are you buying civ4 expansion pack?

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Dis
the original was lacking some units. sometimes I think companies release unfinished games intentionally so they can sell expansion packs to make more money.

That's probably true in some cases but as someone who's been involved with the development of Civ4 since a very early stage, I can assure you that that has not been an issue for Civ4 at least. Firaxis tried to make it the best game it could possibly be and only worried about the expansions once it was (nearly) done. The only things I can think of that were deliberately left out were the Great Wall and a more elaborate espionage system. Not as a money-grab, but simply because there wasn't sufficient time to do them properly in vanilla Civ4. And the Sumerian civ, because the artists ran out of time towards the end and had to cut one leaderhead. Oh, and some scenarios, again because there wasn't enough time to do them justice. Two of these were later released as a free download and I think one ended up in Warlords.

As for the cruiser: which units were included in the game was determined first and foremost by functionality, and since TBH the naval game in at least vanilla Civ4 isn't all that special you really don't need more than 1 or 2 combat vessels per age, hence the lack of cruisers. You can definitely argue that Civ4 has too few modern units, but I (and I'm not alone in this) feel that some of the previous incarnations of Civ had rather too many of them. Civ4 tried to clean things up a bit, which in retrospect may have gone slightly too far. But that's why expansions are a good thing, you learn and try to get it right the next time...

[Last Conformist]

Perhaps.

[Will9]

Locutus, you're posts are part of what mke Apolyton better that CFC

CFC has too many ranting posts. You always have some of the best arguements.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Will9
Locutus, you're posts are part of what mke Apolyton better that CFC

CFC has too many ranting posts. You always have some of the best arguements.

Q F T!

Thanks for that post Locutus

I agree with the minimum Modern units, but it is acceptable.

I am so looking forward to BTS

[Wycoff]

No.

I bought Civ 4+ Warlords, but I sold them after a month or so. I hated the new military upgrade system. I thought that it was too much micromanagement for a game that's supposed to be of epic scope. I understand the need to reward a more experienced army, but I thought that the previous conscript-regular-veteran-elite abstraction did a better job of this.

If they wanted to tweak the battle system to make things more realistic, then they should have made it so players were rewarded for creating combined arms armies.

Anyway, I really didn't like fighting wars with the new method. Since that's half the fun in Civ games, spoiling that portion made me not want to play it very often. After sitting on my desk for a few weeks, I sold the games on ebay.

[Guynemer]

Absolutely. Will preorder. Despite the utter and complete inanity of the Holy Roman Empire and "Native Americans."

[Lonestar]

I didn't buy #4

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Lonestar
I didn't buy #4

I thought #2 was nowhere near as good as #1. #3 was worse. Why buy #4?

[Ninot]

Originally posted by Wycoff
No.

I bought Civ 4+ Warlords, but I sold them after a month or so. I hated the new military upgrade system. I thought that it was too much micromanagement for a game that's supposed to be of epic scope. I understand the need to reward a more experienced army, but I thought that the previous conscript-regular-veteran-elite abstraction did a better job of this.

If they wanted to tweak the battle system to make things more realistic, then they should have made it so players were rewarded for creating combined arms armies.

Anyway, I really didn't like fighting wars with the new method. Since that's half the fun in Civ games, spoiling that portion made me not want to play it very often. After sitting on my desk for a few weeks, I sold the games on ebay.

I felt the new system made combined arms the most important aspect of warfare. But supposedly catapults rule everything, or so I've read. Still, with my amateur friends, I have fun games with my armies.

[Dis]

I just don't like catapult attacks that much. I go for speed and sacrifice over the slow, but unit saving approach of cats.

Plus I prefer to attack earlier before cats are available. swordsmen rush all the way. I usually don't attack again until military tradition and cavalry. sometimes I lose a lot of cavalry, but I prefer lightning fast takeovers. blitzkrieg all the way. hit them before they have time to build up more forced.

with the new xp, cavalry will be pushed back further. so we'll see how this changes my strategy.

I don't play much mp. I especially can't now in my condition.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


I thought #2 was nowhere near as good as #1. #3 was worse. Why buy #4?

If it being one of finest games ever made isn't enough, then you are right, you shouldn't.

[Cartimandua]

I am buying it ASAP. I have it on good authority that this expansion pack makes the game a lot more fun.

[Will9]

I'll have to give up Poly for a few days so I can Harry Potter in the 3 days before the release of BTS (Euros get 7 days )

[Blaupanzer]

Looking forward to the new expansion. Like the idea of an evolving game. Really don't think some things were "held back," although some things did require a bit more development. Better to get them later than to get them broken and have to have them "fixed."

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'll get it as soon as I can... just because of all the stuff that is being included in the game dealing with the late game.