I mean, they have to be the same. But there are slight differences - in 5, the map scope is slightly moved up north, William Wallace is in the place just west of your base in 4, very few buildings remain the fort you captured previously… I’m ok with that, it has context so it is not lazy.
But the way it is looking like in VAV they simply duplicated one scenario and gave you a different side to fight for. It is a bad comparision but imagine if instead of making you chose Tikal or Calakmul in Dos Pilas they made two scenarios where you fight alongside each one…
I’m leaning towards not buying this DLC at all because it is worse than what I thought it would be. But I do really want to know everything about it to decide.
Agreed, other scenarios did the same thing, but what happened with Fetih is way too much. Are they seriously advertising a 19 scenario DLC, where only 5 are new? And one of those “new” scenarios is also recycled? I already had a feeling this would happen, seeing how these two levels represent the same battle.
But look at the bright side: at least they didn’t make Charlemagne a copy of The Saxon Revolt.
Since the city is intended to be historically accurate (as much as reasonably fits) for a specific city during a specific event, they pretty much have to use the same (or at least a very similar) map. A lot of units will also have to be placed in the same (or roughly the same) location at the beginning because they were also placed based on historical information (something the creator has confirmed).
I’d expect differences in things that aren’t based on actual life (triggers, win conditions, maybe even some game data and mechanics), but the map itself is likely based on historical information and real-world geography (which means a lot less wiggle room for changes). I’d also expect the missions to play very differently (which is much more significant than whether the maps are the same or different).
I haven’t bought the DLC (don’t play campaigns all that much), otherwise I’d consider taking a look at the maps myself (via the marco and polo cheat codes).
True… Partly. Other scenarios feature Constantinople and they’re different. Sure, the maps represent a broader geographical location, but they clearly didn’t copy-paste the city layout from those older scenarios and made it bigger. Constantine’s map is new.
And yes, there isn’t anything inherently wrong with reusing maps, BUT, when this DLC already features copied and pasted scenarios from the workshop, it feels pretty strange to have one of the very few “new” scenarios also be 90% copied and pasted.