This is what an expansion should be

[mkorin]

I was very vocal about how bad an expansion Warlords was, so I have to give credit where it is due. BTS is what an expansion should be. If you've played, you can jump right in and not be too lost. However, the new aspects and better AI make it an extremely better game. Much tougher. I was beating Warlords on Monarch and got my butt handed to me on the first BTS game on Noble. I strongly suggest not turning on aggressive AI. Second game is going better. Solver gave a great review of the major issues, so I'm not going to touch on those other then to say I love them. What makes this expansion such a joy is they 'fixed' alot of little things that make the game more fun to play. Moving the announcements to the center of the screen makes them more noticable and decreases the chance of missing something important. Auto missionary makes seeding the world with your religion feasible. I could probably go on for quite some time. My recomendation is if you're thinking of buying it, but waiting to see if it's worth it, buy it.


Mike

[Wiglaf]

Warlords was embarrassing.

[Drakan]

Hmm I was vocal both about CivIV and Warlords but they have definitely made a mark with BTS.

Disclaimer: I still dislike the childish graphics, but who cares anyways.

[mkorin]

I like the graphics. To me the game is about strategy and tactics. I don't need the shooter style graphics. Plus, these graphics are pretty detailed. You can actually see the cavalry **** their rifles etc.

Then again, I remember the graphics from 1 & 2.


Mike

[The_Reckoning]

I think the graphics are pretty great, really. They're streamlined. They show exactly what you need to know at a glance. Buildings in a city, unit health, city riots/pollution etc.

[Wiglaf]

BTS impresses me because it has so much content that really revitalizes civ. It's impressive that they made minor tweaks to the graphics, interface, etc and then added some very complex new mechanics. And of course the scenarios. Road to War in particular is great.

AI seems to still have some quirks but it's a huge improvement as well. After warlords, which was a complete waste of time, this is a pleasant surprise.

that said, the text crawl is way, way, way too cluttered in BTS.

I think the graphics are pretty great, really. They're streamlined. They show exactly what you need to know at a glance. Buildings in a city, unit health, city riots/pollution etc.

they did a really good job making it look good for a tile-based world. that said, it's too far on the cartoony side.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by mkorin
You can actually see the cavalry **** their rifles etc.

They do WHAT to their rifles?!

[Shrapnel12]

I think Warlords was ok. I liked Great Generals and really liked Vassals (even if I'm the only one).

BtS is definitely better though. I love the new graphics. I was very impressed watching the animation of a river running into the ocean and watching defenders brace against my catapult's attacks. I am not a very good player and usually play on Chieftain or Warlord, but I was impressed by a counterattack from the AI on a city I'd just conquered and how well the AI fought wars against each other. For those who never see this level, wars usually consist of "I declare war on so and so", and that's the biggest hoopla of the war. No one actually seems to fight. Not anymore in BtS. So far I'm impressed. My only criticism is I'm still having troubles with diplomacy. Even when only friendly terms, I can't seem to get my allies to coperate, although I did manage to bribe my first nation into a war, so that's better then anything before BtS. It was a waste of money as they declared peace sooner then I liked, but at least they went to war.

[Wiglaf]

The interface is terrible. The text crawl is muddled with stuff the player won't care about (eg, random events that are very trivial). I mean, every blockading privateer I have gets its own line in the text crawl, and a sound effect...every turn?

Ugh. BTS is good, better than Warlords, but they need to cut down on some of the clutter. They went overboard.

[Thrull]

Am I the only one who enjoyed Warlords? Granted, it was lacking in a number of areas, but I looked at it as a mini-expansion.

I've very much enjoyed the games I've played with on BtS. The AI is TOUGH now. If you haven't played it yet, you will need to set it down a level to have a chance. Also, I can leave my workers automated without fear of them doing crazy things. (And I hate micromanaging, so they're almost always on auto.)

Not sure if I'm a big fan of the nerf to siege units. Yes, I realize it really was a balance issue, but I liked going to town with 20 cannons and wrecking a civ in minutes. Good for balance, yes. Just took a wee bit of fun out of it for me in the process.

Events are a great idea. I've seen floods, hurricanes, a volcano, along with slave revolts and marriages, and who knows what I'me forgetting. Later in the game, as all the remaining civs have expanded, you'll see an Event every other turn almost. It IS rather spammy.

I've been impressed with it so far. I plan to try out Corporations sometime soon (though, I always seem to pop the great people as a I get them). Spying seems so-so. I haven't been able to do much with it, though it my be that the other civs switch things around to avoid the loss of population from water poisoning.

Good stuff. Very good stuff for the most part.

[Wiglaf]

I've very much enjoyed the games I've played with on BtS. The AI is TOUGH now. If you haven't played it yet, you will need to set it down a level to have a chance. Also, I can leave my workers automated without fear of them doing crazy things. (And I hate micromanaging, so they're almost always on auto.)

I disagree, BTS seems easier than Warlords to me. In part because the AI goes for (sometimes futile) culture victories, I usually out tech at least 2 or 3 major AI civs every game.

I never had tanks while my opponents were stuck at longbows when I played Warlords, but that will happen in BTS (on noble, at least).

[Willem]

Originally posted by Thrull
Am I the only one who enjoyed Warlords? Granted, it was lacking in a number of areas, but I looked at it as a mini-expansion.

No, I liked it as well. Although there wasn't really alot to it, what it added to the game was a definite improvement. Vassal States was a very good addition to the game, as were the Unique Buildings and Great Generals. Maybe they'll make a third XP to make up for what could have been added in Warlords.

[Blake]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


I disagree, BTS seems easier than Warlords to me. In part because the AI goes for (sometimes futile) culture victories, I usually out tech at least 2 or 3 major AI civs every game.

If you don't like culture victories, you can always turn the victory condition off.

[Blaupanzer]

Warlords was fine. BTS is almost a completely new version of Civ for $30. Yes, marathon needs work still, but except for spies, it works as well now as it did before. The AI is much better, more competitive, even if they misapprehend how to use corps in the late game. Adding three major submodules and improving game speed and AI is a lot, and it isn't all there is to it. I LOVE the events submodule most of all. It's a fun addition, and I play for fun, not for the victory on SP. After all the victories just mean I've figured out this level and need to move up.

[Pinchak]

Judging from the topics of half the active threads in the forum, I think I'll wait until they come out with the first patch before I buy.

Faraxis releasing a game bug free?