Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!agate!shelby!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!ux.acs!clarson From: clarson@ux.acs.umn.edu (Chaz Larson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games Subject: Re: Upgrading Strategic Conquest 2.0 to 3.0 Message-ID: <3171@ux.acs.umn.edu> Date: 31 Jan 91 21:08:25 GMT References: <1991Jan31.175411.6662@wuphys.wustl.edu> Reply-To: clarson@ux.acs.umn.edu (Chaz Larson) Organization: Iron City, USA Lines: 98 In article <1991Jan31.175411.6662@wuphys.wustl.edu> tld@wuphys.UUCP (Tyrone Daulton) writes: |Can anyone tell me the differences between SC v2.0 and v3.0. I have played |SC v2.0 before and after playing Empire on the Amiga and IBM I was not overly |impressed with it. If v3.0 is much improved over v2.0, I would consider |purchasing it. Well, allow me to quote two messages from earlier in this same thread: Article 2697 of comp.sys.mac.games: >From: duga@merlin.cvs.rochester.edu (Brady Duga) Subject: Re: Upgrading Strategic Conquest 2.0 to 3.0 Message-ID: <11938@ur-cc.UUCP> Date: 29 Jan 91 16:37:09 GMT Organization: Center for Visual Science, U. of Rochester Lines: 47 In article <91028.224311CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu> CXT105@psuvm.psu.edu (Christopher Tate) writes: > >Ack! The last I heard, the most recent version was 2.055! Does anyone >know what the changes are for 3.0? As far as I could tell, the only >difference between 1.0 and 2.0 was the lack of copy protection. What's >version 3.0 like? I don't seem to remeber this posted, so here goes: [From page 23 of the Strat Con 3 manual] Changes from Strategic Conquest 2.0: The map is a growable, moveable window. Strategic Conquest now supports gigantic monitors, multiple monitors, desk accesories, Multifinder and the new Sound manager. The two player game is more fair. [I'm not certain i understand what this really means] It uses only one file - no external sound files. The "Hide' and "talking" features have been removed. Carriers are weaker; destroyers and submarines and battleships are stronger, to encourage a sophisticated naval strategy. Armies and airplanes never get strength 2. The world is slightly smaller, there are less cities, and the islands have better shape. [I think they kept the same land to city ratio, but just have less land] There are some mild performance enhancements and several bug fixes: Nothing can attack more than twice per turn, there are no problems with scrolling by dragging an airplanes path, and ships can't regain their entire strength in one turn. [And now the big one:] The computer player now produces his pieces at exactly the same rate as you at every skill level. [YAY!] After all is said and done, I'd say it looks ad feels almost exactly like 2.0. --Brady (duga@cvs.rochester.edu) Article 2751 of comp.sys.mac.games: >From: greg@dj.cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Greg James) Subject: Re: Upgrading Strategic Conquest 2.0 to 3.0 Message-ID: <1991Jan30.231512.26592@cpsc.ucalgary.ca> Date: 30 Jan 91 23:15:12 GMT Organization: U. of Calgary Computer Science I have the new upgrade. The principal change is that the computer now uses and entirely new strategy, and doesn't win by cheating (outproducing) on the higher levels. There are also bug fixes, like the cmd-B bug that turns your fighters into ground support demons, and airplane paths don't change while scrolling. The detroyers and subs and battleships are stronger, while the carrier is weaker. The world is smaller, there are less cities, and the islands "have better shape". That's most of it. I think it is a much better game, now. Greg James greg@cpsc.ucalgary.ca So, there you go. chaz -- Someone please release me from this trance. clarson@ux.acs.umn.edu AOL:Crowbone