Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!cbmvax!rutgers!apple!bionet!agate!ucbvax!hplabs!well!dhawk
From: dhawk@well.UUCP (David Hawkins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Is Risk available for the ST
Message-ID: <7464@well.UUCP>
Date: 25 Oct 88 18:25:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: well.7464
References: <8313@trwrb.UUCP> <6726@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <1719@nunki.usc.edu> <3201@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
Reply-To: dhawk@well.UUCP (David Hawkins)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 28

In article <1719@nunki.usc.edu> jjung@nunki.usc.edu (John Jung) writes:
>
>  Are you insane? I tried Lords of Conquest in the store, and I think it
>stinks. I had seen the ads, and I knew the graphics weren't going to be much,
>but when I actually saw it, the graphics looked like *bad* Atari 8-bit
>graphics. The game interfaced wasn't too bad, but I didn't like it. The sound
>(which I prefered off) was bad and annoying.
 
>  I would not reccommend this game to anybody who likes/loves Risk. I am a
>devotee of Risk, and I didn't like Lords of Conquest one _single_ bit.

I have to agree.  I have a review copy of Lords of Conquest and it's
awful (in my opinion, of course.)  The graphics are incredibly bad.
The worst part was the manual.  Any number of terms were not
explained well or at all.  I never got any kind of 'feel' for the
game.  There were some other problems with it, but they're in my notes
and I'm at work.

If you want an excellent game that has Risk-type elements, play
Empire.  At least the manual is thorough.  (In this case I mean
Risk-type in that it's a 'conquer the world' game.  You start with
just one city, just like the opponent, whereas in Risk and Lords of
Conquest you start with contries interspaced with the opponent's.)

later, david
-- 
David Hawkins       {pacbell,hplabs,ucbvax}!well!dhawk
There's one about Paddy O'Furniture, but I forget how to set it up.