problems winning the game with conquest

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

I have been playing civ3 for a long time.
Now I have installed the Conquests expansion but,
playing at demi-god level, I am having huge difficulties.

I find that I cannot keep the pace with the expansion rate and technological
advancement of other civs. If I try to attack them, they quickly unite
against me and block my expansion (when they do not destry my civ
completely).

Is there any trick that I do not know to win the game ?

Thanks
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 22:20:27 GMT, "Cayman" <dra@kdsljjsd.us> wrote:

>I have been playing civ3 for a long time.
>Now I have installed the Conquests expansion but,
>playing at demi-god level, I am having huge difficulties.
>
>I find that I cannot keep the pace with the expansion rate and technological
>advancement of other civs. If I try to attack them, they quickly unite
>against me and block my expansion (when they do not destry my civ
>completely).
>
>Is there any trick that I do not know to win the game ?
>
>Thanks

The higher levels are just really difficult. Fraxis only says it is
possible to win and not that it is possible for anyone to win. I
personally think the Conquest AI is smarter than in PTW.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Cayman" <dra@kdsljjsd.us> wrote in message
news:LWxid.126637$b5.6248481@news3.tin.it...
>I have been playing civ3 for a long time.
> Now I have installed the Conquests expansion but,
> playing at demi-god level, I am having huge difficulties.
>
> I find that I cannot keep the pace with the expansion rate and
> technological
> advancement of other civs. If I try to attack them, they quickly unite
> against me and block my expansion (when they do not destry my civ
> completely).
>
> Is there any trick that I do not know to win the game ?

C3C is unbalanced in favor of the agricultural civs. You might be able to
use that knowledge to your advantage.

Make sure you install the 1.22 patch. Most players have accepted it as the
standard and there is a GPT bug in the original release which creates
extremely rich AI's.

If all else fails, drop back to emporer for a few games. Demi-god + levels
require knowledge of how the ai works and behaves. Read up on it at
http://civfanatics.com
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

My impression is that some games just cannot be won.
One must try 2-3 times before he finds a favourable
geography, politics, etc.

Furthemore not all civs are equal: what is the most favoured
civilization in your opinion ? I would guess the Germans or the Greeks.
Others like the Celts have a very hard beginning.

In any case thanks to all. I'll follow your advice.

Bye
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:31:41 GMT, "Cayman" <dra@kdsljjsd.us> wrote:

>My impression is that some games just cannot be won.
>One must try 2-3 times before he finds a favourable
>geography, politics, etc.
>
>Furthemore not all civs are equal: what is the most favoured
>civilization in your opinion ? I would guess the Germans or the Greeks.
>Others like the Celts have a very hard beginning.
>
>In any case thanks to all. I'll follow your advice.

Any of the civs with good early attack units can work well in
conquest. Militaristic is a good advantage too, however, since
production matters, things which enhance that are good.

The situation matters more than the civ picked. If you don't have
neighbors you can blow away, it is hard to conquer. Usually, when I
do it I don't start off trying to conquer. Some AI attacks me, I take
them on successfully, and my success lures more AI to take me on,
allowing me to expand my territory without needing to declare war ;-)


--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

y impression is that some games just cannot be won.
> One must try 2-3 times before he finds a favourable
> geography, politics, etc.
>
> Furthemore not all civs are equal: what is the most favoured
> civilization in your opinion ? I would guess the Germans or the Greeks.
> Others like the Celts have a very hard beginning.
>
> In any case thanks to all. I'll follow your advice.
>
> Bye



Being the english is pretty grim especially in a non island game.
My only deity win was against three weaker civs with me as the persians.

After a couple of years I could not lose at Civ 2 - 50 straight wins in
deity but Civ 3 is way to hard and long and dare I say boring.

ATb
The Chris
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:31:41 GMT, "Cayman" <dra@kdsljjsd.us> wrote:

>My impression is that some games just cannot be won.
>One must try 2-3 times before he finds a favourable
>geography, politics, etc.
>
>Furthemore not all civs are equal: what is the most favoured
>civilization in your opinion ? I would guess the Germans or the Greeks.
>Others like the Celts have a very hard beginning.
>
>In any case thanks to all. I'll follow your advice.

The Germans have gotten their ass kicked early on in almost every game
I have played. I have likely seen every civ become a super power at
one point or another.

I have always preferred productive civs. Persia used to be the best
stacked civ with excellent early special unit. Now that Conquests
rebalanced all the traits I am not sure who is the better civ. Also
at higher levels the AI can switch governments really fast so
Religious civs loose some of their power. The only trait I still
avoid is expansionist.

I think the Celts might have improved in Conquest from PTW. Their
special unit used to be way to expensive. Now it is closer to the
cost of a regular swordsman. I haven't played enough epic Conquest
games to figure out the new balance of power.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 01:21:00 GMT, "The Stare"
<wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote:

>C3C is unbalanced in favor of the agricultural civs. You might be able to
>use that knowledge to your advantage.

In what way is it imbalanced? I have never played that trait since my
populations seem to grow faster than I can produce happiness.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"P12" <nowhere@all.com> wrote in message
news:k9moo0pkrdeb4vgf59a0cdm369epmfj43q@4ax.com...
>
> I think the Celts might have improved in Conquest from PTW. Their
> special unit used to be way to expensive. Now it is closer to the
> cost of a regular swordsman. I haven't played enough epic Conquest
> games to figure out the new balance of power.
>

For Conquests on mid level of difficulty, the Celts are my favourate civ so
far, the gallic swordsman is great. You can expand fast and by securing an
early source of iron and building a dozen or two swordsmen, destroy the civs
closest to you one by one, or take enough cities to get a favourable peace
deal(s). It does help if the other nearby civ's don't have a good early UU
of their own though, ones to watch out for are the romans (legions), greeks
(phalanx?) good counter to weak/medium attackers, and iroquois (mounted
warriors).

For the similar reasons to those above I find playing a civ without an early
UU very difficult, I try to expand early on and if I have to wait for my
unique unit until the middle ages, or industrial age it's too late.
Especially as I find myself behind on tech on monarch/emperor games usually
in the middle ages, so my middle age UU sometimes ends up fighting against
units from the next age, making it a lot less useful. Last emperor level
game I tried playing russians for a change (and also their UU looked very
good....), by the time I got the tech, and the resources together and built
a reasonable number of them I was having to fend off persian tank attacks,
(thankfully the germans didn't have any oil, otherwise it would have been
panzer attacks from the north to contend with as well!).

Other civ's I like, just from a unique unit perspective, are the persians,
vikings, and egyptians (sort of, the chariot has a weak attack IIRC).

IMHO, civ's with poor UU's are:
America: F15 Jet Fighter, so late in the game I rarely get to use it.
England: Man o' war, sea units just not that useful, and it has a lousy
defence.
Spain: Conquestador, fast moving for sabotage I suppose, because the map has
usually been fully expored by the time you get them, and they are too poor
attack and defence wise for use against other troops of the era.

Dave


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.782 / Virus Database: 528 - Release Date: 22/10/2004
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:19:01 -0500, P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 01:21:00 GMT, "The Stare"
><wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>>C3C is unbalanced in favor of the agricultural civs. You might be able to
>>use that knowledge to your advantage.
>
>In what way is it imbalanced? I have never played that trait since my
>populations seem to grow faster than I can produce happiness.

O.K. now I see your point with agricultural civs. I just started a
game and was able to expand like crazy despite a very poor starting
location. There where hills, marshland, and jungles everywhere. My
expansion crippled two nearby civs allowing me for easy conquest
later.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 12:14:13 -0000, "Sloth"
<dave@removethis.sloth.plus.com> wrote:

>
>"P12" <nowhere@all.com> wrote in message
>news:k9moo0pkrdeb4vgf59a0cdm369epmfj43q@4ax.com...
>>
>> I think the Celts might have improved in Conquest from PTW. Their
>> special unit used to be way to expensive. Now it is closer to the
>> cost of a regular swordsman. I haven't played enough epic Conquest
>> games to figure out the new balance of power.
>>
>
>For Conquests on mid level of difficulty, the Celts are my favourate civ so
>far, the gallic swordsman is great. You can expand fast and by securing an
>early source of iron and building a dozen or two swordsmen, destroy the civs
>closest to you one by one, or take enough cities to get a favourable peace
>deal(s). It does help if the other nearby civ's don't have a good early UU
>of their own though, ones to watch out for are the romans (legions), greeks
>(phalanx?) good counter to weak/medium attackers, and iroquois (mounted
>warriors).
>
>For the similar reasons to those above I find playing a civ without an early
>UU very difficult, I try to expand early on and if I have to wait for my
>unique unit until the middle ages, or industrial age it's too late.
>Especially as I find myself behind on tech on monarch/emperor games usually
>in the middle ages, so my middle age UU sometimes ends up fighting against
>units from the next age, making it a lot less useful. Last emperor level
>game I tried playing russians for a change (and also their UU looked very
>good....), by the time I got the tech, and the resources together and built
>a reasonable number of them I was having to fend off persian tank attacks,
>(thankfully the germans didn't have any oil, otherwise it would have been
>panzer attacks from the north to contend with as well!).
>
>Other civ's I like, just from a unique unit perspective, are the persians,
>vikings, and egyptians (sort of, the chariot has a weak attack IIRC).
>
>IMHO, civ's with poor UU's are:
>America: F15 Jet Fighter, so late in the game I rarely get to use it.
>England: Man o' war, sea units just not that useful, and it has a lousy
>defence.
>Spain: Conquestador, fast moving for sabotage I suppose, because the map has
>usually been fully expored by the time you get them, and they are too poor
>attack and defence wise for use against other troops of the era.
>
>Dave

I just started my first game as the Summerians. The have an
interesting early unit which gives me a spearmen at the cost of a
warrior. I did have a hard time taking the Babylonians next door who
also have a nice starting unit.

They don't happen until a bit later but the Mongols have a nice
special unit. They are cheap nights which move through mountains
quickly. I don't think you need iron to build them either.

I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have the
worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week because it
cannot travel through mountains. I find the French Musketeer a weak
unit as well.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:

[snip]
>
> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have
> the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week

I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because they
have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free scout
alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time of
scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.


--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 7 Nov 2004 18:25:33 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:
>
>[snip]
>>
>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have
>> the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week
>
> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because they
>have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free scout
>alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time of
>scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.
Forgive me for asking, but what's a UU?

Buck
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 7 Nov 2004 18:25:33 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:

>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have
>> the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week
>
> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because they
>have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free scout
>alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time of
>scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.

The scout can only move two squares over flat land. Through jungles
and mountains it is the same as any other unit. Barbarians will go
out of their way to find an kill them. Goodie huts are not as good
the higher up in level you play. Many of the things you find in
goodie huts are worthless. I would rather just trade for the tech
later in the game. Most of the time I just find barbarians or an area
map. Conquest made expansionist even worse by moving world map
trading to so late in the game. By that time everyone already knows
what you know.

The industrious is probably the best trait. That is what makes it
more powerful than say the Zulu. The Zulu don't build or produce
anything but units and cities.

This all of course depends on your playing style. If expansionists
had something better like along all new cities borders to expand in
one turn I would be more likely to pick them.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"P12" <nowhere@all.com> wrote in message
news:tomso01b6m30ddc6bankjd1srute53lumg@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:19:01 -0500, P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 01:21:00 GMT, "The Stare"
>><wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>
>>>C3C is unbalanced in favor of the agricultural civs. You might be able to
>>>use that knowledge to your advantage.
>>
>>In what way is it imbalanced? I have never played that trait since my
>>populations seem to grow faster than I can produce happiness.
>
> O.K. now I see your point with agricultural civs. I just started a
> game and was able to expand like crazy despite a very poor starting
> location. There where hills, marshland, and jungles everywhere. My
> expansion crippled two nearby civs allowing me for easy conquest
> later.

And your aqueducts are 1/2 prices 😉
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"The Great Gazoo" <thegreat@ga.zoo> wrote in message
news:ehtso0956llbfn28ru4j5hsj11ujrr9q3e@4ax.com...
> On 7 Nov 2004 18:25:33 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
> <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>>news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:
>>
>>[snip]
>>>
>>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have
>>> the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week
>>
>> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because they
>>have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
>> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free scout
>>alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time of
>>scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.
> Forgive me for asking, but what's a UU?

Unique Unit - the special unit each civ can build that will trigger a golden
age
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
news:Xns959A87B35AA6Fkdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
> P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
> news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:
>
> [snip]
>>
>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have
>> the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week
>
> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because they
> have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free scout
> alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time of
> scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.

I'm not the OP but here is my view.... :)

Heh,

Each to his own, but to me playing on a medium sized map, expansionist is
the poorest trait ever, sure you can explore faster, and maybe grab a few
huts for tech. But in the meantime civ's with military as a trait will be be
building barracks (and the troops to go with them :/), Religious will have
cheap temples already built (cultural win?), industrious will bill building
roads everywhere, commercial will get marketplaces on the cheap.... etc.

Starting with a scout is a gamble - if you don't find anything quickly it's
a total waste. But this is just my view. :)

Dave

Military? - well barracks are cheap enough anyway.....

Religious and Industrious are the best....



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.782 / Virus Database: 528 - Release Date: 22/10/2004
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:32:49 -0000, "Sloth"
<dave@removethis.sloth.plus.com> wrote:

>
>"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns959A87B35AA6Fkdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
>> P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>> news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:
>>
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also have
>>> the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is week
>>
>> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because they
>> have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
>> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free scout
>> alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time of
>> scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.
>
>I'm not the OP but here is my view.... :)
>
>Heh,
>
>Each to his own, but to me playing on a medium sized map, expansionist is
>the poorest trait ever, sure you can explore faster, and maybe grab a few
>huts for tech. But in the meantime civ's with military as a trait will be be
>building barracks (and the troops to go with them :/), Religious will have
>cheap temples already built (cultural win?), industrious will bill building
>roads everywhere, commercial will get marketplaces on the cheap.... etc.
>
>Starting with a scout is a gamble - if you don't find anything quickly it's
>a total waste. But this is just my view. :)
>
>Dave
>
>Military? - well barracks are cheap enough anyway.....
>
>Religious and Industrious are the best....
>
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.782 / Virus Database: 528 - Release Date: 22/10/2004
>
Ever have an explorer's first find a barbarian? Doesn't do any good
and you now have to produce military immediately.

Buck
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
news:m05to09jaepfjuv6ijors2pi270hu8l00e@4ax.com:

> On 7 Nov 2004 18:25:33 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
> <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>>news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:
>
>>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also
>>> have the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is
>>> week
>>
>> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because
>> they
>>have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
>> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free
>> scout
>>alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time
>>of scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.
>
> The scout can only move two squares over flat land. Through
> jungles and mountains it is the same as any other unit.

But the point is that you start with it. Everyone else has to spend
the first 5 turns building a warrior.

> Barbarians will go out of their way to find an kill them. Goodie
> huts are not as good the higher up in level you play. Many of the
> things you find in goodie huts are worthless. I would rather just
> trade for the tech later in the game. Most of the time I just
> find barbarians or an area map.

Expansionists don't find barbarians. Ever.

> This all of course depends on your playing style.

That's true. But IMO the most valuable commodity in Civ (any turn
based game) is the turn itself. Because of the cumulative nature of
these games, the earlier you can save a turn the more difference it
will make in the end. And you don't get any earlier than "starts
with".


--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 8 Nov 2004 16:03:56 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>> This all of course depends on your playing style.

> That's true. But IMO the most valuable commodity in Civ (any turn
>based game) is the turn itself. Because of the cumulative nature of
>these games, the earlier you can save a turn the more difference it
>will make in the end. And you don't get any earlier than "starts
>with".

Well along that lines the most valuable asset to the scout for me
would be locating the best spot for the first three cities. With a
warrior you can make a best guess where to put them. A scout could
help find a larger area to better determine an optimal placement of
the cities. The key being that these cities will be your core cities
for the entire 250 turns.
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 8 Nov 2004 16:03:56 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>news:m05to09jaepfjuv6ijors2pi270hu8l00e@4ax.com:
>
>> On 7 Nov 2004 18:25:33 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
>> <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>>
>>>P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
>>>news:78nso0hdehqmu2oc5trld1uvffi54hr18b@4ax.com:
>>
>>>> I agree that America has the worst special unit and they also
>>>> have the worst trait of expansionist. Egypt's special unit is
>>>> week
>>>
>>> I agree that America has the worst UU, but I think it's because
>>> they
>>>have the best traits. Industrial and Expansionist.
>>> I'm curious why you think it's the worst trait? IMO, the free
>>> scout
>>>alone makes it worthwhile as it starts you off 5 turns (build time
>>>of scout) ahead of the non-expansionist tribes.
>>
>> The scout can only move two squares over flat land. Through
>> jungles and mountains it is the same as any other unit.
>
> But the point is that you start with it. Everyone else has to spend
>the first 5 turns building a warrior.

The scout's speed is good too. But the next part is the key thing.

>> Barbarians will go out of their way to find an kill them. Goodie
>> huts are not as good the higher up in level you play. Many of the
>> things you find in goodie huts are worthless. I would rather just
>> trade for the tech later in the game. Most of the time I just
>> find barbarians or an area map.
>
> Expansionists don't find barbarians. Ever.

Never from huts, and they have a much better chance of getting
settlers from huts. "Wild" barbarians are a hassle, though, as the
scout has no defense.

Even so, the huts *are* a major factor if your map is large enough
to give you plenty of them. It is possible to collect all the ancient
era techs from huts, and actually run ahead of the AI in tech early in
the game, even on higher difficulty levels.

OTOH, small land masses and bad luck can cripple expansionist civs.
Their edge is entirely in the early game, and unless they get enough
from it they are weaker due to the lack of any continuing advantage.
Most of the others have something which helps later in the game.

>> This all of course depends on your playing style.
>
> That's true. But IMO the most valuable commodity in Civ (any turn
>based game) is the turn itself. Because of the cumulative nature of
>these games, the earlier you can save a turn the more difference it
>will make in the end. And you don't get any earlier than "starts
>with".

Plus it is nice to see a goodie hut as goodies only, never any
dangers. If you start with one within range, you can even send your
scout out to grab it right off. Get another settler, and you're a big
step up - I think that is the best early result. In fact, if you have
enough huts in range, you can skip building settlers yourself.

Note, it helps a lot to know that you can't get settlers from huts
if you have or are building a settler.
--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom