Hello all, This game,Deadlock II, looks quite interesting. But, being in my usual state of poverty, I want to be sure of a few things before buying. I would appreciate answers from veteran players of the game.

1) One review I read said they like the game because it has a definite ending. I am not much fond of games that, while you have put a lot of time into the game and are having fun, suddenly tell you, 'Games Over! Such and such a condition has been met.' Did the reviewer mean this or simply that when you reach the end of the research projects you might as well wrap it up? In short, is this game open ended and can I keep playing it as long as I want - baring one side conquering all?

2) I don't care about graphics; they are eye candy, not brain candy. But can you name things in Deadlock II; factions, people, units, geographic areas, ect.? If not, this is not a game breaker for me, but I love to name things.

3) Are there several zoom levels? I think all games should have at least 3 levels of viewing.

Thank you

1. As far as I know, there are only three victory conditions which depend on the map or scenario you play and only one can be selected or active. This means you can only win by conquest, controlling a set number of shrines for a set number or turns or by building a certain number of city centers (comparable to wonders in that they take a long time to build and require a large quantity of various resources)

2. I don't believe it's possible to rename units or territories. I know you can't rename the factions (there are only different races)

3. There is really only one zoom level (or two if you count the different views available). You can view the entire map or view inside an individual territory, but when you're viewing either there are no zoom levels available.

Ok, thanks for the information. This is good enough.

In Deadlock 1 you can name all your units. That ability seems to have disappeared in Deadlock 2. Pity.

1) Yes, it does have an actual ending to a map, and as Barry mentioned, there are 3 possible victory conditions. If you play the campaign, the condition changes, but usually Conquest is always an secondary option to the other two. Some campaigns can take a long time and a few, if you know what you're doing, can end in a couple turns.

2) While in DL2 you can't rename anything in the preset maps / campaigns you CAN make your own maps / scenarios and name the territories what you like.

3) There's the world view, the territory view and, technically, inside a building. (but that's just a place to toggle jobs for colonists, not much of a view)

Thanks for all the answers. It is a pity that you can't name units in DL2. How did you do it in DL1.? Also, is it correct that there is no diplomacy in DL1? I am trying to decide which version to buy.
Come to think of it, it is very strange and rare to be able to name units in a game but not in the successor game. Is it the general consensus that this cannot be done? Have you tried? I know it may seem a small point but I think that anything that personalizes a game is to the good.

In DL1 you would just click on the name of a unit in its info screen and type in a new one. I had a system for it, and it was much easier to get a personal feel for your units that way because they gain experience over time and the reports would say "Inf.Brigade 1 is now Elite!" instead of "Uva Mosk Laser Squad #334 is now Elite!" No idea why they left it out of the sequel. There's even a space in the UI that would be perfect for renaming units, but it's inert. Quite a shame.

DL1 has very little diplomacy. You can attempt to sell resources to rival colonies, but they almost always decline because they have to pay (exorbitant) transportation costs above and beyond whatever you charge. Occasionally they'll buy food from you, but if you gift them 100 units by asking 0 money per unit, they still have to pay 200 just for the transport cost, which means there's almost no trade. In DL2 there's much more diplomacy. You can get non-aggression pacts, intelligence pacts, research pacts, alliances, and so forth.

I'm debating whether I prefer DL1 or DL2. The sequel has some very nice UI improvements, but overall I'm not sure it's a better game that the original. If you intend to play multiplayer, DL2 has more options. If you intend to play single player...I'm not so sure. DL2 does have a map and scenario editor though.

Yeah, I don't get it. I name everything if I'm able to do so. Surprisingly few games include this simple option.

BTW, if you like TBS games, I recommend Master of Magic. It's by the same team that made the Master of Orion games but it's better than either of them. I think you're technically at war unless specifically at peace. The messages the other factions send you are more about their mood than any sort of treaty status.

In the lower right corner of the diplomacy screen is a big box with four sub-divisions. By right-clicking (IIRC) on them you can cycle through the different options. For example, the upper-left sub-division has a picture of a tank, but you can cycle through it to a picture of a dove, which stands for a non-aggression pact. Above the big box it will tell you what your exact proposal is, and when it's what you want you highlight the faction you want to send it to and click the check.

I don't know if that explanation makes sense to you, because the DL2 UI is a bit unconventional and counter-intuitive in certain ways. Once you figure it out it's not too bad though.

Universalwolf, thanks, I think you are right that you are at war if you have not signed a treaty. I have been attacked by people I thought I was at peace with. I have also been told by people that I thought I was at peace with that they were stopping the war, or rather stopping attacking me for the present because there would be no peace icon for them on the diplomatic table. The manual is very weak on explaining diplomacy and, given that DL1 did not even have diplomacy, it may be that the designers just aren't interested in diplomacy. We should never underestimate the personal interests and proclivities of the designers; they don't just sit down and rationally plan how to make the most logical game. Again, witness Alpha Centauri's lack of unit naming. What I really don't get is that underneath the icon of your race and the boxes to the right of it giving your relations with the other races there are boxes for all the other races. I can't get these to do anything and don't understand why they are there.

That's just a representation of any current treaties on a grid. If you go down the column under your race to the row that corresponds to another race, you'll see icons for any treaties in the box. Most of the time they're empty, since everyone is at war. You don't actually do anything with that part other than look at it.

I've seen two AI races with non-aggression pacts before, so it does happen sometimes, but I suspect all the diplomacy stuff is in there for multiplayer, primarily. Many of the additions to DL2 are there to enhance multiplayer.

If your faction gets really powerful, the others start to grovel and suck up to you. Kinda funny.

I've played DL2 for a bit now, and I'm not sure I don't like DL1 better. The additions for DL2 are a mix of good and bad, IMO.

EDIT: I went back and looked closely at the diplomacy screen.

The only boxes you personally interact with are the ones in the top row. Your race's picture is on the far left, and you have a box for each of the other races. You select the box that corresponds to the race you want to interact with.

Once you've done that, you LEFT-click on one of the four items in the big box in the lower-right corner of the screen. This lets you cycle through different types of treaties for war, research, intelligence, and ultimately alliances. The offer you're making is displayed in text form above the big box.

When you've got the proposal set the way you want, you click the check box to offer it to the race you've selected at the top of the screen. If they accept, some sort of icon will appear in the little box under that race's picture, in the row next to your race's picture. If it's a non-aggression pact, it's a little dove.

Additionally, on the bottom of the frame for each race's picture is a little face which indicates that race's mood toward your race.

Okay, you can tell how the races feel some, at least you, by a small icon under their picture in the diplomacy screen. It's usually an emoticon unless you do something more to alter it. A heart if they're your best friend (praising them can help raise it over time or attacking who is attacking them) or the blue fist if they're dead-set on wiping you out. (generally after any kind of hostile intent, even caught spying)
And yes, the other boxes are there to show if there's any kind of alliance between the other colonies, it's generally uncommon for the AI, but it does happen.
Also, that upper right option box contains multiple options. Non-aggression which basically keep each from having military in the same space(dove), allied military which you can freely moves troops through each other's colonies (tank), the official breaking of each of the former (red crossed circle), and a Backstab option which you secretly break an alliance to launch a sneak attack. (tank/dove with a dagger running through it). Which might also be how an ally suddenly attacked you, unless you meant the talking heads which usually randomly pick within their subject (praise, complaint, threat etc).

Although the shrine wars campaign is good, I prefer Deadlock1 because the AI won't attack you in Deadlock 2 (unless you deliberately leave a territory weak). Also the unit limits (per territory) in Deadlock1 make for more interesting strategy.

I found this to be a problem too... I did like two campaigns and a dozen skirmish scenarios and dont think i was ever once attacked under any circumstances, even against Ubercharged AI. Sometimes they practically wipe themselves out for some reason.

The idea was to fix the AI making constant futile attacks like it did in D1 but they went a bit too far and made it so the AI will only attack if it knows it can win.

What they should have done, is set it to attack if it can achieve victory yes, but also it should attack if it can achieve a certain amount of damage. Because trying to repair and reinforce a territory against repeated AI onslaughts wearing you down makes the game VERY interesting and entertaining, and there is every chance the AI could wear down your defenses sufficiently to take the territory in the end anyway!