|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Aug 9, 2015 15:36:35 GMT
I'm just curious which game is your favorite? Mine is European War 4 because of the 6 different campaigns, and the ability to play all of the conquests from the start (not having to wait for a clock to reach that year. I actually auto played while I slept in order to reach 1960 in WC) The graphics, while not as good as WC, were still a big improvement from EW3. Post your opinion and tell me some reasons why you think one is better than the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by saltin on Aug 9, 2015 22:18:16 GMT
I played European war 4 a lot,maybe too much and I really enjoyed it.I think the main problem with it was that conquests were too easy once you had a good set up with items/generals(maybe why Easytech originally had a 100 turn limit). In world conqueror 3 the conquests are still not too hard once your tech/wonders/generals are top,but they still are fun and not super easy. I liked the progression unlocks they made too so players dont rush into an era they are not ready for.They should have done same with 1975 conquest and locked that to like level 100 so we dont end up with players tech level 2 attempting alien conquest  Also there is just more variaty in world conqueror 3: missions,multiple kind if challenges,techs that actually matters,wonders ect.. |
|
|
|
Post by The Armchair General on Aug 10, 2015 2:16:06 GMT
WC3 seem to have more freedom to do more things,conquest mode is much better.
Ew4 is a classic though,I felt the campaigns there had much more depth than WC3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Aug 10, 2015 6:04:01 GMT
I'd rather say that ew4 was (personally for me) the best easytech has developed so far, campaigns had quite an edge but once you did a conquest, you got to know quite much about the game. Wc3 is good, but not as good, graphically a bit catoonish, but still fun, though I have to admit farming in ew4 is wayyyy easy comapred to wc3 (all thanks to saltin and kanue's guides on farming lol ) Both are fun, good to see some strategy games being played around the world. |
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Aug 11, 2015 18:24:34 GMT
I love both games, but I have to say I like Wc3 a bit more. I play the conquests much more than the campaigns, and while the Ew4 conquests are still great, I love the global conquest aspect of Wc3, as well as my bias towards WWII games.
|
|
|
|
Post by saltin on Aug 12, 2015 8:39:19 GMT
Yeap,World conqueror 3 has that grand strategy epic scale feel to it,much more so than European war 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by kanue on Aug 12, 2015 18:23:19 GMT
Interface
- Overall, I prefer interface in WC3 which I can navigate things with less click. EW4 always goes to main menu when I click 'back.'
- I like the interface for choosing campaign in EW4 better because I can easily see the sequence of events together with campaign names. It looks kinda messy in WC3.
- HP and attack of units in WC3 are updated to current value while the number is static in EW4
- WC3 has nice descriptions of skill and other things. It's pretty much a work of guess and experiments in EW4
Campaigns
- WC3 campaigns are too short. Fighting aliens is kinda out of the scope of this game original setting and I don't feel like it suits the game. EW4 content is about right.
- I feel a nice chain of events in EW4 campaigns (though, some of them is stupid as someone mentions about HRE campaign) so I have an idea about what I am fighting for. In WC3, there is no clear connection between each campaign. For example, Allied#1 is Pratiotic War in Soviet then Allied#2 moves to Pacific war then Allied#3 goes to North Africa.
- WC3 offers difficulty levels which is good for beginners and veterans.
Conquests
- I like the fact that, in WC3, enemy AI has advantage that my side won't win without me playing an important role. In EW4, my side might just end up win the war without me doing anything about mopping up enemy cities.
- I like winning condition in WC3 much more than in EW4 because you don't need to kill every single enemies, capture every cities, and destroy every fortress.
Units
- WC3 offers more variety of units which can be used differently. Each of them also has some unique ability that affect game play.
- Air force and paratroop open a new way to play.
- In WC3, super tank is OP and makes other units obsolete while there is no unit like that in EW4.
Generals
- General's roles in WC3 is kinda limited in comparison to EW4 because they die very fast.
- General skills in WC3 are kinda not so creative. most of them are just adding flat damage or avoid retaliation. No skill that make a general unique like leadership, Spy, Geography, or Assault Art in EW4.
- Generals in EW4 progress by gaining experience from fighting which is good because I feel rewarding I fight enemies with my general. Generals in WC3, on the other hand, are promoted with medals which might be a good thing that you can switch your generals around. But I prefer how it is in EW4.
- In EW4, items make generals system more interesting.
- In WC3, you have access to almost all generals (except the 3) without spending real money. In EW4, tier 3 generals are exclusive for money spenders.
- I like princesses in EW4. They are trophies for conquest achievement and, at the same time, they also work as free capable generals.
Grinding
- Grinding system in WC3 is a big issue for me. After I finish all missions, campaigns, and other things, the only source is from wonders. This is not about spending real money but with this system, I feel playing the game is not rewarding. I get no progress from playing this game while in EW4, I receive little amount of medals fighting as incentive.
Misc
- Missions and Challenges are nice for taking a break from campaigns or conquests.
- WC3 allows you to build wonders or upgrade your troops which has universal effect, not like in EW4 that upgrades are specific to campaign.
- I like WW II more than Napoleonic War but alien is a bit too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Aug 12, 2015 19:01:28 GMT
The AI is pretty unbalanced in EW4. In 1806, if you play as blue side, there is a huge army in Saxony consisting of Prussians, Austrians, Russians and the Saxony units. There must be at least 20 units there.
|
|
|
|
Post by bottlesofbeer on Aug 24, 2015 23:38:58 GMT
I really like that you can sell back yiur generals in WC3 but I miss items like we have in EW4.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moreau on Aug 25, 2015 22:30:40 GMT
Hmm
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Aug 26, 2015 4:37:09 GMT
The AI is pretty unbalanced in EW4. In 1806, if you play as blue side, there is a huge army in Saxony consisting of Prussians, Austrians, Russians and the Saxony units. There must be at least 20 units there. And when you look at it closely then you get to know that saxony in 1806 isn't in saxony!!. I mean that saxony is also in the rhine confederation (frankfurt is in it) but the allies slso have a saxony. usually the rhiners get pretty much dead when loads of russians, prussians and austrians come in. |
|
|
|
Post by Charlemagne on Aug 26, 2018 1:44:16 GMT
I liked ew4 more cuz I really liked the rank experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Walpole on Aug 26, 2018 9:59:44 GMT
EW6 vs. WC4 when?
|
|
liutenant
Captain
Trying and failing at a multitude of ET games
Posts: 107
|
Post by liutenant on Feb 18, 2019 16:54:41 GMT
 I think WC4 looks better overall and conquests seem easier to view as a whole so as to plan your military operations. I EW6 you have the population cap which I dislike as you could have superior quantity of units and economy but still lose. Despite this it seems EW6 has more to do generally and is more historically based due to the fact that there are no imaginary wars like in WC4, i also think the general system in EW6 is a lot better generally. I also like the free generals in campaign mode. I think campaign mode is more engaging and the difficulty is more balanced so you don’t get stuck forever on an impossible mission. I also like the fact that there is no skill that is overpowered in every situation (such as rumour in WC4) in EW6. I also like the fact that you can view a generals historical background in EW6. I also prefer cavalry to armour as a unit but I think the dynamics between cavalry and infantry in EW6 are quite unrealistic and I think land units, having marched into the sea should we a lot weaker than they are in EW6 and more like how weak they are in WC4 because it risks making navy obsolete like in WC3 |
|
