, the game may choose to skip turns ad nauseum, ignoring completed units or buildings or even construction queues. Then at other times the game will refuse to skip turns even if you have no active units, no rival nations in contact with you and all of your cities with a wonder in the works. I'm sure there's some sort of logic to the way it works but as a player I feel that I should not have to research on how to end a game turn. Socioeconomic Development: This is the one place where the game shines. Developing the economies of individual cities was easier. With the ability to use a portion of your national income to make public works, you could build farms and roads and mines simply and easily with a more obvious return on your investment. Additionally you could influence the various occupations and habits of your citizens in order to modify your income, food, tech or building production rates and your overall happiness. Also it was one of the earlier games to use to the city/national borders system and did it well. World Wonders: There are lots of World Wonders in this game. Some of them make sense. Some of them do not. They were a lot more inclusive that Civilization's choices which were more Euro-Asian in theme. But like Civilization some of them were just not very useful or didn't very well represent the person or place they were based off of very well. Technological advancement: A year before Call to Power was released, the Civilization Series re-released Civilization two as "Test of Time". Test of Time included futuristic, science-fiction, and high fantasy timelines to play through. The futuristic timeline was much like the timeline of Call to Power allowing for space and aquatic colonization. The technologies in Civilization were also, seemingly, more important. World Domination: Call to Power's combat is odd. Though I like the army building feature the limit of 12 units per square, regardless of its terrain or status seems poorly implimented. For example in a city with 41 million (assuming the numerical rating indicates the size of the population in millions) people there should be enough room for much more than five thousand (assuming that the average size of a military unit is somewhere between 100 and 1000 soldiers or that equivalent in equipment) troops. In fact. In a city of 41 million a few hundred thousand troops shouldn't be difficult to garrison (particularly if there's no third amendment rights). Fort Huachuca at which I was was based for a short time had thousands of military personnel and it was a pretty small base adjacent to a pretty small town. Also the disparity between the combat strengths of certain units made the choices a leader would make rather irrelevant (Equivalent units of the same tech level should be balanced. A defense unit should not be able to seige a town filled with assault units and an assualt unit should not be able to rout a defense unit in a town.) Frankly there's just too much wrong with game not to go out and find a copy of any Sid Meier game and play that instead.
Hilft dir das weiter?
