|
Next: Colonization questions
|
| Author |
Message |
External

Since: Feb 29, 2008 Posts: 35
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:07 pm
Post subject: Colonization - severe disappointment Archived from groups: comp>sys>ibm>pc>games>strategic (more info?)
|
|
|
I don't know what happened to Sid Meier, but he seems to have lost his
touch for everything not named "Civilization". I really, really
wanted to like Colonization. And indeed, after an hour of play I
thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
It's horribly unbalanced. Most of the game turns out to be completely
optional. It actually hinders your ability to win to play the way I
assumed you were supposed to play; by establishing a vibrant working
economy of goods production. Instead, the best way to win is to build
one or two small colonies, buy a bunch of cannon, and then slap elder
statesmen into your one or two colonies and declare independence when
your rebel sentiment shoots from 0% to 50% in 8 turns or whatever.
If you build enough cities to get big economy going in order to get
lots of money and build guns and such, you've screwed yourself because
it will take so long to get rebel sentiment to 50% that the Royal
Expeditionary Force will be huge. Why face 150 soldiers and 40 cannon
when you can face 8 soldiers and 7 cannon?
Of course it must be said that a huge REF doesn't necessarily matter
because combat is just awful. You can defeat virtually any force by
allowing them to capture your city and then immediately
counterattacking with a couple cannon. Since they don't get defensive
bonuses and your cannon get +100% city attack it is an absolute
massacre. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Oh, but actually you CAN get rebel sentiment to 50% fast even with a
big economy; by deliberately killing all your colonists when it's
time to go for it. Yes, if you butcher your own people you can get
sentiment to 50% in, again, a couple turns. So if you feel like
building an economy - as I said, you don't have to and it is actually
counterproductive - make sure to genocide your own people before
generating liberty bells! Yay, killing!
There is an engine here but not much game. It's possible someone will
fix it in a mod. I hope so, because this game was clearly tested by a
drunken monkey. And a stupid monkey at that.
-David |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Nov 13, 2007 Posts: 754
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:07 am
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Oct 10, 5:07 pm, David T. Bilek <davidbi... RemoveThis @att.net> wrote:
> I don't know what happened to Sid Meier, but he seems to have lost his
> touch for everything not named "Civilization". I really, really
> wanted to like Colonization. And indeed, after an hour of play I
> thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
> flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>
> It's horribly unbalanced. Most of the game turns out to be completely
> optional. It actually hinders your ability to win to play the way I
> assumed you were supposed to play; by establishing a vibrant working
> economy of goods production. Instead, the best way to win is to build
> one or two small colonies, buy a bunch of cannon, and then slap elder
> statesmen into your one or two colonies and declare independence when
> your rebel sentiment shoots from 0% to 50% in 8 turns or whatever.
> If you build enough cities to get big economy going in order to get
> lots of money and build guns and such, you've screwed yourself because
> it will take so long to get rebel sentiment to 50% that the Royal
> Expeditionary Force will be huge. Why face 150 soldiers and 40 cannon
> when you can face 8 soldiers and 7 cannon?
>
> Of course it must be said that a huge REF doesn't necessarily matter
> because combat is just awful. You can defeat virtually any force by
> allowing them to capture your city and then immediately
> counterattacking with a couple cannon. Since they don't get defensive
> bonuses and your cannon get +100% city attack it is an absolute
> massacre. Lather, rinse, repeat.
>
> Oh, but actually you CAN get rebel sentiment to 50% fast even with a
> big economy; by deliberately killing all your colonists when it's
> time to go for it. Yes, if you butcher your own people you can get
> sentiment to 50% in, again, a couple turns. So if you feel like
> building an economy - as I said, you don't have to and it is actually
> counterproductive - make sure to genocide your own people before
> generating liberty bells! Yay, killing!
>
> There is an engine here but not much game. It's possible someone will
> fix it in a mod. I hope so, because this game was clearly tested by a
> drunken monkey. And a stupid monkey at that.
>
> -David
(Pssst. Colonization was Brian Reynolds' baby, despite Meier's name on
the box.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 447
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:15 am
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <nggve4dc5klaticv09fstlnhe3n0np60af.RemoveThis@4ax.com>,
davidbilek.RemoveThis@att.net says...
> thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
> flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>
> It's horribly unbalanced.
Share your opinion after playing the game to the point where I had a
flourishing economy, about 6-8 dragoons & cannon defending my fortressed
main settlements ... and declared independence. King turned up 'poof'
with several ships of the line (they have unlimited movement?!?) outside
one settlement and unloaded (how?) dragoons and cannon. My ships of the
line smashed on his like eggs on a rock. Didn't even scatch his paint.
His dragoons proceeded to butcher my defending units one after another
after another, my units' veteran status didn't seem to matter, the
fortress didn't seem to help any ... I went 'wha?' and closed the game.
Noticed what you said about it taking forever to get to 50%, even with 3
statesmen and newspapers in my settlements.
I'm not tempted to start another game. One could do that just to play
sandbox mode and abandon the game once the 100 turn timer comes on, but
the economy really isn't comples or challenging enough to make that an
interesting proposition.
Lastly I noted this: I had more population, more money and more citizens
than the Spanish, English and French governors. Yet my score was in the
high 300s and theirs were 2-4 times that when the 100 turn timer came
up. Scratching my head here ...
All my indian friends immediately reneged on their defense treaties when
the King landed troups.
Bah, why bother ...... think I'll free up some harddrive space. The new
GalcivII v. 2.0 looks somewhat more promising, I just patched up to that
level and started a game yesterday.
-Peter |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Nov 13, 2007 Posts: 754
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:15 am
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Oct 11, 6:15 pm, Peter Huebner <no.... RemoveThis @this.address> wrote:
> In article <nggve4dc5klaticv09fstlnhe3n0np6... RemoveThis @4ax.com>,
> davidbi... RemoveThis @att.net says...
>
> > thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
> > flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>
> > It's horribly unbalanced.
>
> Share your opinion after playing the game to the point where I had a
> flourishing economy, about 6-8 dragoons & cannon defending my fortressed
> main settlements ... and declared independence. King turned up 'poof'
> with several ships of the line (they have unlimited movement?!?) outside
> one settlement and unloaded (how?) dragoons and cannon. My ships of the
> line smashed on his like eggs on a rock. Didn't even scatch his paint.
> His dragoons proceeded to butcher my defending units one after another
> after another, my units' veteran status didn't seem to matter, the
> fortress didn't seem to help any ... I went 'wha?' and closed the game.
>
> Noticed what you said about it taking forever to get to 50%, even with 3
> statesmen and newspapers in my settlements.
>
> I'm not tempted to start another game. One could do that just to play
> sandbox mode and abandon the game once the 100 turn timer comes on, but
> the economy really isn't comples or challenging enough to make that an
> interesting proposition.
>
> Lastly I noted this: I had more population, more money and more citizens
> than the Spanish, English and French governors. Yet my score was in the
> high 300s and theirs were 2-4 times that when the 100 turn timer came
> up. Scratching my head here ...
> All my indian friends immediately reneged on their defense treaties when
> the King landed troups.
> Bah, why bother ...... think I'll free up some harddrive space. The new
> GalcivII v. 2.0 looks somewhat more promising, I just patched up to that
> level and started a game yesterday.
>
> -Peter
Man, you guys never played the original Col, huh? There's a reason for
that - see if you can figure it out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Feb 29, 2008 Posts: 35
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:38 am
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:07:24 -0700 (PDT), Jonah Falcon
<jonahnynla.DeleteThis@mindspring.com> wrote:
>On Oct 10, 5:07 pm, David T. Bilek <davidbi....DeleteThis@att.net> wrote:
>> I don't know what happened to Sid Meier, but he seems to have lost his
>> touch for everything not named "Civilization". I really, really
>> wanted to like Colonization. And indeed, after an hour of play I
>> thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
>> flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>>
>> It's horribly unbalanced. Most of the game turns out to be completely
>> optional. It actually hinders your ability to win to play the way I
>> assumed you were supposed to play; by establishing a vibrant working
>> economy of goods production. Instead, the best way to win is to build
>> one or two small colonies, buy a bunch of cannon, and then slap elder
>> statesmen into your one or two colonies and declare independence when
>> your rebel sentiment shoots from 0% to 50% in 8 turns or whatever.
>> If you build enough cities to get big economy going in order to get
>> lots of money and build guns and such, you've screwed yourself because
>> it will take so long to get rebel sentiment to 50% that the Royal
>> Expeditionary Force will be huge. Why face 150 soldiers and 40 cannon
>> when you can face 8 soldiers and 7 cannon?
>>
>> Of course it must be said that a huge REF doesn't necessarily matter
>> because combat is just awful. You can defeat virtually any force by
>> allowing them to capture your city and then immediately
>> counterattacking with a couple cannon. Since they don't get defensive
>> bonuses and your cannon get +100% city attack it is an absolute
>> massacre. Lather, rinse, repeat.
>>
>> Oh, but actually you CAN get rebel sentiment to 50% fast even with a
>> big economy; by deliberately killing all your colonists when it's
>> time to go for it. Yes, if you butcher your own people you can get
>> sentiment to 50% in, again, a couple turns. So if you feel like
>> building an economy - as I said, you don't have to and it is actually
>> counterproductive - make sure to genocide your own people before
>> generating liberty bells! Yay, killing!
>>
>> There is an engine here but not much game. It's possible someone will
>> fix it in a mod. I hope so, because this game was clearly tested by a
>> drunken monkey. And a stupid monkey at that.
>>
>
>(Pssst. Colonization was Brian Reynolds' baby, despite Meier's name on
>the box.)
Uh, Reynolds left Firaxis most of a decade ago. The original
Colonization may have been his baby, but the new one certainly is not.
And I'm obviously talking about the new one which plays quite
differently from the original.
The original is much more balanced.
-David |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Feb 29, 2008 Posts: 35
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:39 am
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
rOn Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:06:35 -0700 (PDT), Jonah Falcon
<jonahnynla.RemoveThis@mindspring.com> wrote:
>On Oct 11, 6:15 pm, Peter Huebner <no.....RemoveThis@this.address> wrote:
>> In article <nggve4dc5klaticv09fstlnhe3n0np6....RemoveThis@4ax.com>,
>> davidbi....RemoveThis@att.net says...
>>
>> > thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
>> > flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>>
>> > It's horribly unbalanced.
>>
>> Share your opinion after playing the game to the point where I had a
>> flourishing economy, about 6-8 dragoons & cannon defending my fortressed
>> main settlements ... and declared independence. King turned up 'poof'
>> with several ships of the line (they have unlimited movement?!?) outside
>> one settlement and unloaded (how?) dragoons and cannon. My ships of the
>> line smashed on his like eggs on a rock. Didn't even scatch his paint.
>> His dragoons proceeded to butcher my defending units one after another
>> after another, my units' veteran status didn't seem to matter, the
>> fortress didn't seem to help any ... I went 'wha?' and closed the game.
>>
>> Noticed what you said about it taking forever to get to 50%, even with 3
>> statesmen and newspapers in my settlements.
>>
>> I'm not tempted to start another game. One could do that just to play
>> sandbox mode and abandon the game once the 100 turn timer comes on, but
>> the economy really isn't comples or challenging enough to make that an
>> interesting proposition.
>>
>> Lastly I noted this: I had more population, more money and more citizens
>> than the Spanish, English and French governors. Yet my score was in the
>> high 300s and theirs were 2-4 times that when the 100 turn timer came
>> up. Scratching my head here ...
>> All my indian friends immediately reneged on their defense treaties when
>> the King landed troups.
>> Bah, why bother ...... think I'll free up some harddrive space. The new
>> GalcivII v. 2.0 looks somewhat more promising, I just patched up to that
>> level and started a game yesterday.
>>
>
>Man, you guys never played the original Col, huh? There's a reason for
>that - see if you can figure it out.
I played the original Colonization. It was a masterwork of balance
compared to the new one. It had problems, sure. But the new one is
essentially broken out of the box.
-David |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 16, 2008 Posts: 102
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:59 pm
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
David T. Bilek wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:07:24 -0700 (PDT), Jonah Falcon
> <jonahnynla RemoveThis @mindspring.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 10, 5:07 pm, David T. Bilek <davidbi... RemoveThis @att.net> wrote:
>>> I don't know what happened to Sid Meier, but he seems to have lost
>>> his touch for everything not named "Civilization". I really, really
>>> wanted to like Colonization. And indeed, after an hour of play I
>>> thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and
>>> the flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>>>
>>> It's horribly unbalanced. Most of the game turns out to be
>>> completely optional. It actually hinders your ability to win to
>>> play the way I assumed you were supposed to play; by establishing a
>>> vibrant working economy of goods production. Instead, the best way
>>> to win is to build one or two small colonies, buy a bunch of
>>> cannon, and then slap elder statesmen into your one or two colonies
>>> and declare independence when your rebel sentiment shoots from 0%
>>> to 50% in 8 turns or whatever.
>>> If you build enough cities to get big economy going in order to get
>>> lots of money and build guns and such, you've screwed yourself
>>> because it will take so long to get rebel sentiment to 50% that the
>>> Royal Expeditionary Force will be huge. Why face 150 soldiers and
>>> 40 cannon when you can face 8 soldiers and 7 cannon?
>>>
>>> Of course it must be said that a huge REF doesn't necessarily matter
>>> because combat is just awful. You can defeat virtually any force by
>>> allowing them to capture your city and then immediately
>>> counterattacking with a couple cannon. Since they don't get
>>> defensive bonuses and your cannon get +100% city attack it is an
>>> absolute massacre. Lather, rinse, repeat.
>>>
>>> Oh, but actually you CAN get rebel sentiment to 50% fast even with a
>>> big economy; by deliberately killing all your colonists when it's
>>> time to go for it. Yes, if you butcher your own people you can get
>>> sentiment to 50% in, again, a couple turns. So if you feel like
>>> building an economy - as I said, you don't have to and it is
>>> actually counterproductive - make sure to genocide your own people
>>> before generating liberty bells! Yay, killing!
>>>
>>> There is an engine here but not much game. It's possible someone
>>> will fix it in a mod. I hope so, because this game was clearly
>>> tested by a drunken monkey. And a stupid monkey at that.
>>>
>>
>> (Pssst. Colonization was Brian Reynolds' baby, despite Meier's name
>> on the box.)
>
> Uh, Reynolds left Firaxis most of a decade ago. The original
> Colonization may have been his baby, but the new one certainly is not.
> And I'm obviously talking about the new one which plays quite
> differently from the original.
>
> The original is much more balanced.
>
Making his point for him....
--
"What Kind of perv rememembers the scenes where she's clothed???" -
Anim8rFSK, 8/23/08 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Feb 29, 2008 Posts: 35
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:11 pm
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 12:59:46 -0700, "Dimensional Traveler"
<dtravel.TakeThisOut@sonic.net> wrote:
>David T. Bilek wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:07:24 -0700 (PDT), Jonah Falcon
>> <jonahnynla.TakeThisOut@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> (Pssst. Colonization was Brian Reynolds' baby, despite Meier's name
>>> on the box.)
>>
>> Uh, Reynolds left Firaxis most of a decade ago. The original
>> Colonization may have been his baby, but the new one certainly is not.
>> And I'm obviously talking about the new one which plays quite
>> differently from the original.
>>
>> The original is much more balanced.
>>
>Making his point for him....
If the point is that Brian Reynolds carried Sid Meier for quite a long
time, I'll agree with that. Alpha Centauri was a great game.
Has Sid himself made any really good games in the last decade? That
weren't just updates of Civilization I mean.
-David |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Apr 08, 2008 Posts: 199
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"David T. Bilek" <davidbilek.TakeThisOut@att.net> wrote
> I don't know what happened to Sid Meier, but he seems to have lost his
> touch for everything not named "Civilization". I really, really
> wanted to like Colonization. And indeed, after an hour of play I
> thought it was a winner. But it's as shallow as a wading pool and the
> flaws really show up once you learn how the game mechanics work.
>
> It's horribly unbalanced. Most of the game turns out to be completely
> optional. It actually hinders your ability to win to play the way I
> assumed you were supposed to play; by establishing a vibrant working
> economy of goods production. Instead, the best way to win is to build
> one or two small colonies, buy a bunch of cannon, and then slap elder
> statesmen into your one or two colonies and declare independence when
> your rebel sentiment shoots from 0% to 50% in 8 turns or whatever.
> If you build enough cities to get big economy going in order to get
> lots of money and build guns and such, you've screwed yourself because
> it will take so long to get rebel sentiment to 50% that the Royal
> Expeditionary Force will be huge. Why face 150 soldiers and 40 cannon
> when you can face 8 soldiers and 7 cannon?
>
> Of course it must be said that a huge REF doesn't necessarily matter
> because combat is just awful. You can defeat virtually any force by
> allowing them to capture your city and then immediately
> counterattacking with a couple cannon. Since they don't get defensive
> bonuses and your cannon get +100% city attack it is an absolute
> massacre. Lather, rinse, repeat.
>
> Oh, but actually you CAN get rebel sentiment to 50% fast even with a
> big economy; by deliberately killing all your colonists when it's
> time to go for it. Yes, if you butcher your own people you can get
> sentiment to 50% in, again, a couple turns. So if you feel like
> building an economy - as I said, you don't have to and it is actually
> counterproductive - make sure to genocide your own people before
> generating liberty bells! Yay, killing!
>
> There is an engine here but not much game. It's possible someone will
> fix it in a mod. I hope so, because this game was clearly tested by a
> drunken monkey. And a stupid monkey at that.
Thanks David - very interesting. I had discussed some of this in the
"Colonization questions" thread when talking about the limitations of
Freecol, though I confess I hadn't thought of killing my own colonists. In
particular the big difference between a conquest victory and an independence
victory.
I played the original Col, but not very much. I didn't get it until after I
had MoM, and it could never compete.
So how is the new version less well balanced than the old? Could you not get
50% liberty bells in the original by focusing on one or two colonies, like
you can in the new version? That seems like the biggest flaw to me - and it
has a simple solution - make independence unattainable until your total
population reaches a minimum figure (like 40 or so).
Of course, that doesn't solve the issue of horribly broken combat - but
that's something that should be moddable. I thought the combat engine in Civ
IV was supposed to be quite good, as TBS non-tactical combat resolution
goes.
CC |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 447
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <qtmjs5-m1m.ln1.RemoveThis@news.terminalarrogance.com>,
not.RemoveThis@receiving.here says...
>
> Of course, that doesn't solve the issue of horribly broken combat - but
> that's something that should be moddable. I thought the combat engine in Civ
> IV was supposed to be quite good, as TBS non-tactical combat resolution
> goes.
>
That's the irony: it _IS_ - at least as far as the Civ-series is
concerned. All the more frustrating that it seems to behave like a pile
of steaming hot horsebollocks in Col 2 ... yeah, well: as I said,
there's better around and some of it's already on my harddrive.
-P. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Feb 29, 2008 Posts: 35
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2008 4:16 pm
Post subject: Re: Colonization - severe disappointment [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:59:22 +0100, "Magnate" <not DeleteThis @receiving.here>
wrote:
>
>So how is the new version less well balanced than the old? Could you not get
>50% liberty bells in the original by focusing on one or two colonies, like
>you can in the new version? That seems like the biggest flaw to me - and it
>has a simple solution - make independence unattainable until your total
>population reaches a minimum figure (like 40 or so).
>
I don't remember the exact mechanics for this in the original, but it
doesn't really matter in any case because it was very difficult to
survive with one or two colonies in the original anyway. Because in
the original your King back in Europe would go to war with other
European powers and drag you into it.
So if you had one pop 7 colony and your King declared war on Spain who
was sitting next to you with 7 colonies, Spain would come kick your
ass and take your pathetic little colony away from you.
In the new one, your King never declares war on other powers and I've
had other powers declare one me a total of ONE time. And that was a
bunch of Indians whose land I, uh, borrowed not one of the European
powers. The lack of aggression of the AI even at high difficulty
levels is ridicuous.
>Of course, that doesn't solve the issue of horribly broken combat - but
>that's something that should be moddable. I thought the combat engine in Civ
>IV was supposed to be quite good, as TBS non-tactical combat resolution
>goes.
>
Another thing that should happen is that the REF should start bigger
than it does, and perhaps grow more slowly over time than it does once
you start producing liberty bells. If the REF started with 30
soldiers, 30 dragoons, and 30 cannon instead of like 7 soldiers and 2
cannon, you couldn't make enough money with 1 or 2 colonies to get
your army big enough. The way it is now you don't have to make any
money because the REF is so small that you can win with like 6
dragoons and 6 cannon, which can be gotten very cheaply.
-David |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
| Related Topics: | Colonization coming - http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=88394 Colonization is one of my favourite Microprose games. It played quite a bit different from the original civilization. The remake will be using Civ4 engine and the game will b...
Colonization review - I just got my PC Gamer in the mail for this month (I get it free as a replacement for CGW which they stopped publishing) and it contains a big reivew complete with an 84% rating for the new Civ 4: Colonization game. I thought this was pretty amazing..
Colonization 2008 - Differences from original - After one hour with the 2008 version, here are some differences I've noticed from the original. Most changes seem geared to reduce micromanagement and to speed up the initial pace. - Colonies now have a base production of 1 hammer, so they can build..
Stronghold 2 install troubles - Stronghold 2 stops at around 3/4 install, when placing the 2nd disc in. The disc is readable via windows explorer, but won't continue the installation. Found a reference to this by another on a fan web site, but no fix listed. Anyone know a solution?...
Rollercoaster Tycoon 2 is incompatible with today's graphi.. - Hi, Is it true that Rollercoaster tycoon does not work with the current generation's graphics cards? Here is the entry copy-pasted from the readme.txt file: RollerCoaster Tycoon2 must be played on a video card capable of 640x480 screen resolution at... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|