QUOTE:
Jaeger of Fenn wrote:


Annoying how? when on mass their knights are hard to defeate but so are many others but personally I prefer either Nords or Rhodoks and cavalry of mine are usually mercenaries.

Well, its because if I played any other then the Swadians, they would always get trampled by the others.

And it annoys me that they've got the best troops (in my opinion), but they always loose wars. I've pretty much made it a personal quest to defend them

Lady Lilith wrote:

Well, its because if I played any other then the Swadians, they would always get trampled by the others.

And it annoys me that they've got the best troops (in my opinion), but they always loose wars. I've pretty much made it a personal quest to defend them [/quote]

Oh well all nations have their advantage and to tell the truth it varies(at least for me) how the wars go but Khergits are peculiar in my opinion they are strong when fighting in low open land and defending cities but have them attack a castle or city and they get whooped the easiest.

And Civilization Colonizations is a good game and highly recomendable to those who are tired to 'classical' civilization play style. But who would be tired to Civilizations

Civ. Colonization of Sid Mayer its a long waited game from my side, but I must say that I was a bit dissapointed:
the graphics works all right, the music is one of the best, but the gameplay..
You don't have the same emotion like in original Colonization (Sid Mayer too) when you walk on indian land and they get upset if too many people go up and down near their villages, even colonists. If military, the indian villages sound the alarm.. also, cutting down the forests, you find special spots, now its all revealed..
In the new Civilization Colonization I discover it a winning tactics: Europeans use to sell the guns after they start and you with one soldier can go and take their colonies for free. Slowing down the competitors, especially England let you room for getting more special persons and bonuses, use the scouts to get rich visiting the indian villages and burials and get a Privateer first to terrorize the others on the sea. It works even on the highest difficulty level..

There are old classics out there that shouldnt be forgotten.

They are worth a try for the experience. The old ones were great ideas.

I reccomend;

Baldurs gate 1 & 2 being one of the best selling medieval / fantasy franchises ever.

Diablo 1 & 2 multiplayer is very good and high replay value.

Might and magic 6, 7, and 8 first person old school fighter, six uses real player portraits, seven uses cgi and eight cgi. Eight's graphics are far superior to six which are lacking, but six is more original. Seven is possibly the best out of the lot, you get your own castle and there are lots of very interesting areas. I will say however that this is a fantasy genre, with fantasy elements.

Baldur's Gate as a classical RPG and Diablo II as a hack'n slash RPG are one of a kind, there are a lot of games today made by them. I just use to play Lionheart who isn't very much different, but have the same perfume..

I really like the Total War series, all of them. Icewind Dale and baldurs gate are also at the top of my list, and I still have in my comp. Europa Universallis 3 and Crusader Kings (it's too bad you can play as a muslim or as a pagan, but its very entertaining),
In mount and blade, I must have tried every possible mod

Do you reccomend mount and blade? And whats the age of conan like? It must be good for the pay per month its charging...

I honestly love conan and the hyborian legends, but its a bit steep.

How could i leave out iwd, i love iwd too.

Thoryn Rathmor wrote:

QUOTE:
Do you reccomend mount and blade? And whats the age of conan like? It must be good for the pay per month its charging... :huh:

I honestly love conan and the hyborian legends, but its a bit steep.

How could i leave out iwd, i love iwd too.

Every one who has played Mount&Blade can recomend it.

I have recently come in posession of Bladestorm it is a game from same makers as Dynastywarriors wich can be seen easily. The game is located in 100 years war but its historical accuracy... well Dynasty warriors 6 is more closer to history than it but it is rather entertaining as long you don't point out the flaws of its history.

But it should be played only by those who love smithing hordes of foes down while commanding a mercenary unit of your own.

I enjoy the X-Box future pseudo-Norse game, "Too Human"

also "Bladestorm," the mercenary Euro version of the Samurai Warriors game mechanics.

Thoryn Rathmor wrote:

QUOTE:
There are old classics out there that shouldnt be forgotten.

They are worth a try for the experience. The old ones were great ideas.

I reccomend;

Baldurs gate 1 & 2 being one of the best selling medieval / fantasy franchises ever.

Diablo 1 & 2 multiplayer is very good and high replay value.

Might and magic 6, 7, and 8 first person old school fighter, six uses real player portraits, seven uses cgi and eight cgi. Eight's graphics are far superior to six which are lacking, but six is more original. Seven is possibly the best out of the lot, you get your own castle and there are lots of very interesting areas. I will say however that this is a fantasy genre, with fantasy elements.

please....tell me more about might and magic, i'm quite interestet.
How's the gameplay?
More strategy based?