What is your favorite Warlords scenario and why?

[paplan]

So far, mine is the Unification of China. I like the fact that each civ can be played differenly for the unification.

 

[cabert]

so far i only played the alexander scenario.
Even at a low level, it was really tedious to move all those units.
So i went back to shuffle maps...

 

[Slade19]

Ever try barbarians?

That is TOUGH... though, I've only tried it a few times.

 

[PMabey]

rise of rome or chinese unification

btw @ cabert alexander is v. boring i agree, its 2 repetitive. u shood try the others

 

[Tekee]

I got bored of them, I tried Chinese, (pretty fun), Vikings, (pretty fun)
But Alexander got me soooo bored seriously!
They should really tell us how your supposed to win thoses games,
But I liked the Conquests 10 times more then Warlords

 

[Jawsofwar]

Chinese Unification and Ghengis Khan scenarios were the best IMO.

 

[petermarkab]

I've almost finished my first scenario as Chinese unification and its been a blast!

 

[cabert]

i'll give chinese unification a go. It seems i got unlucky by choosing the only boring scenario

 

[Zebra 9]

Ghengis Khan was great, it's the only MOD I'v played that came with the game. I realy liked the camps. Wish the AI could use them & that they where in the actual game.

 

[cabert]

i tried chinese unification, it's good!
The game crashed when i started to finally get a lead, but i'll finish the game tonight. Probably a loss (monarch level), since i'm outteched and outpopulated. Council of emperor is already built, and i'm not one of the candidate

 

[Tee Kay]

I've tried:

Alexander: boring
Chinese Unification: excellent. Very well done. In the end I vassalised three other rivals, destroyed one and had myself elected.
Rise of Rome: a little better than Alexander but it's a little repetitive. Map is poorly and/or dully done.
Genghis Khan: alright. But still it's a little repetitive, and those camp units hardly ever produced any units at all
Barbarians: alright. But unlike in normal game, barb (you) cannot build any cities, units can only be spawn in a single camp unit, and you had to destroy all civilizations before they get longbows, otherwise you had practically no chance of winning.

 

[ShannonCT]

Alexander and Peloponessian War: Too simplistic and linear. It's all about building a big land army and conquering in a predetermined way.

Genghis Khan: Quite fun. I like the idea of teching by conquest. And it's a good game for trying out different Great General strategies. I just wish the camp units produced units with higher XPs.

Omens: An interesting idea. It's a little silly (like some of the weird mods with elves and orcs) but it's not boring like Alexander. And the French leader, Marquis Du Quesne (spelling?) has the ever covetted Aggressive/Charismatic combination.

Chinese Unification: Probably the most complete scenario - a great combination of military, research, building, and diplomacy. This has something for everyone.

Barbarians: A great scenario for players who love conquest, and each game is different. After getting my ass handed to me a couple times, I learned the value of pillaging and the power of trebuchets.

Best scenario so far? Chinese Unification.

 

[Vael]

Genghis Khan, Barbarians and Vikings were the most unique in terms of gameplay, so those were fun. Genghis and Chinese Unification wer probably the most well-done and fun overall.

 

[Xanikk999]

Chinese one i guess.

I hate most of the warlords scenarios though because either your cities are too close together to start or you cant research normal techs and expand.

 

[cabert]

i experience lots of freezing in the scenarios
cannot reboot every half hour, it gets to my nerves,
so i'll stay on chinese unification

 

[Tekee]

They need to make them funner or work these out
I really want a Mesopatamia scenario again like in CIV 3, where you play it like a normal civ game but with extra's very fun indeed!

 

[Vael]

I think it's kind of funny that people prefer the Civ 3 scenarios to those made for Civ 4. There was so little you could do with Civ 3... any scenario would basically be a normal game of Civ 3 just with different units and buildings on a pre-made map. At least for Warlords most of the scenarios tried to change how the game was played somewhat.

 

[Jawsofwar]

Well Chinese Unification was my favorite because it was the most different. It had unique civic choices which led to many different strategies. The Chinese music and the art of the military units made it have its own unique feeling. The Ghenghis Scenario was fun too in that it had that unique feel and look to it.

The Rise of Rome Scenario felt too much like "generic" civ game. Maybe Firaxis could update some of the warlords scenarios. I wish the Rise of Rome Scenario had different civic choices than the main game and more unique units. Not just an axeman saying its egyption . Example have slingers to replace archers for Rome. Have triari be the spearman. Have equites replace chariots. Have hastati be your early infantry and then when you build forges for example you can have elite praetorians. The Romans in the Rise of Rome Scenario are no different than they are in the vanilla game which is sad IMO .

For the Alexander Scenario it would be cool if you win by capturing king darius. It would shorten up the game. I also felt that the greek military should of had more elite units but take longer to train. The scenario was more about building a ton of units rather than using tactics and quality troops to win over the mass enemies like alexander did in RL.

 

[Chamaedrys]

I just startet the "Alexander" scenario - and I'm lovin' it! No nerdy economy, just march to Persia and kick a$$. > >

 

[df1_2]

But isnt it gay that you dont see the leaders faces and reactions in the chineese scenario?