Any word on an expansion?

[Grumbold]

I'd like to see ancient era units automatically renamed and reimaged when gunpowder arrives. The 1-1 warrior becomes a 1-1 militia, for instance. Unupgraded units are still bad units, but you don't have the mental disconnect of seeing an empire with infantry sharing a city with spearmen.

[JakeCourtney]

First a couple of patches, then yes I would love to see an expansion pack add more units, and more civs and more options. Diplomacy expansion would be great.

[kseecs16]

be it in a patch or a xpack - sooner the better! I'd like to see a well balanced Epic "Epic" setting perhaps Heroic Epic - for when I want a nice long game where I can wage early wars more feasibly and get more immersed in the early parts of the game while still having a nice long end-game.

[Dis]

great idea for the expanded epic. I played a epic game last night on a large archipelago. Only 5 hours for the entire game. My games are too short. I can't play a huge map, my computer would just curl up and die.

[eluciv]

I agree - the early game is over way to quickly.
I also think some of the interface displays are about as intimidating as they come. Maybe I just need to play on a lower resolution.

[Apocalypse]

There will of course be an expansion. Probably with the Koreans even. I'm still surprised they weren't in the first time around considering how popular Civ is there.

[yin26]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
There will of course be an expansion. Probably with the Koreans even. I'm still surprised they weren't in the first time around considering how popular Civ is there.

Yeah, I was really looking forward to hear the units speaking Korean. I can understand some of the Chinese, but can't wait to hear the Korean.

[Peets]

Originally posted by Dis
great idea for the expanded epic. I played a epic game last night on a large archipelago. Only 5 hours for the entire game. My games are too short. I can't play a huge map, my computer would just curl up and die.

I played on standard archipelago and it took me 24 hours... I wonder how you managed to do it in 5 hours

[Dis]

Originally posted by Peets


I played on standard archipelago and it took me 24 hours... I wonder how you managed to do it in 5 hours

and that included a reboot of my computer because my Windows was running low on virtual memory, and the turns were taking forever. I didn't have the problem after I rebooted though. I think the problem was I restarted civ4 at least 6 times during that computer session without rebooting my computer. Yes this game has some memory issues.

[Broken Hawk]

Expansion? I would like to see the developers clean up the current mess.

Also, with the ability to mod CivIV, I am sure that some experts can address most of the things mentioned in this thread.

For example, look at the SMAC Mod that is being worked on.

[Peets]

Originally posted by Dis


and that included a reboot of my computer because my Windows was running low on virtual memory, and the turns were taking forever. I didn't have the problem after I rebooted though. I think the problem was I restarted civ4 at least 6 times during that computer session without rebooting my computer. Yes this game has some memory issues.

So give it 4 hours of gameplay.
That makes it 6 times faster at a bigger map.
I also had to enter a lot without doing a thing but also had to do some stuff to make sure I won.
Also I try to get the max out of everything, maybe that's why it takes me much longer.

[Alexander I]

Here's a radical idea:

Combination/Dual Civs.

People complain about redundant civs; why not combine similar civs, and have the difference be the leaders.

Example: Mesopotamian Civ.
You could be:

Assyria: Aggressive and Expansive and unpredictably violent with a Sennacherib or Tiglath-Pileser leaderhead

or

Babylon: Expansive and Cultural with a Hammurabi or Nebuchadnezzar leaderhead.

People have complained about the Phoenician/Carthaginian problem almost interminably. Solution?

A Levantine Civ with two civ options:

Phoenicia: Quinquireme UU with Hiram or Jezebel.
Carthage: Armored Elephant UU with Hannibal or Dido.

Thus both civs are included, satisfying both sides of the argument. It would be like having two extra civs in the game -- yes they're similar, that's why they're combined in one, but they're different enough to represent separate sub-civs.

What do you think?

[Alexander I]

Another idea:

Holy Wars! Under theocracy, a religion should produce some kind of holy warrior/crusader/fanatic.

There should be some sort of holy war aspect to the game which has not yet made itself manifest.

Saladin was one tough cookie. I want him to Jihad all up on me and give me a real challenge.

[Footie Mad]

I'd like to see some options added that would make things unpredictable. Note that I said options, for those people who like them such as me.

Spontaneous civil war: This would happen when your nation was divided by religion for example, a large majority hindus in one part and a large majority muslims in another would lead to warnings to come up a couple of times. Would add a needed risk to multiple religions. And eventually there would be a message that:

"A rebellion has taken place in cities A, B, C and D, caused by religious differences within the nation. Government troops were forced to abandon their posts and leave the territory in the hands of the revoutionaries. As of this day the seceding cities are known as the nation of X (if you're not playing with maximum civs one of the left over ones, otherwise something else)."

Other factors could be geographical distance or a long period of unhappiness.

[Footie Mad]

I'd also like to see epidemics, the black plague spreading across the world and lowering population for everyone.

Also bring back the ability to construct air bases, maybe not like in civ 2 but still I think it should be possible to build an airbase where there is no city available.