Worst BTS scenario?

The worst one is the one they didn't do, Age of Discovery! Why else would they include Portugal, Netherlands, Maya, and Soiux as new Civs and not include some sort of "Settle the New World" senario? I would have rather had Austria-Hungary, Italy or Poland.

davbenbak:

I almost converted my vanilla Age of Discovery mod for BtS. But since the start I've wanted to do WW2.

Road to War is the vanilla Desert War I wasn't allowed to do back then.

Thanks Dale. Can't wait. I'll have to start watching the AOD forum again.

Dale,

That should be fun, especially with the ability to grant independence to colonies and the like. If you toss in a few historical events, would be fun to fight the American Revolution - English vs American style.

GoliathFF8 said:

I voted Defense. Don't get me wrong, it is EXTREMELY fun and enjoyable. However those Suicide Grenadiers just ruin the game, since they are so incredibly broken it's not even funny.

Click to expand...

Build bombard units, suicide grens are easy!

Afterworld should have been a normal zombie game with Wisconsin farmgirls, policemen, and mall ship owners! It's kind of difficult to relate to tentacle ghost robots.

Also Road to War would be better if turns didn't take 4 minutes to cycle.

The Road to War. I hated it, of the scenario's i played. It's inaccurate

From what I've played so far I can say this:

1) Final frontier: Unplayable. Clicking on certain leaderheads or meeting certain leaders in-game causes a CTD. Might be a good mod, I don't know.

2) Next war: epic game is pretty cool. But the actual scenario kind of sucks. Like someone before said, the Civs are unrealistic. I particularly don't like the "Southern Empire"- it just seems like a lazy catch-all Civ for the Third World, and how can it be the most powerful nation when it is made up of third world countries??? I also find the future-history background unrealistic ("One-world Government"? Gimme a break! ). And why are the civs still at a circa 2000CE level of technology in 2050?? Also, the Mech becomes all but invisible when it is moving- must be a graphics bug.
Aside from that, I don't think enough detail was put in to the future era- they still have the modern-age digital Soren clock on the "You have entered the future era!" popup- why not some futuristic holographic clock or something?- and there is not enough future-ish sounding music for the future era. The architecture of the cities doesn't change for the Future era either- I would expect the skyscapers to look just a bit sexier and a bit more tomorrow-ish, it doesn't have to be anything too out-there. Then again, the cities with arcology shielding look really good!

3) FFH- I enjoyed this scenario, but when I finished it I thought "is that it?". I hope a full FFH mod is made for BTS (and that it is small enough to fit on my memory stick!). Fun Fact- my Hero unit lost against Mulcarn the first time despite the odds of a victory for my Hero being 99.7%!

4) Crossroads; started playing this as the Ethiopians, got bored pretty quickly. I guess I just wasn't in the right mood at the time....might give it another chance later.

I don't know which one is the worst because I haven't played them all yet.

I don't understand why so many have voted Afterworld. Of course I'm sligtly biased since my all time favourite game is X-COM(I'm sorry, but I think it's miles ahead of any civ incarnation).

The worst one is the one they didn't do, Age of Discovery! Why else would they include Portugal, Netherlands, Maya, and Soiux as new Civs and not include some sort of "Settle the New World" senario? I would have rather had Austria-Hungary, Italy or Poland.

Click to expand...

Maybe Dale had them put those into make it easier for making AOG.

Next war - the scenario isn't good for me simply because it's so unrealistic. Moscow the capital of all Europe? Then when you pass the Urals all the Russian cities are controlled from Beijing. And having Arabs, Africans, Indians and South Americans in one civilization also seems bizarre.

Click to expand...

I agree that the scenario is implausable, though the set-up is probably designed for fun rather than realism. It'd be interesting to see a near future scenario modeled after Huntington's Clash of Civilizations.

3) FFH- I enjoyed this scenario, but when I finished it I thought "is that it?". I hope a full FFH mod is made for BTS (and that it is small enough to fit on my memory stick!). Fun Fact- my Hero unit lost against Mulcarn the first time despite the odds of a victory for my Hero being 99.7%!

Click to expand...

Well, that's what auto save is for.

Onagan said:

The Road to War. I hated it, of the scenario's i played. It's inaccurate

Click to expand...

To be fair you are never going to get an accurate WW2 game with the Civ engine.

Onagan said:

The Road to War. I hated it, of the scenario's i played. It's inaccurate

Click to expand...

I sorta agree with you.

They should've done something, I was playing as poland, and i ended up culture flipping Moscow and Berlin before Germany declared on me....

TheLastOne36 said:

I sorta agree with you.

They should've done something, I was playing as poland, and i ended up culture flipping Moscow and Berlin before Germany declared on me....

Click to expand...

If you find things like this, let me know in the RtW forum: http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=265

Screenshots and saves really help to track and fix stuff like this.

Defense has some interesting ideas, and Afterworld had a lot of thought into the graphics and storyboard, but I have to say they tie for worst, since the tactical 'shooting' aspect of Civ just doesn't fly. It's just not optimized enough to do a really playable job of it. I'd rather play a real XCom 2008 instead.

Afterworld wasn't bad per se, but the Civ 4 interface doesn't, ahem, click, with the type of game that the author was trying to make. Nor does the camera position help at all. StarCraft's inside-the-base missions were done a lot better. Ditto with X-Com, where you could also have reaction fire and such.

I voted FFH age of ice - after having played the warlords player mod - this little scenario was , to me, pointless and not much fun.

TheLastOne36 said:

I sorta agree with you.

They should've done something, I was playing as poland, and i ended up culture flipping Moscow and Berlin before Germany declared on me....

Click to expand...

TLO I would seriously like to see a save where this occurred, because culture flipping is disabled totally in the RtW scenarios.

thanks.

Spearthrower said:

And therein you see the problem with anonymous polls..... why have people voted for Rhye's (just as an example)? I'm not saying that people can't have their own opinion and that they must like Rhye's, but a vote against something clearly well designed and stable with no explanation is worth little.... it almost seems like someone could've mis-read and voted for their favourite!

I voted for Afterworld too.... I dont think it's a bad scenario, it wins hands down on innovativeness, but has no interest value for me. I play civ because I like empire building.... if I wanted to play a game like that I'd play X-COM.

Defense is totally pointless for me as well, but at least it is in a civ-like theme.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that a vote for Rhye's is ... bizarre. You may not care to play it, but that does not make it bad!

Spearthrower, I might point out that you kinda fell into doing the same thing you just criticized though ... rating based on the personal appeal to you, vs. quality/innovativeness/whatever makes a scenario "quality." You wrote "I voted for Afterworld too.... I dont think it's a bad scenario." The vote was for "what is the worst [most bad]" scenario!?!

Actualy I thought it was "Which is your least favorite scenario".