Talk:Cossacks: European Wars

message: "The makers of Cossacks also have attempted to retain as much historical accuracy as possible in their game, both by providing detailed and correct histories of all the units available, as well as rendering the units beautifully and acurately according to historical descriptions."
Come on. And Polish noble first thought, when waking up, was running and oppressing poor Cossacks. This sounds like marketing not encyclopedia Szopen 11:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've toned this down a bit. Lovingboth 16:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Article claims that only the Total War series can rival (And the implication is that Total War games actually have lower caps) the Cossacks series, but Rome Total War has usually 2000-4000 units on screen, maxing out at a whopping 38,880 units on screen at once. Can some hard statistics be given here?
It was at least 50,000 on screen at once at the highest resolution.
The website says you can have up to 8,000 units for Cossacks. -Arnos
Yes, the cossacks website says that each player can control up to 8,000 units, making it possible to have 64,000 units on the screen at once.  This would make it larger than the Total War series.  Also, in the Total War series you almost never have eight full armies fighting each other.  However, the Cossacks number is very misleading.  While it is theoretically possible to build 8,000 units, one rarely gets above 2,000 because of population limits imposed by the number of houses and barracks.  Once you get to about this number it is impossible to build more houses or barracks to increase your population limit because each time you build a building of a certain type, it gets more expensive, eventually to the point where you cannot build anymore.  So the "8,000 units controlled" is really just an advertisement for the game that never can actually happen.
Eh, someone is forgetting the fact that you can theoretically mod ANY game to handle as many units as you want.  You just need some basic computer knowledge...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.131.237 (talk) 02:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unit Capacity 

message: The article states that in realism, the game is only rivalled by the most recent entry in the AOE series.  While I admit, the graphics are very good, they still aren't 3 dimensional, and actually look more like the graphics of AOE II.  Any other people with me? 
Taylor 09:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphics: are they really that good? 

message: The articles for this game's two expansion packs should be merged with this main article. Both has stub quality, and I doubt there is much more to say about either of them. --Himasaram 03:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with expansion pack articles 

message: :Image:G09828gpcz0.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:04, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:G09828gpcz0.jpg

message: This line is a fallacy :
It is rarely seen that a force of 196 Prussian musketeers can be bested by any other infantry unit of the same number
18th cent saxon muskets own prussian muskets for breakfats lunch and dinner.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.81.17 (talk) 20:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prussian 18th cent musket 

message: I don't buy it. The whole development section is damn weird. Particularly this sentence seems completely non-sensical: "17-18 century was selected because the most obvious continuation of Age of Empires would be medieval Europe and Cossacks was its logical successor, not a competitor." So I'm supposed to believe that GSC Gameworld just wanted to expand the AoE series with a game that has completely different ambitions considering historical accuracy and realism? And I'm supposed to believe that they just guessed that there would be an AoE sequel that would take place in the middleages, and that's why they chose to avoid that particular scenario? And THAT's supposed to be the reason why Ukranian developers chose to make a game about Ukraine's most important historical period? Because they didn't want to interfere with some American franchise? Whoever wrote this section has to be damn delusional. --92.78.136.37 (talk) 03:45, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logical successor to AoE? 

message: The website listed as official (cossacks.ru) is redirecting to gobf.ru, so the domain must have been expired or something. Rozmysl (talk) 03:34, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official website address is not good anymore? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cossacks: European Wars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081216001437/http://www.computerandvideogames.com:80/article.php?id=3719 to http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=3719
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:48, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article says it was released on 24 April 2001 whereas the infobox says 30 November 2000. So which is it? The Steam page says the former. (The release date information refers to the original release date, not the date of the Steam release. When it was added to Steam can be seen by looking at either the developer's or the publisher's page.) 80.78.219.54 (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release date? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cossacks: European Wars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216001103/http://www.escmag.com/v5/reviews/review.cfm?rv=74 to http://www.escmag.com/v5/reviews/review.cfm?rv=74
*Added  tag to http://www.gameplasma.com/reviews.php?do=view&id=358
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:36, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Cossacks: European Wars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216001056/http://au.gamespot.com/news/2639358.html to http://au.gamespot.com/news/2639358.html
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6ALL9x4Qn?url=http://au.gamespot.com/cossacks-european-wars/reviews/cossacks-european-wars-review-2702187/ to http://au.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/cossackseuropeanwars/review.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cgonline.com/features/020117-f1-f1.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://timegate.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:13, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified