What elements of Deadlock II do you like/hate vs Original

General discussion, queries, etc. about Deadlock and Deadlock II.
Post Reply
Cyth Lord
Hatchling
Hatchling
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:10 am
Favourite Race: Cyth

What elements of Deadlock II do you like/hate vs Original

Post by Cyth Lord »

What the title says.

+I like the expanded sea additions. Sea platforms and more units make for a more interesting game.
+The editor and the campaign are also great, adding to an otherwise straight forward game.
+World resources are also a nice touch... low energy for martian, high endurium for alien, ext.
+New techs are great, such as cloning + military training center

-I hate the changes in maintaining culture and morale. I can stand reducing the centers to half the original values, but I HATE that you cannot build museums strait up! That means you have to plan out morale in a territory at least four turns in advance... making it very hard to manage a large colony. This has made the Cyth a much more favorable race. And that museums only produce 15 instead of 20 morale + requiring 10 energy per turn... too much sacrifice in my opinion. Oh and art centers can only be built after endurium mining is researched... WAY too late in the game.
-I also hate land mines, because they change the outcome of battles too heavily.
-Inability to relegate tasks for buildings in %, vs one colonist = one set of values.
-AI in DL2 is also lacking. Liked the challenge of original much more.
-Animations and voices of aliens are terrible
-Bad black market setup

User avatar
MaugTheInfirm
Advisor
Advisor
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 5:52 am
Favourite Race: Maug

Re: What elements of Deadlock II do you like/hate vs Original

Post by MaugTheInfirm »

After I saw how Deadlock II changed the interface, I refused to play it for a very long time. But then I learned of the highlight of Deadlock II: it has a campaign for each race. So upon learning that a few years back, I started playing Deadlock II. The campaign is it's best feature for me.

I'm okay with making morale more difficult despite it's drawbacks. I'd rather grow faster (moving colonists to a newer territory), but with morale penalties I have to wait for culture centers to upgrade to museums. If I foolishly send colonists into a mountain territory, putting it far past the limit, I'll even built 3 culture centers. One upgrades while the other 2 help with morale.

In the original, conquest was made more difficult by military limits per territory. After attacking a territory, I might not lose any cannon. But then the limit kicks in, and I lose all a few of them. That meant planning the minimum force to use to invade, and having other territories constantly building more. It also made higher tech units even more powerful, since you had only a limited number of cannon to use on defense.

I'm playing the 4th scenario in the Deadlock II Maug campaign now, and mines are essential. When the Tarth land, they have disruptor cannon while I may or may not be making fusion cannon. You start at lower tech levels with mines, which is your only defense. Still, they do make for morale problems rather early on...

Post Reply