Beyond the Sword Review by Solver

[Solver]

If I were just a regular player, I guess I'd still take an indepth review by a somewhat biased person over most professional reviews.

I read gaming sites like Gamespot and IGN, and I have probably read almost every review of Civ4 and Warlords available. I consistently find them idiotic. There are a few reviewers (at IGN in particular) that I like, but I find that reviews for strategy games in particular tend to be of piss-poor average quality. Most professional reviews only notice superficial things, do not particularly concern themselves with game balance, and usually play at Chieftain or Warlord to boot. Which is how the majority of vanilla reviews appear to have been done.

Though of course, reviews of Call to Power (and the sequel) have to stand out as the most idiotic ones professional sites have published.

[valthemu]

Thanks for the review Solver - very informative.

[Todd Hawks]

Thanks for your insights on the game speeds. I'll try some epic games next. Will take some getting used to with only half the turns available and techs coming by twice as fast.
I planned to mostly use the no tech brokering option anyway to prevent the tech frenzy. My favorite option. I guess if I really fall behind too far, I'll have to send some spies over in order to get the techs I missed. Or I simply lose.

Edit: Most "professional" reviews are done by people who a) don't know enough about a game, especially if it's as deep as Civ and b) don't take enough time to really find out the pros and cons. You can use them to figure out if game xyz that you never heard of is worth looking at but for a game like Civ I only listen to people like Solver, Yin & Co who know what they are talking about even if maybe I disagree on some of the finer points.

[Solver]

No Brokering is interesting. On a two-continent map, for example, you may well have a situation where one continent is advanced, while the other one is considerably behind. Makes for all sorts of interesting game situations.

[DanQ]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
... and in the intro blurb by DanQ.

To clarify, I didn't write that blurb.

[DanQ]

Originally posted by Solver
I'm actually probably less satisfied with [this] than any of the others I've written.

We are always our worst critic.

[JimMac]

A very good review indeed.

Not only does it give a good flavour of the game, I did actually learn a few things about some aspects that the manual doesn't explain very well. Special thanks are due for the information on corporations.

Now that I feel I am better armed with your tips, you've made me want to start another game since I think I could play better.

[Wiglaf]

This is true. All of Solver's reviews are worlds better than Gamespot's, IGN, or any site like that.

Originally posted by DanQ

To clarify, I didn't write that blurb.

details, details..

[sirboxalot]

Good review, too bad it's not on US shelves yet.

[Virdrago]

Thanks Solver. Good review.

It gave me something to do this afternoon, since I do not possess the game yet. Now to find something to do this evening...

[Jvstin]

Thanks for the review, Solver. As I confidently predicted, even though you worked on the expansion, you didn't hesitate to point out the deficiencies (and even an outright bug) as well as what you thought were the strengths of BTS.

As far as State Property and Corporations, I think I know why SP was nerfed so badly with Corporations--its because, IMO, that SP is somewhat unbalanced in Civ4 and Warlords, and this is a way to counter that. I've certainly always gone to SP as soon as possible. The extra hammers have always come in handy.

Now, in BTS, I might have to rethink my strategies if I want to take advantage of corporations.

[Solver]

SP was probably indeed the most powerful economy civic in BtS, certainly for larger empires. I still think that disabling corporations altogether is far too much of a nerf. I would have done it differently, but the designers disagree

[LotC]

It's bound to get some raised eyebrows. Then again, it's not like Mount Rushmore at Fascism made much sense in Civ4.

Maybe not to you.

[JSRHINO]

Thanks!

Solver-
A great review! Thanks for all the gory details. I am usually just a lurker, but I wanted to say thanks for all the time put in to the review. It clarifies many of the new features of BTS and provides in-depth strategic perspective to those on effects to vanilla Civ 4.

Great job! One of the best Civ reviews ever...

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by Solver
SP was probably indeed the most powerful economy civic in BtS, certainly for larger empires. I still think that disabling corporations altogether is far too much of a nerf. I would have done it differently, but the designers disagree

From what I've read about Corporations - backed up by what you say about their trade-offs - I don't know if culling their effects in SP will be all that big a deal (when I play that far along ). So you miss out on a few extra food or shields in each city you have a Corporation branch in - all those cities need is a couple of Windmills or Workshops and the food is made up with the inherent bonus of SP, and now with +10% production in every city, you can expect at least an extra shield in every city without having to deal with the negatives of Corporation upkeep (there's another thing SP does for you - REDUCES your maintenance), or the cost involved in starting it.

Maybe they've been undersold by everyone who's discussed them so far, but the cost-benefit of Corporations underwhelms me.