Best Conquest

[Comrade Pedro]

Maybe i should do this as a poll, but...

I hanna have some statistics of this matter: Conquests

Which Conquest (i mean the special scenarios that are alredy made) do you like most?

I, with my little expirience in that games, don't have much to say, but i think the best i've play until now (i've not play them all) is the Napoleonic Wars.

 

[jm chen]

Love Mesoamerica. Love Mesopotamia. Love Sengoku. Love Age of Discovery. Hate everything related to Rome. Haven't played WWII or Napoleon yet.

All depends on my mood. They're incredibly different. But I like shorter games (2-4 hours instead of 10-15) so this expansion really plays to my taste.

 

[Dogmeat]

Ive played Mesopotamia, Rise of Rome, Mesoamerica, Sengoku and Napoleonic wars.

Mesopotamia is good.

Rise of Rome was good until i found out that persia is soo hard to beat with a score victory.
Mesoamerica was good.

Sengoku was good until i found out that ninjas had hidden nationality and an attack rating of 6. Too bad that the scenario got ruined by this.

Napoleonic is not good. Probably as bad as rise of rome. Or even worse.

 

[Xen]

THE MIDDLE AGES ROCK!!!!!

play the middle ages scenario as Byzantium, amke a quick move to conqoure the Bulgars, and to get first horse rideing, and then cataphract, and then the western church tech to build the "Holy ROman EMpire" wonder, and you can do no wrong

 

[Comrade Pedro]

I think in the Rise of Rome, Carthage is in a very disadvantage comparing to Rome, that haves the Legionary I, II and III.

 

[Master_Debater]

Methinks I'm gonna love this game

 

[Master_Debater]

expansion, I mean. considering I don't have PTW either

 

[ybbor]

Originally posted by Dogmeat
Rise of Rome was good until i found out that persia is soo hard to beat with a score victory.

Yeah same here, it just seemed to hard,might play it later as persia... Fall of rome appears impossiblr to me, WWII Rocks (as Japan, america is too hard), Mesopotamia, is prety good, haven't played the rest

EDIT: Finished Mesoamerica, really cool, especially enslavement, comes in handy for that 2K

EDIT2 midway through AoD, it's preety cool (my problem isn't treasure, it's getting the units to escort the treasure) close game, and i think it really is possible to win as almost anyone (w/ the possible exception of dutch) i'll probably play as a few more civs after this one...

 

[ShiplordAtvar]

I like playing the mesoamerica scenario. Enslavement and sacrifice is fun.

 

[tomart109]

Originally posted by ShiplordAtvar
I like playing the mesoamerica scenario. Enslavement and sacrifice is fun.

Yes, I agree, and I'm a kindly liberal pacifist! (A special treat is the sound the natives make when you go to sacrifice someone, but then change your mind. "Boo!! grumble, Boo!" - a nice, funny touch.)

But the Age of Discovery is excellent fun, (just be aware that Portugal seems to have an edge) and in the WWII Pacific, I even enjoyed playing China.

Each Conquest is a whole different game, and a fresh boost to the civ3 empire.

 

[Warspite2]

WWII in the Pacific

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

Middle Ages and Sengoku are definetly my favorites.

 

[Azadre]

Napoleon

 

[Mr Black]

Rise of Rome, playing as Rome.

The Age of Discovery is also very good, especially the constant moving of the treasure units.

 

[Nihilist]

Age of Discovery: Playing as Aztecs + enslavement of most N. American natives + all Europeans focused on destroying Portugal rather than me = very fun + unexpectedly easy scenario, though not my favorite. That distinction goes to the excellent Rise of Rome.

 

[Chris1111]

*warning a lot of opinion here*

My favorite was the middle ages. The only fault with the middle ages is that the AI builds way to many wandering spearmen/settlers. They place cities everywhere and the map is a mess. Other then that all the conquering is fun, Im working on beating it with every playable civ.

Napoleon I didnt like at first but I finally managed to play through and even did it as the Ottomans surprisingly. I dont like that their sipahi isnt as strong as in the epic game though.

World War II and Fall of Rome are at the bottom in my opinion. In both scenarios you are basically alone cause the AI is so inept with war and alliances.

Your so called Allies in the WW2 scenario basically sit on their rear and do nothing. The commonwealth does bomb occassionally but the Chinese just roll over( which is expected) and the Netherlands just watch everything it seems.

In the fall of rome you might as well not even bother making alliances as you will have to take on both romes by yourself. I feel the scenario should end when both romes are destroyed and not just victory points. I hated the fact that I had to rush and colonize everywhere and fight off the 'barbarian' tribes when the romans were gone. It was really anti-climatic.

 

[joycem10]

my favorites are the middle ages, napoleon and mesoamerica.

i agree with chris on fall of rome... i basically had to take out both roman empires. i finally took out western rome and had to sit for twenty turns with an overwhelming point lead until the scenario ended. very anti-climatic. i would have gone to war for more victory points, but by the time sufficient units would have arrived at the enemy, the game would have been just about over anyway. (playing as the sassanids).

 

[Samurai Matt]

My favorites would be Rise of Rome (as rome), Napoleon, and WWII (as Japan)

I don't mind the other scenarios, all of them are great.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

I like the look of Age of Discovery though I haven't finished it yet. Taking Scotland from France at the start costs precious colonising time but I just can't help myself.

Middle Ages was a bit hairy, but I played as the English which might have made it a bit trickier than it needed to be.

Napolean was disappointing for me. I played as the British and had barely got into the continent before the Austrian Empire had annexed France (!). I had to take out Spain to win since the Austrians looked a bit too strong (could have been some gpt bug anomaly I think because they really were a bit too strong - I'll try again just incase I got a false impression of the scenario).

Rise of Rome was frustrating. Persia is annoying to fight for victory points, and domination, though acheivable, is just too tedious.

Sengoku is quite cool, though my going for a diplomatic victory might have somewhat missed the point.

Mesopotamia was fun, but I found it too easy at my usual dificulty level (whatever that is). I think I only bothered meeting my two nearest neighbours and had no map of the world outside my borders. Could be different as someone else since I was Egypt and has a bottleneck to rely on.

I've tended to find that I always get a few dozen turns in then start again with a better idea of what I should be doing. There's plenty of replayability in them. I normally go for a small perfectionist empire rather than a globe spanning one, so a lot of the conquests are difficult for me to get into, but so far only the rise of rome has overwhelmed me (middle ages came close).

 

[lord42]

Middle ages as Germany or as denmark.

Second sengoku as hojo.

third Napolionic europe as britain.