What are the "unlocked" scenarios?

[G-Max]

My computer lists "RFC 3000 BC unlocked", "RFC 3000 BC", "RFC 600 AD unlocked", and "RFC 600 AD". What does the "unlocked" part mean?

 

[StuartKleinsen]

It means you can pick eg America in the 3000BC start and the game will auto play till you spawn.
As far as I know 600AD was introduced by Firaxis, btw, for those with slow engines.

 

[Jusos2108]

And there is the Questions & Answers -thread.

 

[LuKo]

Firaxis made Rhye to do "locked" scenarios to hear no complains about too long loading. "Advanced users" (those who downloaded the mod) still have an unlocked ones to not lose anything

 

[Úmarth]

Short answer: the unlocked versions give you more civs to choose from. There's no reason not to use them.

 

[Baldyr]

The technical answer is that one value has been changed in the WBS. Other than that the scenarios are identical.

 

[nody]

The technical answer is that one value has been changed in the WBS. Other than that the scenarios are identical.

Which one?

 

[onedreamer]

Locked and Unlocked scenarios are completely different. The civs you can choose from are different and the gameplay will definitely be different. It is only one variable, but so is the one that determines gravity on Earth.
I consider the unlocked scenarios the real RFC, it is IMHO more challenging, but less historically plausible.

 

[Wessel V1]

To clear up the previous statement(s):

They are essentially the same, but the unlocked scenarios allow you to play every civ on the 3000BC map, and the Americans on the 600AD map. The result is that you may get a very strange Europe in a 3000BC start, and lots of other rare stuff. That is the only difference, there are no events that happen in the normal scenario and don't happen in the unlocked scenario, and the other way round.

 

[onedreamer]

Depends what you mean with events. For example I consider the birth of Judaism an event, but it seems you don't. Again, even if from a programming point of view there is a one line difference, the scenarios are quite different, and so is the gameplay (think Judaism holy city in Egypt or Christianity in Ethiopia), strategy for many civs (think Arabia) and the overall "feel" of the mod.

 

[Úmarth]

Are you confusing locked vs. unlocked with 3000BC vs. 600AD, onedreamer? 'cos I'm pretty sure the locked and unlocked scenarios are exactly the same apart from the player can choose to play late-spawning civs from the beginning.

 

[Wessel V1]

No, it's about the difference between the 3000BC unlocked and the 600AD start. However, technically there is no difference, though in practice it means that a 3000BC start will likely be more different (and interesting, depending on your preferences). The point is, that there is no difference between a 3000BC and a 3000BC unlocked start, except for the possibility to play more civs in the latter one.

 

[blizzrd]

Locked and Unlocked scenarios are completely different.

As posted by others, no they aren't.

The civs you can choose from are different and the gameplay will definitely be different. It is only one variable, but so is the one that determines gravity on Earth.
I consider the unlocked scenarios the real RFC, it is IMHO more challenging, but less historically plausible.

Choosing to play England using the 600AD start or the (it would have to be the unlocked) 3000BC start is certainly different. I believe this was what onedreamer was trying to say. But the choice of words to say it was not the best.

 

[Kawzmo191]

Every 3000bc Euro civ start I get results in a super-duper Buddhist Greece that controls Italy

 

[onedreamer]

Are you confusing locked vs. unlocked with 3000BC vs. 600AD, onedreamer? 'cos I'm pretty sure the locked and unlocked scenarios are exactly the same apart from the player can choose to play late-spawning civs from the beginning.

Yeah I was. Apologies to everyone.