Tag Archives: “review”
Game Review – Civilization Revolution (iOS, Windows Phone)
(Note: the NDS version of the game is similar to the mobile phone versions, but I have not played it and thus don’t know the differences. The console version is from what I can tell, completely different. This is also not a review of the more recent Civilization Revolution 2)
Civilization Revolution is a video game by Firaxis Games, made for consoles and mobile devices as opposed to the PC, where the game series usually resides. I have the iOS version of the game, so that’s what I’ll be discussing. The game uses touch controls, and is more similar to Civ IV and predecessors than Civ V and successors, though a bit toned down.

The gameplay is understandable to any who have played a Civ game. It isn’t as complex, but it gets the job done. The game is played on a randomly-generated map divided into squares (not hexes like Civ V). The squares are either land or water, and contain various resources. Players play as various civilizations (Romans, Zulu, Chinese, etc…) or more technically (an all-seeing, all-people-commanding, forever living god in the form of) a famous leader from that civilization (Napoleon, Cleopatra, Montezuma, Etc…) and compete against other civilizations to either: be the first to conquer all other capital cities; make the most gold and build the world bank; have a lot of culture and build the United Nations; or develop all of the technologies and reach Alpha Centauri. They can build cities and then buildings in those cities to give them bonuses, or use the cites to build units to make other cities, trade with other cities, explore the world (there are artifacts that can give one bonuses), or wage war on other civilizations or barbarians.

Cities themselves are only one square on the map for the purposes of combat, but can grow and influence an area around them, using resources to increase the food or production of a city. All of the various units have their own abilities, movement, and strength that can be upgraded after winning battles. Getting more technology allows one to build more advanced and stronger units. Land units can’t cross water in this version, but they can get in ships and be transported to various other places. Air units can’t land on ships, but can fly over mountains (among other things). There are various terrain benefits and deficits on the land, but they are relatively simple.

Unlike other versions of Civ, units do stack, meaning in theory an infinite amount of units can share the same square. The tech tree, also, while still there, has much less nuance than in the PC versions of the game. After meeting other civilizations, the player can also interact with the other leaders. This almost always leads to nothing, as they never have any knowledge. It looks like there was a much more ambitious inter-civilization interaction ability planned, but unfinished. At least in my version, the only way the player and other Civs interact is by going to war or stealing cities with culture. And nothing really seems to influence when others will go to war with you more than you just being in their way or the strongest player. Combat is also simplified: it is unit vs. unit (or army vs. army if units combine {3units of the same type to one army. They can’t be split after joining and die as one unit}), and one unit will be destroyed. The victor can be injured, but has a maximum of three hit-points and this decreases as tech becomes more advanced. A warrior has three hit points, a horseman two, but a tank or an infantry only has one. And a final, glaring difference between this and the PC versions is the nukes. One can only build one nuclear weapon, but it will destroy an entire city (except a capital) and all of the units in it, and in the 8 squares around it. I think that maybe being able to build two would be more fun, but I can see why they made the choice as it simplifies the nuclear aspect of the game, and being able to build multiple city-crushers might break the game.

The overall control is nice and intuitive. Some of it does need explanation, and getting into very specific city controls can require some menu navigating, but this is handled very well on default, and even on the hardest difficulty level I have completed the game many times without even thinking about messing with the default city settings. Units move easily, selectable options on what to build or what technology to research are large and easy to click or scroll through. Scrolling through stacked units can be a pain if there are quite a few (10 or more) but that rarely comes up, since units can be combined into more powerful armies. Looking around the map and plotting future courses for ships is also easy. The only real navigation problem comes with nuclear weapons, which can technically fire all over the world (I believe), but are difficult to launch past the screen they are created on (zooming out only helps a little).

Even with all of the simplifications, though, it’s still quite a complex and long game for phone play, and a full game will generally take several hours and most of your battery. It is possible to save multiple games (though I have yet to get mine to work: that’s my problem and not at all related to the game) and I would recommend that. Though if one can’t save, like me, or only wants to complete one game at a time, the game does a very good job of always loading up right where it left off. The game seems fairly processor-intensive and my phone does get hot while playing, and the game has at several points crashed on me. I’m running an older phone and the game brought me right back to where I was, so the problem was understandable and I couldn’t really get mad. The graphics and animation are generally nice and smooth and well defined. I’m not the biggest fan of the cartoon-y look, but it gets the job done and I’ve never really like Civ’s graphics anyway, nor have I played it for the graphics.

In the end this game does a great job of being “Civ on the go”. The empire building, invasion, and growth aspects are still there while trimming some of the things that would make some people more frustrated or confused with the larger game. I find that while I wish there was more depth at times, I’ve definitely kept coming back for more and I can certainly see how adding much more would make it an mobile-unfriendly game. It works well as a game, runs well on the platform, and is a great introduction into the Civilization series. If the games seem interesting I would certainly recommend this one both as a starting point or one to look out for.
Mildly Relevant Reviews – UB 9″ Travel Chess Set
Review – Expo Ultra-Fine Point Dry-Erase Markers
When it comes to dry erase markers, Expo is almost the only brand people recognize out there. Their chisel-tip markers are almost ubiquitous in any place that requires a white board, and are generally what people replace the cheap in-package markers from home magnetic boards with. And while I like the markers and always have, I do have a problem with their tip size. Even the fine point markers are large enough to be hard to use for people who like to write fine lines, like I do. Fortunately, there are slightly-less-popular, but still easily available Expo markers with an “ultra-fine” tip. Are they much better?

The body design is almost identical to the fine tip versions, with a slight taper from the middle to the ends. There is a step-down on the rear to allow for easy posting. There is also a step-down from where the cap is removed to the section. The cap and all of the writing on the pen is loosely in the color of the ink. The section can be a bit slippery, but it’s never a problem. It ends in a small cone with the point that is indeed very fine for a dry-erase marker. The information presented on the side is standard and useful enough.

The tip is very fine when compared to a regular fine marker. It gets down to a medium/broad on a regular ball or fountain pen. The ink flows smoothly and erases easily, as one would expect from the Expo brand. The black is the standard Expo black, and does the job. It doesn’t start to wash out at this size and is perfectly readable.

For anyone who needs to mark something with a bit of a finer point (like on a map), wants to write regularly on a dry-erase board, or for those who are artistically inclined and were frustrated when they couldn’t get the various line sizes they needed out of the more standard Expo markers, these work very well. They are of the same quality as the other markers in the line (which is to say as good or better than competitors) and offer a much smaller and more manageable line.
Comparison – Simply Tacky vs. Scotch Mounting Putty
When looking for some sticky tack to put that poster up on the wall without using push-pins, one usually looks for the Scotch brand. After all, they do know how to make things sticky. But one may also find Simply Tacky a (terribly named) product that does the same thing. Is it worth it to search for the right brand?


To start off with, both items come with very close to the same amount of product. The Scotch packaging is slightly smaller, and more packed with use information and diagrams. Both are cut into four similarly-sized bars. The Scotch is the only one with a weight limit (of 1lb). Both are quite white, and are easy to pull apart and shape to stick onto a surface. Both are very grippy, with the simply tacky being a little more malleable and aggressive. It breaks into pieces more easily, though.

As for what they can hold I’d say it’s about equal. The Scotch says it’s up to a pound, but they don’t tell you how much product to use. With a tiny, equally-sized bit of each product (weighing less than a gram) I was able to hold 70 grams (2.4 oz) easily, and I’ve held up to half a pound products stably up with enough (It will do up to a pound, but only in certain configurations of putty and object). Putting that same small piece of product up with a 7oz (198g) item, both failed fairly quickly with the Scotch maybe a little faster, but I’d chalk that up to my tests being not completely scientific.

Overall, I’d say both products are really the same on the user’s end. Their uses are the same, price can be more or less in favor of each brand depending on where one shops, and they hold almost equally well. If you’ve got a choice in the aisle, then I’d say take the cheaper one, but it’s not worth another trip to get the right brand.