Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Though i thought .2 was the .1 improved ive seen that some people stick with .1 . Why is that?
    Son of the now supersilly walking MasterBigAb/戦国無双



  2. #2

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Some people don't like the new additions, some can't bother to download more and others just like 6.1 as it is. It's just down to preferences, like choosing food.

  3. #3

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    I think more submods are compatible with 6.1 than with 6.2 too.

  4. #4
    Galain_Ironhide's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Kalgoorlie Western Australia
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    The one thing I did not like about 6.1 was the AI losing Territories to rebellion. This doesn't happen so easy in 6.2 rr/rc.

    Also the AI didn't seem capable of growing much further past 15 maybe 16 territories in a GC. Kinda made it a bit boring after you managed to hit roughly 20 territories of your own. Again the AI has no troubles there - I'm a 150 turns in my TO campaign, I own 31, the Mongols have 32 and the Fatamids have roughly 25 and the french about 20.

  5. #5

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Quote Originally Posted by Galain_Ironhide View Post
    The one thing I did not like about 6.1 was the AI losing Territories to rebellion. This doesn't happen so easy in 6.2 rr/rc.

    Also the AI didn't seem capable of growing much further past 15 maybe 16 territories in a GC. Kinda made it a bit boring after you managed to hit roughly 20 territories of your own. Again the AI has no troubles there - I'm a 150 turns in my TO campaign, I own 31, the Mongols have 32 and the Fatamids have roughly 25 and the french about 20.
    Playing as Seljuks i got Tabriz 2 times and baghdad 3 times from the mongols due to rebellion my ally kwarzem most have gotten at Kermanshah like 10 times so ure massively wrong AI loses the same amount of territory as in 6.1

  6. #6
    Galain_Ironhide's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Kalgoorlie Western Australia
    Posts
    410

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Quote Originally Posted by The-Monetary View Post
    Playing as Seljuks i got Tabriz 2 times and baghdad 3 times from the mongols due to rebellion my ally kwarzem most have gotten at Kermanshah like 10 times so ure massively wrong AI loses the same amount of territory as in 6.1
    The Mongols are a different kettle of fish altogether. They do not garrison their cities (except for like one or two units), nor do they build new buildings or repair the ones they smashed when taking them for their own - they just spawn infinite stacks of uber troops to make it interesting . It is intended in the submod that they do lose territories to rebellion because of massive unrest. In my current game they should probably have up to 40 - 45 territories if it wasn't for rebellion

    I apologise, I should have been more clearer that Mongols are the exception. The statement was centered around the other 29 factions that are more stable in their growth.

  7. #7

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Quote Originally Posted by Galain_Ironhide View Post
    The Mongols are a different kettle of fish altogether. They do not garrison their cities (except for like one or two units), nor do they build new buildings or repair the ones they smashed when taking them for their own - they just spawn infinite stacks of uber troops to make it interesting . It is intended in the submod that they do lose territories to rebellion because of massive unrest. In my current game they should probably have up to 40 - 45 territories if it wasn't for rebellion

    I apologise, I should have been more clearer that Mongols are the exception. The statement was centered around the other 29 factions that are more stable in their growth.
    Knocking at the gates of Europe
    Son of the now supersilly walking MasterBigAb/戦国無双



  8. #8
    JorisofHolland's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    3,779

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Simply preferences, as mentioned above. I think more sub mods are compatible with 6.1, but on the other hand: RR/RC, the best sub mods I can think of, includes 6.2 compilation. There are no major differences, except the difficulty is supposed to be higher. Didn't notice that really, though. Only the starting off is a bit hard.
    The Enemy of Human Souls
    Sat grieving at the cost of coals;
    For Hell had been annexed of late,
    And was a sovereign Southern State.

  9. #9

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    i used to play 6.2 then i switched back to 6.1 to play sub mods =D and 6.2 they attack too much =(

  10. #10

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Thank you for the response

    So in general : -compatibility with sub mods for .1
    -AI is harder for .2

    anything else ,that you only experience while playing ?
    Son of the now supersilly walking MasterBigAb/戦国無双



  11. #11

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    I think scripts are more stable and bug free in 6.2. Sometimes in 6.1 the scripts can be buggy which results in having to reload from much earlier. It isn't frequent but definitely make saves every other turn for the last 6 turns or so for each campaign.

  12. #12
    JorisofHolland's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    3,779

    Default Re: SS 6.1 vs SS6.2

    Golden Horde can no longer be counted as a faction They are more a massive attack of rebels. See it as the revenge for taking all those rebel settlements early on, and killing all those bridgands
    The Enemy of Human Souls
    Sat grieving at the cost of coals;
    For Hell had been annexed of late,
    And was a sovereign Southern State.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •