After a long delay, the expansion pack is finally available in stores here. Anyway, I usually don't have the time to play more than a complete game per month. So, my question is: if you had the same time constraints, would you play a WOTM instead of a GOTM?

Rephrasing: does Warlords offer a better gaming experience than Civ4 vanilla?

p.s. I know that the latter question might have been discussed in other forums, but I wanted to hear from this specific community (GOTM players).

Time constraints? Never heard of such a thing. I could always play both, at the expense of my "offline games".

For me, the main driver for the near future will be difficulty level. I would hope the WOTM and GOTM are spaced apart on the difficulty spectrum. I don't always get around to a GOTM/WOTM, but I am much more likely to if it is Prince level or below (I may try Monarch...but not for WOTM since it is still so new to me).

For now, I am enthralled with the novelty of the Warlords (which I just got in the past week), having just won my first game where I did any serious warring (though I won by Space Race, I took over 2 civs and made another one capitulate). It was an easy victory, as it was on Chieftain so I could experiment with all the new features.

I'll be switching to playing Warlords only as my time is also limited, especially with the prospect of skiing every weekend soon. I like it better for various reasons, especially with the new patch that makes for a much better AI. It seems they keep getting good feedback on all the 'exploits' we find in the game mechanics and keep patching them up, which I think makes for a better game experience.

Time constraints? Never heard of such a thing. I could always play both, at the expense of my "offline games".

There are people who have barely the time to finish one game per moth if it is on epic speed. So i will stay on GOTM, because I don't want to give money for a game i won't have time playing.

Upon further thought, I do think from now on I actually will only play WOTM. The new features are really growing on me after some tinkering around, and besides a bit of a challenge is a good thing, right? I can always go Adventurer class on the WOTM this month...after practice. I hope we get a reprieve beyond Monarch (which is really Emperor by all accounts) for the near-term, but I would like to grow my Civ skills further, and the best way to do that is to have a few losses in your mix :)

Sam

I'll be switching to playing Warlords only as my time is also limited,... I like it better for various reasons, especially with the new patch that makes for a much better AI. It seems they keep getting good feedback on all the 'exploits' we find in the game mechanics and keep patching them up, which I think makes for a better game experience.

That seems a valid argument to me. Also, I just looked at the poll result and it's 25x6 for Warlords. I just wonder why the changes leading to a better AI and a better game balance couldn't also be patched to the (vanilla) original game. :confused:

I just wonder why the changes leading to a better AI and a better game balance couldn't also be patched to the (vanilla) original game. :confused:

They just need to have a reason for people to buy Warlords. Its better to sell warlords to many players than issue a free patch. Some people wont buy warlords just for a couple of new leaders and building.