Zouave
Crusader
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,603
Is this the game that beats Civ 3??
- Thread starter Sporty_Thievz
- Start date
Cunobelin Of Hippo
Site Pachyderm
Poor them 
This is off to All Other Games...
This is off to All Other Games...
No, they get a whole 3 different kind of units? Kinda weak if you ask me....I might have to break out my EU again. I bought it to hold me over till Civ3 but the learning curve was too much for me (the manual for that game really sucked! It was in story form instead of just tellingyou how to play the damn game).
Barenziahlover
Warlord
Well back then unless you discor the technogal to use your cannon in seigh warfare when you attack than castile of fortizn cities with horseman and pikeman
excety to lose many thousand 's of man to than small army inside than castile of walled city. The secret is to edit the savegame files to give you than few hundred million gold coins than use the gold coins to hire mer and
regurate horseman than pikeman in the provens near the one where the fighting is going on to keep or increase
the strenght of your forces. Than other form of seign warfare was to stav then out.
excety to lose many thousand 's of man to than small army inside than castile of walled city. The secret is to edit the savegame files to give you than few hundred million gold coins than use the gold coins to hire mer and
regurate horseman than pikeman in the provens near the one where the fighting is going on to keep or increase
the strenght of your forces. Than other form of seign warfare was to stav then out.
Barenziahlover
Warlord
Back in the Middle Age and uo to the mid
19th century forts and walls town and cities have than force mulphire of 10 to 50 which meant with than mulph of 10 each men defenceing the fort was = to men attaching it. So in the middle age the
mulph was 25 to 50 and by the mid 19th
century was 10 to15 on than average.
19th century forts and walls town and cities have than force mulphire of 10 to 50 which meant with than mulph of 10 each men defenceing the fort was = to men attaching it. So in the middle age the
mulph was 25 to 50 and by the mid 19th
century was 10 to15 on than average.
Raven1er
Kevin
Originally posted by Sporty_Thievz
Well in my option this is the game that is alot more better than Civ 3...
I found Civ 3 boring and got bored after 3 weeks...
3 weeks after playing this game however and i'm still loving it. Its got so much accuratey in it, detail and much much more gameplay. And over 200 countries to play as!
'Europa Universalis 2'
This game rules!
Sorry but Civ 3 compared to this game is a load of crap....
Well, u are entitled to your opinion, but lets not exaggerate. ive seen screenshots, and graphics arent what they kicked up to be. but 200 countries? sheesh, thats awesome. and the game layout resembles that of Starcraft Beta version. and the diplomacy isnt very nice. but overall looks real cool like a mix of simcity and risk and a touch of Civ
Raven1er
Kevin
Sorry but EU2(or Imperialism?? =P have no idea....) compared to Starcraft is pretty bad....
Cilpot
Pretentious Schmuck
I bought EU2 a while ago... I think Civ III is far better... Not that EU2 is crap, but its more like a board game in my eyes.. fixed borders and sutch.. Fully patched Civ III beats this game with no problem IMHO...
konigstiger
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2002
- Messages
- 80
Originally posted by Midnight Rider
I played this game before. It was called IMPERIALISM.
It looks fun, but I prefer BATTLEFIELD combat with games like that. I still think they should make an improved version of L'Empereur.
THAT game was awesome.
Glad to see someone with the same mind, do you know of any group that wish this ? One of the early things I experimented with the internet is flooding Koei with emails asking for them to consider a sequel to that game
Barenziahlover
Warlord
The board are fix as the conquestor kept the orginatoe provein board as the people in each area didnot want to be part of than other provein.
This is why the ancient empire and the Trukic Empire last longer than the Brit Empire than the America Empire.
Raven1er
Kevin
because basically i really dont care about EU2 *not finalized?*
The Overlord
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2002
- Messages
- 351
First of all even Super Mario Bros. is better than Civ III (there are less bugs in it) 
but you're right EU is really a heavy-hitter. The possibilities are endless and this one is REALLY a historical game and you see the designers did some research in history. Even it's quite a little hectic for me (I'm the kind of turnplayer these fancy realtime games are just too fast for me well perhaps I'm too slow) but this is the only realtime-game I bought and if you want a game that recreates history with all it's facets (diplomacy, trade, vassal states,....) you should go for it.
but you're right EU is really a heavy-hitter. The possibilities are endless and this one is REALLY a historical game and you see the designers did some research in history. Even it's quite a little hectic for me (I'm the kind of turnplayer these fancy realtime games are just too fast for me well perhaps I'm too slow) but this is the only realtime-game I bought and if you want a game that recreates history with all it's facets (diplomacy, trade, vassal states,....) you should go for it.Barenziahlover
Warlord
Originally posted by The Overlord
First of all even Super Mario Bros. is better than Civ III (there are less bugs in it)
There is than pause game key you can press to pause the game, there is than way to slow down the speed time past
as well as to increase the rate time past in the game.
Similar threads
