Why did American Conquest never get the same amount of love from the fan base?

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by grizzgolf, Jul 31, 2015.

  1. Nowy

    Nowy Well-Known Member

    However AC game had some interesting features I still prefer Cossacks games, especially C2 is much better.
    AC never get the same amount of love. There were too many stange things which I mentioned in my post on 1st page.
    Cossacks games offered more interesting RTS game, swift game pace and better stick with represented periods.

    C1 offered crazy dynamic gameplay, fast economy development, many nations, variable units, ships, simpler gameplay.
    There were poorer, but more transparent graphic and better chosen build/damage times.

    C2 add more advanced squad combats, roads, villages, better organized armies, better artillery, sappers, skirmishers, better recreated cavalry and infantry types, better chosen units statistics, behaviours, morale, fatigue, better landscape, transparent graphic, suficient combat animations and fine Battle for Europe Campaign. AI is much better and smarter.
    There are less crazy damage and less basic kill ratio. There no crazy garrison buildings, insane fortifications sieges, too big artillery fire ranges. All these looks more realistic.

    I never feel fun with insane killing masses of blobing units which I can meet in C1 or AC games. I prefer well organized combats with well represented various units organized in fine order of battle. That's why ACFB HEW mod and C2 games were much more iteresting for me.
     
  2. i loved ac,and the Divided Nations mod was really good.But the best with AC was the music
     
  3. HerrGeneral

    HerrGeneral New Member

    The game was just immature. They made a lot of good features but they didn't work really good. Example to occupy a house you need to much units and it doesn't make any sense. Or the stupid thing that you fort shoots all the time some animals and hits your own houses...
     
  4. SomeDude2016

    SomeDude2016 New Member

    ACFB was the first game i've played, Cossacks I later.
    I've always loved the principle that peasants had to be 'converted' to soldiers (bit realism).
    I see some people complain about the economic managements. Never had problems with it. In CI i had often problems with it. If you build walls, it kept using stone, dropping it fast down. Never understood that, perhaps for maintenance?
    Like mentoined before (don't know by who), the size comparisation of buildings/ units was idd better.
    I see some of you talking about troop formations in CI, and even in your own advantage.
    Never worked for me in CI, only in ACFB. Their the formations always worked, no matter which size.
     
  5. vonshaunus

    vonshaunus New Member

    AC was in many ways a very good game, but it was way too late in the market and just that bit too 'quirky' for the mainstream. The engine was also a compromised upgrade of the old Cossacks engine at a time when everyone else was doing full 3D.

    The ability to handle mass units was amazing though, and making Divided Nation was a lot of fun. Even the weeks of work for all those arty reload animations and the immensely complex buildings.
     
  6. Privateer

    Privateer Active Member

    I liked the fact that you could occupy houses and fight over them, and have to send villagers to forts to train, however the training aspect always required baby-sitting.

    I think having such a narrow focus - colonisation of the Americas, with few nations was too much of a departure from European Wars and its European nations. In Cossacks, most Europeans (i.e. the biggest market for the game) could select their home nation and do battle - we were a little limited in AC!
     
  7. Hugojackson18

    Hugojackson18 Member

    Absolutely loved American Conquest and hoping we can mod Cossacks 3 to be in the same vain!
    Love the Indians and some of the mechanics.
     
    Loner likes this.
  8. [KGR]CATWEAZEL

    [KGR]CATWEAZEL Moderator Staff Member

    that is a question, which is very easy to answer. The Graphics wasn't good and the warefare was literally all about putting units into buildings and fortresses from which they could shoot out from. Then the morale aspect destroyed the whole gameplay as big armies scattered all the time only because the morale was low. Gladly this was more balanced in cossacks 2, but cossacks 2 therefore had other issues.
     
  9. (OC)Fotheringill

    (OC)Fotheringill Active Member

    I think the answer is a simple one.

    Where there are several successive new releases of a base title, the fan base gets diluted. Some staying with version 1, some with version 2, etc.

    It was also a horror for many clans, with a fragmentation of the cohesiveness of the group with so many versions of the same title.
     
  10. Kneecap

    Kneecap Member

    I played AC for a while, but it quickly grew boring, because the AI in that game was pretty poor. They would ignore formations, and basically just put their barracks rally point in my base. One by one the harquebusiers would trickle in, and it made for some pretty boring gameplay. Sadly i never tried the multiplayer in this game. Maybe that would have been better.
     
  11. Nath33killer

    Nath33killer Member

    AC was a so good game but too long to play. The fire system was incredibly perfect and bowmen were just good enough. Cannons were so expensive and took so much time to train but were very effiecient with cannister. Ships were amazing and balance wasn't too bad there were just a few tribes which didn't have a lot of different units. Economy was interesting but maybe too complicated. You never hunted because you had farms :). Finally, tribes everywhere on the maps were so nice, you just paid them to send soldiers or to help you defending. There were peasants killers, raiders...
    A AC copy with cossack 3 graphics mod would be the second mod I would be waiting for the most after the Cossack 2 one.
     
  12. Ivenend

    Ivenend Member

    The units in AC are graphically better than C1. The reason why I seldom play AC is that I'm not interested in Colonism history.
     
  13. Nath33killer

    Nath33killer Member

    You're funny you know that you don't only play a game for its historical context right ? Fans loves AC because there were Indians maybe but also cause graphics and gameplay were so better. There were realistic fire power and bowshots as well as cavalry behaviour. Unit formations were better than in cossacks, and know, we come back to the first one, with all its problems ? A 2000 game even if we are in late 2016 ? No, even real cossacks fans cannot say they are satisfied because the copy has still problems, it was in beta phase when GSC launched it.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice