New XP announced

[Panag]

hi ,

check this out > http://www.atari.com.au/product/?act...form=5&genre=2

not only conquest but a gold edition also

have a nice day

[Falco]

"They" Atari, say they have now released European patches. The French one is merde and the UK one non-existent!!

[Panag]

Originally posted by Falco


"They" Atari, say they have now released European patches. The French one is merde and the UK one non-existent!!

hi ,

relax , the others are supposed to be for monday , .....

are you sure you have the correct french one , .....

have a nice day

[Falco]

Oh to Hades with Atari, pass the Doobie!

[timbrom]

Colonization @?

I've been after Firaxis about an update to Colonization and now they can get on with it . What do we reckon? A Civ2 like makeover, or something bigger?

[statusperfect]

Re: Colonization @?

Originally posted by timbrom
I've been after Firaxis about an update to Colonization and now they can get on with it . What do we reckon? A Civ2 like makeover, or something bigger?

firaxis isn't making conquests

they are working with breakaway games

they have a VERY good track record making expansions

cheers

[riiha]

Originally posted by The Templar
The only 'Enkidu' I remember from Sumeria was Gilgamesh's hairy friend. Does this mean you can only build one? (And if he dies, he praises you for showing him the pleasures of women and wine?)

And yeah, the Dutch grow some pretty good weed. It should be a wonder!

i hope they are a little more historically correct with their units. I was very disappointed with the Carthaginian Numidian Mercenary The Carthaginian light infantry were Libyans and were noted as rather poor light infantry. The Numidians were the very best light cavalry of the era and carried the war for Hannibal in Italy. Scipio Africanus defeated Hannibal at Zama by having more Numidians than Hannibal and nullifying the effects of the elephants.

[Panag]

Originally posted by riiha


i hope they are a little more historically correct with their units. I was very disappointed with the Carthaginian Numidian Mercenary The Carthaginian light infantry were Libyans and were noted as rather poor light infantry. The Numidians were the very best light cavalry of the era and carried the war for Hannibal in Italy. Scipio Africanus defeated Hannibal at Zama by having more Numidians than Hannibal and nullifying the effects of the elephants.

hi ,

there where only a couple elephants left anyway to start with , .....

have a nice day

[Louis XXIV]

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/army-carthage.htm

The heavy infantry spearmen of Libya formed the backbone. They were armed with pikes or long spears, and probably fought in a formation similar to the Macedonian phalanx. The Libyan infantry proved to be a match for Rome's legionaries throughout the Second Punic War. These spearmen were augmented by Balearic slingers, renowned as the finest missile troops in the world at the time, along with Numidian archers and javelinmen.

[riiha]

libyan light infantry

i've been to that website and they tend to take a pro-Carthaginian stance in my opinion. The Romans usually had their way with the Libyans, Celts, and Gauls in the middle of Hannibal's formations, even at Cannae and Tresimane. The thing that turned those battles into slaughters was Hannibal's use of the Numidians and Spanish heavy cavalry.

The Romans and everyone before Hannibal would stick the cavalry on the flanks and they would slog it out with the opposing cavalry while the infantries would face off. Hannibal was the first to use his cavalry to encircle and attack the flanks and rear of the Roman legions. Combining that with the pathetic Roman leadership and you had some unbelievable slaughters.

Panag is correct in that the elephants did not survive the first battle in November. They don't do well in the mountains in the late fall. By the time Hannibal had a decent number of elephants at Zama, Scipio had developed a strategy to nullify them.

When you get right down to it the Carthaginian politcal system defeated Hannibal more than the Romans and, at the same time, the Roman political system contributed more to his success than his tactics or army.

[Panag]

Re: libyan light infantry

Originally posted by riiha
i've been to that website and they tend to take a pro-Carthaginian stance in my opinion. The Romans usually had their way with the Libyans, Celts, and Gauls in the middle of Hannibal's formations, even at Cannae and Tresimane. The thing that turned those battles into slaughters was Hannibal's use of the Numidians and Spanish heavy cavalry.

The Romans and everyone before Hannibal would stick the cavalry on the flanks and they would slog it out with the opposing cavalry while the infantries would face off. Hannibal was the first to use his cavalry to encircle and attack the flanks and rear of the Roman legions. Combining that with the pathetic Roman leadership and you had some unbelievable slaughters.

Panag is correct in that the elephants did not survive the first battle in November. They don't do well in the mountains in the late fall. By the time Hannibal had a decent number of elephants at Zama, Scipio had developed a strategy to nullify them.

When you get right down to it the Carthaginian politcal system defeated Hannibal more than the Romans and, at the same time, the Roman political system contributed more to his success than his tactics or army.

hi ,

not only that but he had an advantage over them , ......

food , the managed to bring in over a land route loads of food and wine , his army was more fed , the elephants , well they found one not to long ago ( whats left of it ) they did not only frose to death but also they did not like the local food and got the runners all the time , there is a french lib and museum that has loads of details on this btw , ....

its sometimes funny to see the indian civ war elephants on the tundra in ptw , ....

in the year 2025 it just makes you think each time of Hannibal , .....

have a nice day

[SpencerH]

Game complexity in SP must be limited so that the AI can be a challenge. Thats not the case for MP. For my money, the XP must include a major change in direction. It must include rules that allow more variation (player choices) that are only playable in MP.

Governments
Trade
Combat

Those components are hard-coded so we cant do anything about their oversimplification in CIV3. We can already mod the eye-candy that they're offering, they should focus on adding complexity for the human to human versions.

[Panag]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Game complexity in SP must be limited so that the AI can be a challenge. Thats not the case for MP. For my money, the XP must include a major change in direction. It must include rules that allow more variation (player choices) that are only playable in MP.

Governments
Trade
Combat

Those components are hard-coded so we cant do anything about their oversimplification in CIV3. We can already mod the eye-candy that they're offering, they should focus on adding complexity for the human to human versions.

hi ,

have you tried to play with the editor , or have you tried the balancer bix yet , ......

try the scenarios in ptw , ......

have a nice day

[Zero]

any info on civ traits?

Im eagerly waiting for another version of america (ind/exp)

hopefully it will land on a civ that has ancient - middle age UU....

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Zero
any info on civ traits?

Im eagerly waiting for another version of america (ind/exp)

hopefully it will land on a civ that has ancient - middle age UU....

I doubt that this will happen, America was given a late game UU because its traits are deceptively powerful, esp on Huge maps. It should also be noted that a high percentage of the wonders are either Industrious or Expansionist so achieving a GA throuh a wonder is very likely unless you play at high levels. If another Civ was given an Ind/Exp trait combo it would likely have a Modern age UU as well.