Which one?

[amps1963]

I need some guidance. I really want a game that focuses on the Pacific, so I'm thinking why not by SC Pacific Theater. Easy, right? But now that SC Global Conflict is out i'm wondering if I shouldn't go that route. Other then obviously one covers the whole world and the other covers just one theater, what are the differences?:confused:

Any help on this is much appreciated.

Andy (The Greatest Guitar Player you've never heard of):cool:

[Bill101]

SC Pacific Theater covers the Pacific in more detail and at a different scale to the Global game. Plus it has quite a few Pacific only scenarios, e.g. Burma, Kokoda, the Philippines, Guadalcanal, Peleliu etc.

The Global game being newer obviously has some enhanced features over SC Pacific, but the scope being Global it does give a different game.

The best thing I can suggest is to take a look at the demos of both, and see which takes your fancy the most.

[xwormwood]

Pacific Theater has a larger map of the pacific, and it is really fun to play.

Global Conquest has the even larger map as it has the whole world, but a slightly smaler map of the pacific.

On the other hand: you can attack east africa or madagaskar as the japanese player in Global Conquest, which isn't possible in Pacific Theater.

Very difficult decision.

I would recommend Global Conquest. And if you can spare the money, then buy Pacific Theater as well.

But in my opinion Global Conquest offers you more:

more mapsize, the newest and by far best SC game engine ever, more replayability.

But if you don't want to play the war in europe, than you should grab Pacific Theater, because you "only" play in the pacific in this game.

Again, i would choose Global Conquest. Maybe a modder will release a Pacific Theater only game in the future.

If this happens, than the Global Conquest game engine will generate much more fun, the Pacific Theater game engine is good as well, but not as good the the Global Conquest one.

REALLY trickery, your question, yes, it is.

[amps1963]

Cool, it looks like I'll give Global Conquest a try. Thanks for the replies.

[xwormwood]

SC Pacific Theater covers the Pacific in more detail and at a different scale to the Global game. Plus it has quite a few Pacific only scenarios, e.g. Burma, Kokoda, the Philippines, Guadalcanal, Peleliu etc.

The Global game being newer obviously has some enhanced features over SC Pacific, but the scope being Global it does give a different game.

The best thing I can suggest is to take a look at the demos of both, and see which takes your fancy the most.

While it offers more scenarios, it unfortunatly offers only one campaign.

Which is still excellent, though.

But it would have been nice if a patch or the vanilla version would have had a 1919 - 1949 campaign, or any campaign starting before pearl harbor / 1941. Even a campaing like 1943- 1949 or something like that would have been a nice addition.

Anyway, the game is still very good (and the still the "but" remains).

On the other hand that is just me.

Other players are probably extatic of joy about all those scenarios.

[robert4260]

Just a quick note. I really like being able to play Japan from the 1939; however, I wish there was a option to make peace with China. Was that in Pacific theater or maybe the original global that was put out as a patch/mod for SC 2?

[Bill101]

Making peace with China isn't a possibility, so the only way for Japan to end the war there is to conquer the country. Which is possible with the right amount of effort.

[Colin I]

I would like there to be an option to make peace with China. Given the fragmentation of the warlords you could see the coalition falling apart - maybe enhanced by diplomacy. It would really open up the strategic options for Japan.

[xwormwood]

I presume "making peace" with anyone is more or less an option or wish for a SC3 game engine.

[Colin I]

Is it really impossible to reset the flag for at war from 1 to 0 (or whatever) and reset % mobilization in current game engine?

[SeaMonkey]

I'm with you Colin, doesn't seem like it would be that tough and would be a welcome addition to the diplomatic possibilities.....hmmmm.

Maybe a script activation based on a diplomacy hit that takes the supply level to 0 in an entire area thereby representing a formal "cease fire"? While diplomatic negotiations are going on the supply values start to return like recovery from strategic bombing and the belligerents then can initiate cease fire violations that eventually ramp up to full scale.

The point being that the combatants can have a sort of "time out" while pursuing other interests, all the while keeping an eye on the escalating situation of that cease-fire theater.

[xwormwood]

I think it might be pretty tough to playbalance AI-peace treaties.

As we, the human players, would probably find soon and easy ways to force the "dumber" AI into our treachery peace offers.