New XP announced

[FrostyBoy]

For diplomacy, all they really have to add are more options to throw around and use.


I don't think you can set up a battle with an ally to attack certain parts of the land, certain cities, units.

There's no World War feature within games. So, if all countries are at war with someone, the game could go into a state of 'world war' and that gets recorded, and if it happens again, it becomes 'world war 2', and so on.

Having all these new civs, etc, is OK, but the game is linear, civ is not meant to be linear. Adding new stuff doesn't fix that problem, Firaxis should be adding in features that lead your countries and other countries onto different paths, constantly.

What about a race to find new land, like Columbus? There's no 'race' sort of feature. Or what about a 'nuke race' or where your nation splits because a large % of your ppl have other ideas. (like the indepence war). these things just aren't strong enough in the game.

[statusperfect]

AND THE GOOD OLD CIVIL WAR

cheers

[Gramphos]

I want back to Nation split when you take the capital.

[CorpusScorpius]

I am all for any XP that will keep me playing as long as it is reasonably priced I do believe UberKrux & Snoopy bring up some vaild points though.

[Harovan]

I won't buy an XP for a couple of new civs. Unless they introduce new traits (attention: balance!), they will be almost (short of UUs) exact copies of other civs anyway. Same for units or buildings. Neither will I buy one for a bunch of scenarios, which I won't play anyway. PtW came out with the word Multiplayer on the box. It still doesn't work, not even PBEM. I won't shell out money for more sheer eye candy.

I would consider to buy it, if it has

- a really working Multiplayer. I mean, without half of the PBEM games crashing after months invested, and with a valid and working option to play over internet with more than 2 players and without game caused lag, crashes and dropouts.

- more diplomatic options, like the mentioned fixed alliances, a fixed UN (what's it now? a bribing contest, not more), one-sided RoP after wars ("occupation") and others. There are plenty of ideas on the boards.

- an improved combat system, and real ZoC, at least as a choosable option! If the AI can't handle it, teach it and don't take any tactical choice out of the game for the sake of a good AI! AI's suck anyway, even the best one's, when it comes to MP. It would also be good to give an option to limit the RR movement per turn, to force the players to place their forces wisely.

- a vastly improved scenario editor with events, and a scripting language, dammit.

- the guarantee, that all patches are available at the same time for all versions (by this I mean, with 4 weeks or less to wait for localized versions), for the sake of MP! Yes, I mean Atarigreed with that!

Unless a majority of these points is met, Firaxis/Atarigreed can stick this XP where the sun doesn't shine. Sorry to sound harsh, but I'm still angry about the MP failure named PtW.

[FrustratedPoet]

8 more civs =

8 scenarios =

I'm hope there is a lot of stuff they're not telling us, and until they tell us more I'll remain completely unexcited about this. The current announcement is a big snooze-a-thon.

To be honest I'm almost happy with the game as it stands. The ONLY two things I would like are:
1) MP that works much better in real-time and no game-breaking PBEM bugs!!!
2) Lots of Diplomacy and Event options in the editor (a minor "w00t" about the diplo announcement here, I suppose).

Like Sir Ralph, I'll only be interested in the 8 new civs if they add a new (balanced! .. or at least moddable) trait or two.

[Robert]

Hey, I'm happy with it.
But one thing: worldwide copy protection system.
Let's all e-mail Firaxis and Atari with this.

[Spiffor]

I have just seen the news. I am delighted !

If there are scenarios, that must mean there will be codable events (I doubt there will be a scripting language, but an event editor has to be in). And codable events is the big thing that I want.

They say there are new diplomatic options. The only one mentioned is the "locked alliance". Probably good for scenarios, but will there be unit trading, at last ?
Should the scenario abilities only be half-good, Unit-trading might be a deciding factor for me to buy the game or not....

[Spiffor]

I too think Conquests won't be dependant of PtW, because it would hurt the sales (I've heard there are about 4 times less sells for PtW than for Civ3, they won't want to aim at a part of this 25%, but they'll rather aim for the broades audience)

However, PtW features such as PtW units, victory conditions, Civs etc. are most likely not to figure in a vanilla Civ3 + Conquests combo. I wonder if Conquests will have multiplayer by itself or not though.

[Spiffor]

Oh, and the Khmers, the Javanese and the Mali are a must too

[Hagbart]

This sounds like something they promised would be in PTW. I think the expansion packs are very weak.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

And Now, A Rant

The "Islamic Sultunate" better NOT be fundamentalism with a new, bigoted name. Are there Islamic fundamentalists in this world? Yes. Are there equally loony Christians, Jews, Hindus and even Bhuddists? Absolutely. It would sicken me to learn that Firaxis/Atari is profiting off of the anti-Islamic wave of igorance currently sweeping America.

Don't get me wrong - I'd love to play a game of Civ with an "evil" government other than communism (which maybe they'll have the foresight to rename "Totalitarianism" someday...). I just hope that I can play as not only an evil-Osama-type leader, but as a wicked Klansman, a rabid Sharon-type nationalist, etc.

Evil is not limited to Islam alone!

Fin

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Probably good for scenarios, but will there be unit trading, at last ?
Should the scenario abilities only be half-good, Unit-trading might be a deciding factor for me to buy the game or not....

Just making sure I have this right.

You want unit trading, right?

As for this "Islamic Sultantate" nonsense, I certainly hope this isn't a form of government. What next? Maybe an Inquisition building that allows pop rushing with local Jews? Klan meeting halls to quell unrest and assure that the tobacco gets harvested?

[SirOsis]

Originally posted by Spiffor
However, PtW features such as PtW units, victory conditions, Civs etc. are most likely not to figure in a vanilla Civ3 + Conquests combo. I wonder if Conquests will have multiplayer by itself or not though.

Their web site says it will have "enhanced" multiplayer features. Does this finally mean MP will actually work how it should? Why do I feel like they are milking me of all my cash?

I think I'll wait to get the XP this time so I won't be as pissed as I was with PTW when I find out it is buggy as all hell.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by The Templar
As for this "Islamic Sultantate" nonsense, I certainly hope this isn't a form of government. What next? Maybe an Inquisition building that allows pop rushing with local Jews? Klan meeting halls to quell unrest and assure that the tobacco gets harvested?

Maybe there'll be a "CNN" small wonder that, in conjunction with the "Barely Challenged Completely Fraudulent Election" small wonder, makes your entire population content no matter what you do...