Any complaints about Conquest?

[Dis]

I kind of figured out the hall of fame.

pressing the o button (lower right) brings you to another screen in the hall of fame. It would have been nice if that was clearer. But now I know it makes no difference.

So far, I like the scenarios.

[Dis]

Is it me, or is there no civil war scenario.

How can you have a civ game with no american civil war scenario?

[Dis]

I forgot my biggest complaint

lack of sleep

[Traelin]

Originally posted by vmxa1
It is hard to say. I don't know if they are trading or getting free tech from being first. Some civs are way behind, some are doing fine.
Maybe someone running a debug game can speak to that.

Sheesh in my current game (Emperor) I discovered the latter 1/3 of the the IA and entire MA first, yet I still didn't get a SGL. I wonder what the probability is of getting one?

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Dissident
Is it me, or is there no civil war scenario.

How can you have a civ game with no american civil war scenario?

Agreed, Dissident. I normally don't care too much for scenarios, but a Civil War one would kick arse. IIRC there was a good one for Civ2 that I really enjoyed.

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by joncnunn
1A. US also at war with Germany; off map resources of the US assumed to be going towards European front (Remember that the US decieded upon Germany first.)

The fact that is Japan had won Midway won have led to a reallocation of production that was headed to Europe to the Pacific instead until that is resolved is outside the scope of a scenerio focusing on the pacfic.

1B. Duh, US cities on the west cost in the 1941 weren't well developed, especally compared to the east.

1C. Historically accurcute. UK was if anything withdrawing units from that theatre in 1942.

rest of 1: No comment, haven't played the conquest yet.

2. There is a multi-player version of the conquest and it does have accel prod on.

3. Build them yourself if you want them. I think that having very few worker units in Dec 1941 is historically accurate for the US. The CBs had to be mobilized (represented in the game by building them) as well. As I recall, the Roman Legion UU can build roads in that conquest.

1. The actual resources of the US were split approx 50-50 vis-a-vis the respective theater, however only 10-15% of the US is shown (and as you point out the LEAST developed part). San Francisco was the MOST developed city on the west coast but it is the one city lacking a factory? Finally the entire Atlantic fleet (3 Carriers, 8 BB & 15 CA as well as numerous destroyers) are not even depicted in the game even though most of these ships played major (several even critical) roles in the Pacific war (only the Carrier Ranger and the Battleship Arkansas remained in the Atlantic for the entire length of the war. )

Finally most ships were built on the east coast and were sent to the pacific via the panama canal; including every Fleet Carrier and every Battleship serving in WW2. And to top it all off the US has to research Amphibious warfare even though the US marines have been conducting amphibious invasions since the Mexican-American war. As for the Brits they are historically modeled but an unsatisfactory option to play

On whole I am simply unimpressed with the design, the scope, the flagrent inacuracies and the absurd play of the scenerio, the only way this scenerio could be fixed is to completely overhaul it, which, despite my desire to do so, I lack the modding expertise for.

The comment on wokers is related to all scenerios, sure I can build them, but most of the scenerios are designed as a unit production game with too limited means to roduce them adequately. Most scenerios have 10-12 cities, but less than 5 workers. In games that I play I build at least 1 worker per city, and usually many more. Then the tiles that have already been worked have usually been done poorly and have to be redone.

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Traelin


Agreed, Dissident. I normally don't care too much for scenarios, but a Civil War one would kick arse. IIRC there was a good one for Civ2 that I really enjoyed.

Just as long as its done right, but if its done like the WW2 pacifc scenerio the map of the north would stop at southern pennsylvania and would have about 4 or 5 tiles railroaded with 2 workers

[Dis]

I agree on production. Reno is the biggest mineral city!!

Reno was nothing back then. It still is nothing. It has a naval air station nearby (not sure if it was there in ww2).

SF should be #1. San Diego should be decent, followed by Seattle.

I would have liked to see Las Vegas on the map. Not only because I live there, but because we did have an air force base (used for traning mostly), and Henderson did supply war materials for the war effort. And of course locating the Hoover Damn there would have been nice.

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Dissident
I agree on production. Reno is the biggest mineral city!!

Reno was nothing back then. It still is nothing. It has a naval air station nearby (not sure if it was there in ww2).

SF should be #1. San Diego should be decent, followed by Seattle.

I would have liked to see Las Vegas on the map. Not only because I live there, but because we did have an air force base (used for traning mostly), and Henderson did supply war materials for the war effort. And of course locating the Hoover Damn there would have been nice.

Problem with Vegas is that it was a hick town in the middle of the desert until the mob (a portion of it anyway) got ran out of NY in the late 40's and early 50's. Believe it or not the next most productive city in the west (after SF & Seatle) during the 1940's was Salt Lake City ( of course that isn't shown either)

[Dis]

well I wasn't saying it would be a productive town. But there is room on the map for it I believe. Just barely- though some city squares would be cut off. There certainly would be no factory. Only a library, marketplace, airport, and temple.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dissident
Is it me, or is there no civil war scenario.

How can you have a civ game with no american civil war scenario?

Neither Civ1 or Civ2 came with one, so it looks like that's how!

[Dis]

ahh but the first civ2 expansion had one.

[Catt]

The bonus CD has a civil war scenario, though I haven't looked at it. The scenario was provided by cdgroup.org if you don't have the bonus CD.

Catt

[ShadeRage]

My main complaints are: 1. From what i can tell you can no longer trade maps with other countrys like in the original civ3
2. Seems like none of the new wonder show up in the city view
3. Seems like resources are really scarce compared to the original civ3

[Selanne]

Sigh another bug in the map editor. All the overlays (barbarian huts, irrigiation, mines etc) but not rivers have disapperared from all my maps. They're there, but they are invisible in the editor but not in the game.

[alva]

My main complaints are: 1. From what i can tell you can no longer trade maps with other countrys like in the original civ3

Still can, just need a different tech now

[Greg1]

My biggest beef is that, as with earlier versions of the game, the editor doesn't give me access to animations that aren't in the main game, even if they are in the scenarios. For instance, if I want to build a scenario using the warrior monk unit from the Sengoku Japan scenario, I'm out of luck (unless I learn how to program). I get the option of having a new unit represented in the city screen by the warrior monk icon, but bizarrely, choosing that icon doesn't give me the associated animation when the unit is built, but a crash instead. Grr!

How hard would it have been to tie the icons to the associated animations? Indeed, why bother to make the icons available if they *aren't* going to be tied to the associated animations?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Greg1
My biggest beef is that, as with earlier versions of the game, the editor doesn't give me access to animations that aren't in the main game, even if they are in the scenarios. For instance, if I want to build a scenario using the warrior monk unit from the Sengoku Japan scenario, I'm out of luck (unless I learn how to program). I get the option of having a new unit represented in the city screen by the warrior monk icon, but bizarrely, choosing that icon doesn't give me the associated animation when the unit is built, but a crash instead. Grr!

How hard would it have been to tie the icons to the associated animations? Indeed, why bother to make the icons available if they *aren't* going to be tied to the associated animations?

You're mistaken--you can have the animations for those units. It is, however, a bit of a tedious process. After you add them in the editor, you have to go into the pediaicons.txt and civilopedia.txt files and add entries for them, and you have to link to the proper scenario folder from the scenario properties screen.

[spy14]

My 2 issues as yet are lack of diplomacy upgrades, and (more frustratingly) the fact that a lot of the combat results are still... odd.

[mimi]

Yep... I have a complaint.

Marshes.

Marshes = Tedium

And what, really, is the point of all these new terrain features? Seems like a waste of energy. Why not just increase the frequency of, say, cows and not spend time programming sugar or tobacco or whatever the heck else is there. (Don't even know what they do since it's rather rare I see them through the marshes I live in.)

[Snotty]

I was told not to use regicide against the AI when playing PTW because it did not understand the victory conditions.

Has this been addressed in conquests?

I was just playing the medeaval conquest as the danes. I felt like a good pillage and so started harrassing the french coast. I battered one city down and its final defender was its king unit. I had to wait until next turn to attack again.

I expected the AI to flee with its valueable king unit as it would be certain death to stay against my unharmed vetern berserks. Only the AI didnt flee with its unit. It just stayed there.

If you are going to make conquests that have AI king units then you have to tweak the AI so it knows how best to use them.

[Dis]

Originally posted by mimi
Yep... I have a complaint.

Marshes.

Marshes = Tedium

And what, really, is the point of all these new terrain features? Seems like a waste of energy. Why not just increase the frequency of, say, cows and not spend time programming sugar or tobacco or whatever the heck else is there. (Don't even know what they do since it's rather rare I see them through the marshes I live in.)

that's boring. They want to add diversity to the game. There are already to many cows for my tastes

[Dis]

Originally posted by Snotty
I was told not to use regicide against the AI when playing PTW because it did not understand the victory conditions.

Has this been addressed in conquests?

I was just playing the medeaval conquest as the danes. I felt like a good pillage and so started harrassing the french coast. I battered one city down and its final defender was its king unit. I had to wait until next turn to attack again.

I expected the AI to flee with its valueable king unit as it would be certain death to stay against my unharmed vetern berserks. Only the AI didnt flee with its unit. It just stayed there.

If you are going to make conquests that have AI king units then you have to tweak the AI so it knows how best to use them.

playing the third Intro scenario on Conquests sees them at least defending their King. Both opponents put their King in their capitol which was probably their best defended city. Though one complaint was when I approached their capitol with an overwhelming force, they did not have their King flee their capitol. It would be dangerous to be caught in the open. But they have a movement of 2 I believe, and their roads were still connected. There were other cities within reach.

So taking their capitol resulted in the complete destruction of their empire. The bad thing about this is I don't have to worry about retaliation from the ai, while I battle the other civ in that scenario.

[Snotty]

In the Napoleon conquest the British city of Gibraltar seems to be founded on plains. I was expecting it to be based on hills at least, or maybe even on a mountain. The defense bonus would be accurate, and it could still perform its important port functions.

[Dis]

I have another possible complaint

hall of fame.

is it me or does the hall of fame for scenarios not get updated after you finish the successfully the first time?

It is posible I scored a lower score than my other victory though. I was playing as the Aztec in the Age of Discovery scenerio and won by a single city cultural victory. But I only had 6 cities, so it is possible my score was lower despite playing 2 difficulty levels higher than my original victory points victory with the Spanish.

[BulMaster]

My sole complaint for now is that the dip problem is still not fix it has worse. I'm tired for the AI to remind who i betrayed and on the same do it on and the other AIs and only be bothered by my betrayal. They should make the AI forget after some time. It's annoying to be reminded in 19**ad that you betrayed somebody in 3000BC :S. That's my view though you might be happy with it I'm not and now even you havn't met a civ when you betrayed somebody it seems to know :S somehow!

Not forget I WANT MY SPIES NOT A CRAPY INTELLIGENCE THINGY THAT COSTS MONEY I MISS THE PLANE NUCLEAR DEVICE FROM CIV2 :'(

[dnassman]

I only have two complaints but I have much more positive things to say about conquests. The AI is much better a combat for starters. It is great.

Ok back to my problems.
Signed a MPP with Byzantine, they were polite to me, next turn they declared war on me. Never had this happen before. Annoying.

SGL have been complained about a lot. Played as Persians, basically leading techs from the start as playing on regent. Beat other civs to all techs. Almost finish reserching Industrial???(Tanks etc) age and still no SGL.

[Brundlefly]

I have a complaint: I spend too much time playing it!

[needle]

Where is Brian Boru, Gods' damnit!?

[Shogun Gunner]

I really don't have any complaints about Conquest. There are little things here or there, but I would classify them as "Civ 3 issues". Conquests is what Civ3 vanilla should have been.

I guess I'm already thinking about Civ4 and what dramatic changes will be introduced there....eighteen to twenty-four months in the future if we are lucky...