Civ3 conquests better with 'Rise and Rule' mod or as original game?
- Thread starter Gam
- Start date
mikehunt
Warlord
so far I'm loving RAR
tons more technology, units, improvements, and wonders
more than one type of pirate, not just the weak privateer, and they have decent attack ratings, which pirate ships should have
not being able to irrigate for quite a while takes some getting used to though, but as long as you remember to try to have at least a couple flood plains or grasslands tiles for each city the lack of irrigation isn't bad
tons more technology, units, improvements, and wonders
more than one type of pirate, not just the weak privateer, and they have decent attack ratings, which pirate ships should have
not being able to irrigate for quite a while takes some getting used to though, but as long as you remember to try to have at least a couple flood plains or grasslands tiles for each city the lack of irrigation isn't bad
DBear
unbeliever
I've played Rise and Rule, but probably not enough to have an opinion (I've never finished one). I just find the tech pace and the amount of builds dizzying.
RaR is awesome, but as the game goes on the AI gets more incompetent with it because of the changes made. Also, there are still many mistakes in the mod from what was intended. I prefer my own variant of Rhye's of Civ.
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
I'm afraid that poll will lead to nowhere.
IMHO you'd have to ask first if someone likes mods at all.
There a quite big comunnity of purists/cable modem users/ computer illiterates who simply prefer unmodded way over anything. And won't ever try a mod, so their opinion (while respected!) isn't based on knowledge, thus doesn't count
.
But then, I think there is a number of excellent mods, and depending on you personnal preferences (say, Fantasy=WH2; Builder=RaR; Warmonger=AU; World Map=Rhye's etc), such a mod may indeed be better for you than the unmodded game.
I for one consider unmodded C3C, the Firaxis' Conquests, and RaR all different games, and I like them all. So nothing gets my vote.
For PtW, however, I can say that I only enjoyed DyP. TEThurkan didn't run with my stone-age system, and other great full scale mods weren't around. And unmodded VC3/PtW offers a unit selection I hate, plus that stupid early map/contact-trading.
IMHO you'd have to ask first if someone likes mods at all.
There a quite big comunnity of purists/cable modem users/ computer illiterates who simply prefer unmodded way over anything. And won't ever try a mod, so their opinion (while respected!) isn't based on knowledge, thus doesn't count
.But then, I think there is a number of excellent mods, and depending on you personnal preferences (say, Fantasy=WH2; Builder=RaR; Warmonger=AU; World Map=Rhye's etc), such a mod may indeed be better for you than the unmodded game.
I for one consider unmodded C3C, the Firaxis' Conquests, and RaR all different games, and I like them all. So nothing gets my vote.
For PtW, however, I can say that I only enjoyed DyP. TEThurkan didn't run with my stone-age system, and other great full scale mods weren't around. And unmodded VC3/PtW offers a unit selection I hate, plus that stupid early map/contact-trading.
microbe
Cascaded Mansion
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2003
- Messages
- 4,596
I love RaR, but I still think the original conquests is better. It's more balanced. RaR IMHO is a bit too crowdy.
The reason some people find RaR is more fun is because they get tired of the original. However, you'd get tired of RaR as well at some point.
The reason some people find RaR is more fun is because they get tired of the original. However, you'd get tired of RaR as well at some point.
Similar threads
