"This game is so addictive only buy it if you have many many hours to lose!"

Sid Meier's Civilisation II is, in my opinion, the ultimate strategy game. I had CivI with its dreadfully basic graphics and limited gameplay and lost many hours (which I could have spent working) to it: CivII is a vast improvement.
You begin as a nomadic band of wanderers and settle down in your first city. Assuming that you have picked a random map, you have no idea where your opponents are or of the surrounding terrain. Gradually, you expand and build new cities and come into contact with other civilisations whom you either befriend (generally involving trade), tolerate or with whom you go to war.
CivII allows you to pick scenarios as well: you can pick Earth as a map (if you do so, don't select the Babylonian civilisation as they have no chance; isolated civilisations such as the Aztecs or Zulu have a much better chance of becoming established before coming into contact with warlike neighbours). There is also a WWII scenario (where the odds are stacked in the favour of either Axis or Allies) and an ancient Rome scenario.
Pros
The game is replayable ad infinitum.
There is a greater range of opponents in CivII c.f. CivI
The range of 'winning' strategies are greater.
Great technology advance graphics (the first time you see them - after that, they are a pain - turn them off)
Combat is much improved over CivI in two respects: units become exhausted and tired units fight worse; secondly, newer technology has the edge over older numbers of units. Since a column of tanks would beat hordes of warriors armed with sticks, this makes sense.
There is a new 'spy' unit which acts as a diplomat/terrorist. This is a great leap forward as CivI was a bit limited on the diplomacy front.
Trade is facilitated by the use of caravans or freight and depends on the resources actually found within that city. (However, this is still restricted to three trade lines per city: why? A great city could trade in everything, whether produced there or not - Amsterdam is a big diamond centre despite the absence of diamond mines in the Netherlands)
Cons
The Wonders of the World (advances such as the Eiffel Tower which improve the feelgood factor in your civilisation and often offer a civilisation advantage) offer too great an advantage - especially Leonardo's Workshop which upgrades all out-of-date units to the newer unit. Your civilisation will benefit so much from having this that attacking any city that is making it, whether you have a desire to go to war or not, is worth it.
Certain civilisations have certain characteristics that dictate how you play against them and there is little variety. For example, the Chinese (or Babylonians) seem to have little expansionist drive: they remain static for a long time, the Greeks or Russians are not to be trusted at any cost and both the Russians and the Mongols are extremely aggressive. The Americans, on the other hand, are civilised, trustworthy and become democratic and achieve technological dominance before going to war (Can I guess the nationality of the writers here?)
My megalomaniac side misses the history map at the end of CivI: I enjoyed seeing the progressive world conquest of my civilisation (if you don't have any megalomaniac tendencies, get a Barney game!)
If you enter into an alliance with a 'friendly' civilisation, they can occupy a strategic square on your map (eg a railway cross section, or a narrow bottleneck of land) and effectively cut your civilisation in half. The only solution is to go to war with people with whom you were allied previously, purely to regain movement in your own territory!
Areas for improvement
Diplomacy is limited. You have no control over with whom you trade (thus, America would be forced to trade with Iraq if an Iraqi caravan arrived in New York, even during the Gulf War!) Once embassies are established, they cannot be ended (if you are at war, you should be able to kick the ambassador out). Any action against enemy civilisations is limited to war or specific action against a specific city: if you could 'fund' the opposition in a rival civilisation, causing higher levels of unrest, this would improve the game and make it more realistic (ask the CIA!)
Conclusion
In summary, this is the best strategy game around and you should own this (unless you need sleep or have to work!) However, there are limits and some loopholes that facilitate a victory that one does not deserve.

Reviewer's Score: 9/10, Originally Posted: 04/12/02, Updated 04/12/02