Any word on new wonders? I've been wanting to see Todaiji in a civ game as a wonder. It's the largest wooden building in the world.

^^

I think that it shouldn't be a wonder, as we wouldn't know what it is without explanation.

Some advice: You have to shorten your signature, it's way too long. Otherwise you'll get a warning.

Any word on new wonders? I've been wanting to see Todaiji in a civ game as a wonder. It's the largest wooden building in the world.


Cristo Redentor
Mausoleum of Maussollos
Moai Statues
Shwedagon Paya
Statue of Zeus: Doubles the war weariness of other civilizations fighting against you.are the new world wonders along with some new national wonders unannouced

Any word on new wonders?

New Wonders (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=222075#NewWond)

well, you will have to wait and see.

These 5 plus AP are 6 of the 8 wonders announced. Since Mausoleum and Zeustatue are not so new maybe there are really 5 new wonders but it can be also that there is 2 national wonders.

like in series : " to be continued ... "

^^

I think that it shouldn't be a wonder, as we wouldn't know what it is without explanation.

Some advice: You have to shorten your signature, it's way too long. Otherwise you'll get a warning.

Done and done. Didn't know long signatures were a problem.

Todaiji is just a really big Buddhist temple in Japan. It's also known for the deer that live freely on the temple grounds. They're considered sacred, even though they leave their droppings everywhere.

Cristo Redentor
Mausoleum of Maussollos
Moai Statues
Shwedagon Paya
Statue of Zeus: Doubles the war weariness of other civilizations fighting against you.are the new world wonders along with some new national wonders unannouced

As if the ancient era doesn't have enough wonders already...

As if the ancient era doesn't have enough wonders already...

Yeah, WTC would've been a cool wonder if those bastards hadn't knocked it down. Also Big Ben, that Arch de Whatever in France, and the Sydney Opera House might have been nice.

Didn't know long signatures were a problem.

Just to clarify....

Forum Rules (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumrules.php)
Keep your signature brief.
This forum has a signature feature that allows you to "sign" your posts with a customized block of text. The text may include links to other sites (as long as they are within the forum rules) and emoticons. No derogatory references to other members, spoiler tags, or quote tags are allowed in signatures.

Signatures are limited to 5 lines of regular (size 2) text. Using smaller text (size 1) allows 7 lines of text. Larger text (size 3) allows 3 lines of text. No text size larger then size 3 should be used. The number of lines for any text size includes blank lines and room used by emoticons and is evaluated at 1024x768 resolution.

I wonder... will we see a "Disband City"-function? Or "Sell Building"? I'd like that. Then you could sell buildings you let a city build b4 you got currency and the "build wealth"-option

Sounds like you can chose which religion you find when you discover one of the techs:) ... getting tired of always being the founder of Hinduism and Buddhism...

"Nice....how much ?"
hahahahaha :D

can't wait to get my hands on this :woohoo:

"Nice....how much ?"
hahahahaha :D

can't wait to get my hands on this :woohoo:

It's 29.99 in the US. I have to wait for the mac version in five months. :mad: :sad:

It's 29.99 in the US. I have to wait for the mac version in five months. :mad: :sad:

You could always buy a new mac and install Windows on it? :mischief:

It's 29.99 in the US. I have to wait for the mac version in five months. :mad: :sad:

Also 29.99 in Canada :) although now it isn't much difference... actually like $1.50 difference...

You could always buy a new mac and install Windows on it? :mischief:

I don't have to get a new one to install windows on it, but I really hate windows. It's also a pain to get all the right security software and stuff, not to mention a bunch of $$ down the drain when it does come out for mac. :crazyeye:

Pre-ordered, though I get it in the end of July. Amazon.uk. I would have ordered from US but it said that they couldn't send that to me. :confused:

Oh well. I may get it faster from UK anyway, no matter if it's released earlier in US.

Updated with content from the play.tm interview.

<Jump to the OP> (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=222075)

Hohohohohoho! So many features!!!

I can't wait to play! :D

Methos, it seems you ripped some multiplayer features under the modding paragraph.

Methos, it seems you ripped some multiplayer features under the modding paragraph.

Hehehe, that's what I get for doing it at 1 a.m. Thanks and it's fixed.

How much time are you spending keeping this updated?

Significantly more than he's paid for I'd guess ;)

Do you think that they'll make it to where you can only get Christianity after someone gets Judaism?

Maybe not, as the religions are all the same so there shouldn't be any previous religious requirements for religions. That would make some religions in different position compared to others, and lil' Jesuses would get angry. Maybe.

Do you think that they'll make it to where you can only get Christianity after someone gets Judaism?

Being that that is how it happened in real life, it would make sense. Monotheism is a prerequisite for Theology so that is already implemented.

New mounted unit :
Cuirassier

New artillery units :
Anti-Tank Gun
Mobile Artillery

New non-combat units :
Executive GP
Spy GP
ancient spy

New infantry units :
Paratroopers
Mobile SAM ??? (possibly an artillery, can't make my mind)

New naval units :
Privateer
Missile Cruiser
Stealth Destroyer
Attack Submarine

New air unit :
Tactical nuke

Being that that is how it happened in real life, it would make sense. Monotheism is a prerequisite for Theology so that is already implemented.

Alot of the great people from history were influenced by other great people. But Warlords randomizes the order you get great people so it only makes sense that civ removes the historical order religions are founded.

very good point. Besides, what really would be the point of the new option if it more or less kept the religions in the same order? If you want the religions to be founded on techs that make sense, turn this option off.

Amazon.com says July 10th:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000PCLBE2/civilizationfana

I'm seriously considering getting windows on my mac for this expansion.
One more thing:
Did anyone hunt down anymore screenshots for the expansion?

It is my understanding that ninja's will not be included in BTS. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's good news IMO.

New mounted unit :

Mobile SAM ??? (possibly an artillery, can't make my mind)



I suppose it's the same unit from C3C (http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/units/c3c/): a fast, mobile anti-air unit; [edit: can only defend; 50-70% chance to intercept aircraft; ] very powerful in C3C, i always have builded a lot of them! Very happy for its return!!! :rockon:

[edit: Possibly the SAM Infantry can be upgraded to the Mobile SAM when you discover Robotics, like Infantry -> Mechanized infantry, and possibly you can build SAM infantry earlier than in C4W, (the Modern Era part of the tech tree has been reworked), otherwise its use is too short.]

Preordering shortly. Got a desktop and a laptop that both run Civ IV just fine. Got WinXP and an iMac capable of bootcamping it -- but only if I want to see the video card run hot.

Perhaps I might pick up the Mac based version, but hope the SDK business can be sorted out by then.

Does anyone know, when exactly we'll receive the remainder of the information? I'm slowly growing tired of all the discussions about which civs will be in... ;)

Does anyone know, when exactly we'll receive the remainder of the information? I'm slowly growing tired of all the discussions about which civs will be in... ;)

You do know that once all the new civs/leaders are revealed, there is going to be nothing but topics consisting of: " <x> Civ should of been in the game" or "<y> Civ doesn't deserve to be in the game, replace it with <z>".

You're right there. Actually I wonder why didn't start a thread on that already...

They already have. The Byzantines and Boudicca both seem to be taking a lot of flak.

It is my understanding that ninja's will not be included in BTS. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's good news IMO. I'm glad there not putting them in.:thumbsup:

Finally a modern submarine and art unit!

thanks methos for the cool thread.

the waiting is making me sick.

How much time are you spending keeping this updated?

Whoops, missed this.....
It can take up a lot of time, but the simple truth is, I enjoy doing it and continue actively looking for any new articles.

It is my understanding that ninja's will not be included in BTS. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's good news IMO.

I'm glad there not putting them in.:thumbsup:

Statement regarding ninja's has been removed from the Espionage section.

Does anyone know, when exactly we'll receive the remainder of the information? I'm slowly growing tired of all the discussions about which civs will be in... ;)

Just a hunch, but I'm guessing it'll continue to trickle in until BTS's release.

Just a hunch, but I'm guessing it'll continue to trickle in until BTS's release.

As it should, for our sake and for their sake. As a player you want new stuff to read about coming in waves, so you don't go waiting the last months knowing everything, never finding out anything new.

I've kinda learned to control my waiting excitement, I distance myself more from the hype and stuff about the releases more. And I don't get as excited anymore, cause that can make waiting intolerable, and can also make the product a disappointment when I get it.


I like what I see in BTS, but the main reason I want BTS is cause of a Mod. The next phase of Fall From Heaven 2, Shadow, is going to be made with the BTS source, so that's my reason for wanting BTS. I almost never play vanilla Civ4 anymore, not when I can play FfH 2.

It's good that Firaxis has acknowledged the mod's importance to Civ. Which has much to do with their closeness to the community, CivFanatics and Apolyton in particular. I remember when we used to have DevChats about upcoming releases, I don't know if we do that anymore, or how active the #CivFanatics chat is now.

It's only fiftychat now...

I want more kinds of Artillery, Nukes, and LOTS more Naval Units! :goodjob:

I have to give them credit, this is such a cute way to create hype. Just dole out pieces at a time in Sneak Previews on different features, no need to PAY for advertising.

I have to give them credit, this is such a cute way to create hype. Just dole out pieces at a time in Sneak Previews on different features, no need to PAY for advertising.

Really, just to get us all psychotic for an expansion to a computer game they have to say its going to exist in two months and do a few interviews. :lol:

But I'd wish they'd start emphasising other pieces of information in their sanctioned previews. Enough with corporations and espionage. Give details on visible trade routes and new diplomatic treaties.

Thedrin, apart from the graphical and scenario additions, I dont really think there is anything 'big' in this expansion apart from the corporations and espionage concepts.

There will probably be trinkles of other bits and pieces included but they are pushing these areas hard because I gather thats the only 'new and improved' areas of the game :lol:

Not saying the game wont rock, but its like every expansion that comes out for any game....you expect it to fundementaliy change your existing game experience but what you end up with is 80% eye candy and 20% 'we added this cool concept into the game'.

I see it akin to some collectible card game adding a few new cards. Same game but now there are some nifty new mechanics and combos possible.

I repeat myself by saying this is the first ever civXP that has the potencial to seriously ROCK.

I repeat myself by saying this is the first ever civXP that has the potencial to seriously ROCK.
I agree.
Warlords was a joke but this expansion...
I hope for the best :)

Could someone please tell me where confirmation about Sumeria is? At Apolyton we still only have 6 civs on our factsheet.

Could someone please tell me where confirmation about Sumeria is? At Apolyton we still only have 6 civs on our factsheet.

I believe it's the Eurogamer's article (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=76804), but I can't confirm it. I'm at work and that address is blocked.

Hah. That address is blocked, but not CFC? Somebody doesn't understand how to manage productivity... :D

This article does not mention Sumeria specifically, but it does say Gilgamesh.

:eek:

I just had a thought: the article makes a mistake, saying Tokugawa is a new leader, along with Gilgamesh. What if the guy also mistook Hammurabi for Gilgamesh? In other words, what if Sumer's not in the game at all?

There is probably another site out there that confirms Sumer is in, so I won't worry. But still...

EDIT: I briefly checked the other articles in the official list, and I could not find any specific references to Sumer as a new civ.

Hah. That address is blocked, but not CFC? Somebody doesn't understand how to manage producitivity... :D

This article does not mention Sumeria specifically, but it does say Gilgamesh.

:eek:

I just had a thought: the article makes a mistake, saying Tokugawa is a new leader, along with Gilgamesh. What if the guy also mistook Hammurabi for Gilgamesh? In other words, what if Sumer's not in the game at all?

Gilgamesh was confimed in the interview, but no confimation of Sumeria. I'd guess Gilgamesh is another leader for Babylon.

But the interviewer makes a mistake. He says Tokugawa is a new leader :confused: which, if anything, suggests the Japanese have a new leader (but obviously not Tokugawa). What if he saw Hammurabi (who is confirmed in other places, I believe) but thought he was Gilgamesh? Hence, Gilgamesh is nonexistent, and so is Sumeria.

Having said that, I doubt this is the case. Just trying to point out a possible logical fallacy. :)

But the interviewer makes a mistake. He says Tokugawa is a new leader :confused:

Where do you see that? :confused:

Click on the link in Methos' post #304!

There are 10 new scenarios including Babylon, Portugal and The Netherlands and 16 new leaders - Sitting Bull, Tokugawa, Gilgamesh and Justinian for starters. The key difference to the way you rule is through corporations that can be spread, grown and used to dominate the world. We're talking McDonalds and Microsoft scale here, not making pasties in a medieval kitchen.

I see that now, but read page 2

Eurogamer: You've got new leaders in the game. Can you tell us about some of them?

Tim McCracken: Yes. We've added loads of new leaders. We've got Abraham Lincoln, Gilgamesh, Justinian. He'll be annoyed with you as he plays but the opposite of him is Sitting Bull - he'll try to take you over culturally.

Good, that makes me feel better. It still doesn't have to follow that the Sumerians are in ;) since they're aren't mentioned by name, but as I said, I believe they are. And I'd be very disappointed if they weren't.

More importantly, I wonder what this Tokugawa deal is all about...

Hah. That address is blocked, but not CFC? Somebody doesn't understand how to manage productivity... :D

Yeah, doesn't make a lot of sense. :crazyeye:

I'm at work as well and I get CFC; but I can't access the homepage of CFC. That is because it somehow doesn't recognise anything past the homepage as having 'gaming content'.

Sumeria was added in C3C and they had Gilgamesh as leader there I think.

Sumeria was added in C3C and they had Gilgamesh as leader there I think.

That is correct. Sumeria and Gilgamesh were also supposed to be in vanilla Civ IV, but were dropped because of time constraints. You can see the Sumerian flag and colour (dark grey) in some of the early screenshots, and this fellow Monkspider did some excellent work in finding bits and pieces of the Sumerian civ left over in the final game files - he even attempted to reconstruct them as a custom civ.

While the Sumerians by name haven't been explicitly confirmed to be in BtS (though Gilgamesh himself certainly has), I think it's exceedingly improbable that they wont.

Hey guys,

I'm curious about the rest of the community. I've noticed alot of speculation and discussion on here about which new civs and leaders will be added. To me, I confess that that aspect of the game is just not all that important. I never play as one of the games' inbuilt civs. I always play as my own imaginary civilization, complete with my own imaginary city names etc. For me, the joy in playing civilization is not to try to repeat history to see if I could do better, but to have my own "history" to make. Thus, while I enjoy playign scenarios, they are not the most important part of the game for me. I realize that every one enjoys the game differently, but I was just wondering how many others are out there like me, and make up their own imaginary civilizations?

Hey guys,

I'm curious about the rest of the community. I've noticed alot of speculation and discussion on here about which new civs and leaders will be added. To me, I confess that that aspect of the game is just not all that important. I never play as one of the games' inbuilt civs. I always play as my own imaginary civilization, complete with my own imaginary city names etc. For me, the joy in playing civilization is not to try to repeat history to see if I could do better, but to have my own "history" to make. Thus, while I enjoy playign scenarios, they are not the most important part of the game for me. I realize that every one enjoys the game differently, but I was just wondering how many others are out there like me, and make up their own imaginary civilizations?

I REALLY could care less about trying to replay historical situations in scenarios but, rather, like to play as RANDOM civilizations on a RANDOM world with RANDOM personalities. Now that they'll let you RANDOMIZE Leaders to Civilizations I plan to have fun with that as well.

While I sometimes rename a few of my cities on a whim, sometimes I like to think of these historical leaders having woke up from long comas (hence the scrambled personalities) in this strange new world trying to make the best of things. :lol:

Wow, you've seemed to think about this a lot, but I still REALLY doubt Canada as a civ.

Save for Italy (who have the Romans), Canada is the only G8 country without a Civ.

Save for Italy (who have the Romans), Canada is the only G8 country without a Civ.

Hi, first time poster. I don't mean to be offensive to Canadians, but they haven't really done anything really dramatic to affect history. While they might be powerful or rich, I don't think that alone would be good enough. I like to think of the key to a civilization in "Civilization" the game is that they need to be distinct, dramatic, exotic, and/or extremely strong willed at least once one point in history.

While they might be powerful or rich

Are you still talking about Canada?:confused:

A poll on Poly agreed that Canada shouldn't need to be in civ.

Personally, I don't care about historical justifications. I like canada and the canadian ppl a lot so I'm happy they made it into the xp. Hope they get a decent trait combo, too.

^^

If no historical achievements are needed then why should Canada be included? Why not Botswana, Tajikistan or Micronesia?

There needs to be some requirements for a civ to be included.

Shigga, what you say tells me that Canada is definately in. Is that so?

I have not seen any evidence that Canada is in.

Well, if there is a WWII scenario I sure hope Canada is in that, at least. They were a huge player in the D-Day invasion at Juno beach, and I know this to be a source of fierce pride in many Canadians (having relatives there myself).

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=history/secondwar/canada2/normandy

Despite the view (in the US at least) that Canada hasn't really done anything, I would say that the above at least should give them some role in the WWII scenario.

And if Canada ever makes it in, can we have hockey arenas as the UB? ;)

Shigga, what you say tells me that Canada is definately in. Is that so?

Well, I did understand Canada was to be included, but I may be mistaken. :confused:

Liechtenstein is in. You heard it here first.

...

Of course Canada isn't in. :D And we haven't got any new information for days. Right now, it's just waiting for tidbits. :(

Hello Everyone!

This is my first post ever. I have two questions about BTS.

1) Will you need Vista to play it?
2) I know there are only a few Civs left, but could Scotland have any chance of appearing? In past Civ's they weren't included and I was wondering it they might appear.

Hello Everyone!

This is my first post ever. I have two questions about BTS.

1) Will you need Vista to play it?
2) I know there are only a few Civs left, but could Scotland have any chance of appearing? In past Civ's they weren't included and I was wondering it they might appear.

Welcome RPGary!!
I seriously doubt you'll have to have Vista to play it. I also hope Scotland make it with Malcolm II as leader.

I'm hoping for William Wallace

I suspect that the best you could hope for would be James I of Scotland/James V of the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

I suspect that the best you could hope for would be James I of Scotland/James V of the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

James V of Scotland/ James I of England ;)

Uh, yeah. Not thinking straight.

The WW2 Artillery is not really that modern. I think I would like a WWII mobile artillery Unit as well. I also want artillery to have a range greater than one square. I know what a square represents but still Iowa can launch an impressive broadside with radar that can go further than what a crusier can launch and they can still only strike at the one square. Artillery was seriously nerfed in Civ IV. I used to use it all the time to aid my units in C3C before Air Power and sometimes after but now in Civ IV it is like what is the point? Even before Airpower it is useless, as you just fling enough units at a city and all defenders will eventually get destroyed. This is one of those things that I will have to look at modding back in and hope the AI understands the increase in Artillery Range. It needs to be so close to the action even in modern ages that it can be destroyed quite easily. Artillery never was intended, at least in WW2 to be quite close to the front-lines and what is with Artillery being able to be flung against units in a city? The mechanics of artillery were useful in C3C no matter what people say and now it has become fairly useless.

The WW2 Artillery is not really that modern. I think I would like a WWII mobile artillery Unit as well. I also want artillery to have a range greater than one square. I know what a square represents but still Iowa can launch an impressive broadside with radar that can go further than what a crusier can launch and they can still only strike at the one square. Artillery was seriously nerfed in Civ IV. I used to use it all the time to aid my units in C3C before Air Power and sometimes after but now in Civ IV it is like what is the point? Even before Airpower it is useless, as you just fling enough units at a city and all defenders will eventually get destroyed. This is one of those things that I will have to look at modding back in and hope the AI understands the increase in Artillery Range. It needs to be so close to the action even in modern ages that it can be destroyed quite easily. Artillery never was intended, at least in WW2 to be quite close to the front-lines and what is with Artillery being able to be flung against units in a city? The mechanics of artillery were useful in C3C no matter what people say and now it has become fairly useless.

Ranged bombardment has already been done.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=3863

Canada, Poland and Australia are good, I also want:

Finland
Bulgaria
Turkmenistan
Tajikistan
Chile
Belarus
Fiji
Philippines

[end sarcasm]

^^

Of those above Poland is good, proofed by many reasons give in several threads. I'm not so patriotic that I would wave the flag for Finland.

It is my understanding that ninja's will not be included in BTS. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's good news IMO.

actually according to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilizationivbeyondthesword/news.html?sid=6171558&mode=previews
3rd paragraph down does mention spies so unfortunatley they might be in

Whenever I see flamingzaroc and Hitti-Litti next together I laugh. (Those of you who don't know why probably weren't here for that avatar bit... :D)

I'm getting tired of saying this, though. John Shafer, lead programmer of Civ 4 and BtS, has said himself that ninjas are NOT in the game. "They're not technically ninjas," he said. Spies are in, ninjas are not. So we can put our minds at ease.

And if Canada ever makes it in, can we have hockey arenas as the UB?
Actually according to a recent survey, Canadian Children prefer to play Soccer rather then Hockey. SO that can change quite quickly.

Whenever I see flamingzaroc and Hitti-Litti next together I laugh. (Those of you who don't know why probably weren't here for that avatar bit... :D)

I'm getting tired of saying this, though. John Shafer, lead programmer of Civ 4 and BtS, has said himself that ninjas are NOT in the game. "They're not technically ninjas," he said. Spies are in, ninjas are not. So we can put our minds at ease.

yeah i get a chuckle out of it too. and thank heavens ninjas arent in. wanders off to fix wikipedia . . . . .

I think what we will see happen is what has happened with games like Dawn of War. The new expansion will come out, and all the complete single player content will be available on BTS, however multiplayer will require the installation of Warlords and possibly Civ4 vanilla. That is how Relic still makes money on copies of Winter Assault.

actually according to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilizationivbeyondthesword/news.html?sid=6171558&mode=previews
3rd paragraph down does mention spies so unfortunatley they might be in

Realize that article is not "official" and by that I mean the statements made in it are not from Alex, or someone else at Firaxis. And as Gaius Octavius stated, when asked about the inclusion of ninja's, John Shafer stated that no, ninja's will not be in BTS.

^^ ok thanks, i was just look at the wikipedia section on BTS and it had ninja's but i've changed that

James V of Scotland/ James I of England ;)

C'mon! It's James VI of Scotland/James I of England ;) :p .

On another note, I'd be surprised not to see Charlemagne in the expansion. There has been talk in the past of him not being in previous versions of Civ; he has a scenario dedicated to him this time which has been one of the more publicized components. However, if Charlemagne did make it into BTS, would the Franks be one of the new civs, or would he be an alternative for France or Germany?

It would be France since the previous Merovingian dinasty was ruling mostly territories under actual french borders for about two centuries.

I tend to associate Charlemagne wth the French, if for no other reason than his name.

I tend to associate Charlemagne wth the French, if for no other reason than his name.

Yes, there's his name; also did the name "France" evolve from "Franks?" However, I associate him with Germany just as much, especially Aachen - and let's not forget he aquired much of Italy too. However, France is as good as any other choice for Charlemagne to represent (unless they do the Franks, which I'd have considered unlikely) - as long as he's in the game!

"Franks" are associated with France, but Charlemange's capital is in Germany.

Hmmm...tricky decision.

It'll make somebody mad; that's all I know. Just like this:


http://encounters.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/poland_1.jpg

^^

You really like that picture? Third time you use it.

More than the third, I'm sure. ;)

It just struck me as particularly ironic. :D

nvm. posted by accident.

It'll make somebody mad; that's all I know. Just like this:


http://encounters.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/poland_1.jpg


Haha very funny...

The only thing that irritates me is that i have to wait until the end of July to get it. My summer holiday already starts in about two weeks!

Too long to wait. :cry:

Can someone tell me if the expansion will have an Earth 24 map? I'm going to buy the expansion the first day it comes out but I just want an Earth 24 map for those people who do have beefy comps. They could just have an Earth 24 map or just add every civilization (Except The Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantines)to their respected areas and have more than 24 civs. They could also keep the vannila 18 civ earth map for the people who do not have the beefy GB to play with more than 18 civs. Once again I will be very disappointed if they don't add an earth 24 map. And another thing, Why can't we play normal games with huge maps with more than 18 civs? I always play huge maps with 18 civs but I want more than 18.

Again, any word if they will add an EARTH 24 map or allow us to play regular maps with 24 civs or more? If they do allow us to play with more than 18 civs in any map including EARTH this expansion gets A+ in my opinion. If not it will be a solid B for me.....

^^

You really like that picture? Third time you use it.hehe heres my favorite...
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b318/WhiteElk/bush_monkey.jpg

To be legally, nearly on topic...

I think all civs Deserve to be in the game. Of course they can't all fit, even in a mod until such time as the MAF is fixed. So there must be some determining factors. There are many threads arguing who should and shouldn't be in. These go back to the begining of Civilization (the game ;~) People can be quite passionate about it. I'd like to see Firaxis design an XP for the sole purpose of making the game modable by us non-programming types. A glorified game editor which also contains software for some basic graphics modding. I think it would sell well just based on how frequent these Civ choice discussions come up.

Again, any word if they will add an EARTH 24 map or allow us to play regular maps with 24 civs or more? If they do allow us to play with more than 18 civs in any map including EARTH this expansion gets A+ in my opinion. If not it will be a solid B for me.....I think before that can happen they must resolve some memory issues.

Can someone tell me if the expansion will have an Earth 24 map? I'm going to buy the expansion the first day it comes out but I just want an Earth 24 map for those people who do have beefy comps. They could just have an Earth 24 map or just add every civilization (Except The Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantines)to their respected areas and have more than 24 civs. They could also keep the vannila 18 civ earth map for the people who do not have the beefy GB to play with more than 18 civs. Once again I will be very disappointed if they don't add an earth 24 map. And another thing, Why can't we play normal games with huge maps with more than 18 civs? I always play huge maps with 18 civs but I want more than 18.

Again, any word if they will add an EARTH 24 map or allow us to play regular maps with 24 civs or more? If they do allow us to play with more than 18 civs in any map including EARTH this expansion gets A+ in my opinion. If not it will be a solid B for me.....

Well, Rhye's mod will be included, and it uses a 24 Earth map, so my answer would be "yes." Probably. ;)

I wonder if his mod will include the Byzantines...? Well, no matter. You can change them on the basic Earth map.

Part of a Civilization is their language. The Franks spoke Frakish so they can't be considered the same civilization as the French.

Hi, first time poster. I don't mean to be offensive to Canadians, but they haven't really done anything really dramatic to affect history. While they might be powerful or rich, I don't think that alone would be good enough. I like to think of the key to a civilization in "Civilization" the game is that they need to be distinct, dramatic, exotic, and/or extremely strong willed at least once one point in history.

Canadian inventions: acrylics, basketball, Canadarm (duh spacerace), electron microscope, time zones, green plastic garbage bags, Ginger Ale, IMAX, heartvalve operations, insulin, java, world's first patented lightbulb, pacemakers, paint rollers, panoramic camera, ski-bindings, snowblower, snowmobile, foghorns, walkie-talkies, zippers, blackberries, caulking guns,.. just to name a few.

On top of that, this is about the modern age. Canada has been a significant player in the modern age. The 100 Days of Canada in WWI? D-Day landings at Juno beach? Canada and Britain pushing the founding of NATO. Creating peacekeeping as it is known today. Only a truly ignorant person would belittle the role Canada has played in modern times.

On top of that, Canada has a very distinct, dramatic, exotic history. You may actually have to open a book or two to read about it. Our marriage of English and French Canada has produced many unique Governmental institutions that have been adopted globally. Most recently a Charter of Rights and Freedom within a Westminster style of government.

No more ignorant statements please.

Are you still talking about Canada?:confused:

A poll on Poly agreed that Canada shouldn't need to be in civ.

Why not look up the G8? Or World GDP numbers, and then come back and talk.

Why not look up the G8? Or World GDP numbers, and then come back and talk.


Have you ever heard of a joke?

Have you ever heard of a joke?

That's the problem with text, it's hard to tell what the intent of the statement is. Hence my reason for often adding extra smilies to make sure the reader doesn't take it the wrong way. :D

Not to start a flame war, but your arguments for the inclusion of Canada could also be attributed to other nations, for example, RPGary's suggestion of my own country Scotland.

Scottish Inventions/Discoveries: The first cloned mammal (Dolly the Sheep); the Television; the Telephone (generally accepted although still debated); Radar; Ultrasound and MRI Scanners; Antiseptics and Penicillin; Mathamatical Logarithms/Calculus; A 'viable' Steam Engine; Bicycles; pneumatic tyres; the Transistor and pioneering electromagnetic work, just to name a few. . .

That list doesn't even include Scotland's philisophical, and cultural contribution to the world, especially during the Scottish Enlightenment of 1730 - 1790 approx. were David Hume and Adam Smith (The same Smith in the Smith Trading Co. Wonder in Civ3 - I think) proposed ideas at the basis of our world today. Hume's essays were the basis for the scientific method and Smith could be described as the father of modern economics or the creator of capitalism, due to his work The Wealth of Nations.

As for culture, well Scotland has had a dramatic (think William Wallace; Jacobite Rebellions etc) and distinct history going back to 800AD approx. and considering Scotland now has a population of less than 5.5 million, I think we've done well to promote our culture in the face of globalisation and believe we will continue to do so.

All in all I believe Scotland has punched well above its weight in terms of Inventions/Discoveries and in Philosophy/Cultural respects, especially considering we're such a small country on an island dominated by our southern neighbours.

So, if Canada is in BtS - then so should Scotland! Just think of the possible scenarios i.e. uniting the warring Scottish clans and the Scottish/English Wars.

(And to think I didn't even need to mention kilts and whisky! :D )

New BtS article from GAMEDAILY (http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/jun2007/id20070604_240411.htm?chan=innovation_game+room_sn eak+peek)

I found it from Apolyton (http://civilization4.net/). :)

I think the new information is about "making Diplomatic Victory a different process."
But maybe they just talking about the Apostolic Palace.

Thanks for this great infor center!!

Whatever, I want this xp soooooooooooo badly! Does anyone know (not think!) what the last two civs/leaders are? :hmm:

New BtS article from GAMEDAILY (http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/jun2007/id20070604_240411.htm?chan=innovation_game+room_sn eak+peek)

I found it from Apolyton (http://civilization4.net/). :)

I think the new information is about "making Diplomatic Victory a different process."
But maybe they just talking about the Apostolic Palace.

Thanks PeanutBomb! I came across that article the day it came out (man, do I like Google Alerts), but seeing there wasn't anything new I didn't bother to mention it. :hmm: I'm thinking that's not very wise. I should have posted it anyway, I apologize.

Scotland is pretty darn close to the Celts.

The Celts originated in Ireland then moved into Scotland, through Britain, and Wales, then down to France, then into Germany, Spain, and down into Rome (plundered it under the leadership of Brennus) and then they merged with other nations to form over countries but now have part of their culture in almost all of Europe.

Also I heard the television and telephone are Canadian inventions but that information came with the lie that the canoe, snowshoes, and lacrosse are also Canadian inventions.

Also just so you know I am Celtic(Scottish), Canadian, and Algonquin so I want them to all be in BtS although I am fine with the Sioux if there are no Algonquins.

Also just so you know I am Celtic(Scottish), Canadian, and Algonquin so I want them to all be in BtS although I am fine with the Sioux if there are no Algonquins.

I'm a mutt (I live in NJ), if the Austrians are added all of my ancestry will be represented in civ:
English:coffee:
Irish (Celtic) :trouble: :beer:
Dutch :p
German :ar15: :twitch:
French :love: :groucho:
Austrian :king:
Russian :nuke:
Living in America! Woo! :cowboy:
Hehe, pretend the coffee is tea next to the English...

This is driving me nuts. I sat down to play Civ IV Vanilla for the first time in a long time, and I can't find my start up disc. I have the other one - Disc 2, the one I don't need - tucked safely away where nothing will happen to it. But Disc 1? Nope. Can't find it. So I've been tearing the place apart searching with no luck. :cry: I hate to have to buy the same thing all over again. I don't have Warlords - wasn't planning to get that. But if it has the startup disc included the way C3C did, I might spring for it. What would be really good would be if BTS included a startup disc, because BTS has content I really want. Of course then I'd have to wait a long time now that I have the game on my mind.

So anyway, my question is: Does Warlords have the startup disc, & does anyone know about BTS?

This is driving me nuts. I sat down to play Civ IV Vanilla for the first time in a long time, and I can't find my start up disc. I have the other one - Disc 2, the one I don't need - tucked safely away where nothing will happen to it. But Disc 1? Nope. Can't find it. So I've been tearing the place apart searching with no luck. :cry: I hate to have to buy the same thing all over again. I don't have Warlords - wasn't planning to get that. But if it has the startup disc included the way C3C did, I might spring for it. What would be really good would be if BTS included a startup disc, because BTS has content I really want. Of course then I'd have to wait a long time now that I have the game on my mind.

So anyway, my question is: Does Warlords have the startup disc, & does anyone know about BTS?

Don't worry, you will need the BtS disc to play BtS.

Scotland is pretty darn close to the Celts.

The Celts originated in Ireland then moved into Scotland, through Britain, and Wales, then down to France, then into Germany, Spain, and down into Rome (plundered it under the leadership of Brennus) and then they merged with other nations to form over countries but now have part of their culture in almost all of Europe.

The Celts orriginated on the southern Rhine where France, Germany, and Switzerland meet.

Canadian inventions: acrylics, basketball, Canadarm (duh spacerace), electron microscope, time zones, green plastic garbage bags, Ginger Ale, IMAX, heartvalve operations, insulin, java, world's first patented lightbulb, pacemakers, paint rollers, panoramic camera, ski-bindings, snowblower, snowmobile, foghorns, walkie-talkies, zippers, blackberries, caulking guns,.. just to name a few.

On top of that, this is about the modern age. Canada has been a significant player in the modern age. The 100 Days of Canada in WWI? D-Day landings at Juno beach? Canada and Britain pushing the founding of NATO. Creating peacekeeping as it is known today. Only a truly ignorant person would belittle the role Canada has played in modern times.

On top of that, Canada has a very distinct, dramatic, exotic history. You may actually have to open a book or two to read about it. Our marriage of English and French Canada has produced many unique Governmental institutions that have been adopted globally. Most recently a Charter of Rights and Freedom within a Westminster style of government.

No more ignorant statements please.
Hello.
Goonies: You think Canada should be a civ just because you're proud of your country. That's ok to me, but that's not enough to make Canada a civ (so Luxembourg should be one too, because I think it's a cool name).
The beaver's country has been a colony for the first part of its history, three century (around 1600 to 1867), then some kind of "vassal state" for fifty years (1867 to WWI, on paper in 1931), then a true country since 1931 (on paper in 1982).
Alls civs in the game are (like America, Russia) or have been an empire (China, France, Mongols, Spain, even Zulu). Not Canada. (And don't tell how big it is. Most of its territory is empty. And it didn't conquered it. England did.)
Alls civs had a signifiant influence on the world (or the known world). Not Canada.
Most civs have or have had a signifiant culture, with myths, great monuments, great litterature with big influence, etc. Canada has that stuff, but it's not as big as Greece, Germany or America (and I don't think about silly blockbuster movies).
What about inventions ? Well, all moderns nations invented something. Too bad it's not something big like writting or philosophy, those are already done. What about Canadarm ? I always thought it was used to check America's prostate.
"Marriage of English and French Canada" : unconsummated marriage.
"Creating peacekeeping" : i agree, this is good memories.
Maybe the maple leaf state should be renamed "Not America". And not should be a civ. Or at least after Tibet, Olmec, Huns, Khmer, Assyria and others.
And I'm Canadian.

The preview at AskMen.com (http://uk.askmen.com/gaming/pc/Civilization-IV-Beyond-the-Sword-Pc/preview-1-2.html) mentions very little new information, though it does name the Saracens as an opponent in the "Charlemagne's Wars" scenario. When speaking of "Afterworld," they say it's a tip of the hat to X-Com and includes "boss battles" and focuses the action on tactical team-based strategy. "Final frontier" is also spoken of, the article stating "Values, a bit like those many of us remember from Alpha Centauri, replace religion and starbases can be built to spread influence."

Canadian inventions: acrylics, basketball, Canadarm (duh spacerace), electron microscope, time zones, green plastic garbage bags, Ginger Ale, IMAX, heartvalve operations, insulin, java, world's first patented lightbulb, pacemakers, paint rollers, panoramic camera, ski-bindings, snowblower, snowmobile, foghorns, walkie-talkies, zippers, blackberries, caulking guns,.. just to name a few.

On top of that, this is about the modern age. Canada has been a significant player in the modern age. The 100 Days of Canada in WWI? D-Day landings at Juno beach? Canada and Britain pushing the founding of NATO. Creating peacekeeping as it is known today. Only a truly ignorant person would belittle the role Canada has played in modern times.

On top of that, Canada has a very distinct, dramatic, exotic history. You may actually have to open a book or two to read about it. Our marriage of English and French Canada has produced many unique Governmental institutions that have been adopted globally. Most recently a Charter of Rights and Freedom within a Westminster style of government.

No more ignorant statements please.Not much to add but I can't resist pointing out the Sid Meier quote in my sig (from an interview maybe 3-4 months back). Clearly a sarcastic comment, so I think you can rest assured there is a 0.00% chance of Canada ever being added as a civ :)

Not to start a flame war, but your arguments for the inclusion of Canada could also be attributed to other nations, for example, RPGary's suggestion of my own country Scotland.

Scottish Inventions/Discoveries: The first cloned mammal (Dolly the Sheep); the Television; the Telephone (generally accepted although still debated); Radar; Ultrasound and MRI Scanners; Antiseptics and Penicillin; Mathamatical Logarithms/Calculus; A 'viable' Steam Engine; Bicycles; pneumatic tyres; the Transistor and pioneering electromagnetic work, just to name a few. . .

That list doesn't even include Scotland's philisophical, and cultural contribution to the world, especially during the Scottish Enlightenment of 1730 - 1790 approx. were David Hume and Adam Smith (The same Smith in the Smith Trading Co. Wonder in Civ3 - I think) proposed ideas at the basis of our world today. Hume's essays were the basis for the scientific method and Smith could be described as the father of modern economics or the creator of capitalism, due to his work The Wealth of Nations.

As for culture, well Scotland has had a dramatic (think William Wallace; Jacobite Rebellions etc) and distinct history going back to 800AD approx. and considering Scotland now has a population of less than 5.5 million, I think we've done well to promote our culture in the face of globalisation and believe we will continue to do so.

All in all I believe Scotland has punched well above its weight in terms of Inventions/Discoveries and in Philosophy/Cultural respects, especially considering we're such a small country on an island dominated by our southern neighbours.

So, if Canada is in BtS - then so should Scotland! Just think of the possible scenarios i.e. uniting the warring Scottish clans and the Scottish/English Wars.

(And to think I didn't even need to mention kilts and whisky! :D )

I do not dispute Scotland's impact. I do not however think their modern impact was not in the same league as Canada's. I mentioned in my last post Canada's presence on the world stage in the last one hundred years that actually made a significant impact. Perhaps I am slightly ill-informed, but can Scotland truly lay claim to achievements such as the One Hundred Days of Canada (Hundred Days Offensive), a landing at Juno beach, diffusion of the Suez Canal Crisis, pushing the founding of NATO, etc?

Hell, I live in Canada where Scottish influence is enormous and continually present. Hell, my university is modelled after a Scottish school, borrowing many of it's unique institutions and traditions.

Oh, and Bell was in Canada when he invented the telephone although he was not a Canadian citizen.

Hello.
Goonies: You think Canada should be a civ just because you're proud of your country. That's ok to me, but that's not enough to make Canada a civ (so Luxembourg should be one too, because I think it's a cool name).
The beaver's country has been a colony for the first part of its history, three century (around 1600 to 1867), then some kind of "vassal state" for fifty years (1867 to WWI, on paper in 1931), then a true country since 1931 (on paper in 1982).
Alls civs in the game are (like America, Russia) or have been an empire (China, France, Mongols, Spain, even Zulu). Not Canada. (And don't tell how big it is. Most of its territory is empty. And it didn't conquered it. England did.)
Alls civs had a signifiant influence on the world (or the known world). Not Canada.
Most civs have or have had a signifiant culture, with myths, great monuments, great litterature with big influence, etc. Canada has that stuff, but it's not as big as Greece, Germany or America (and I don't think about silly blockbuster movies).
What about inventions ? Well, all moderns nations invented something. Too bad it's not something big like writting or philosophy, those are already done. What about Canadarm ? I always thought it was used to check America's prostate.
"Marriage of English and French Canada" : unconsummated marriage.
"Creating peacekeeping" : i agree, this is good memories.
Maybe the maple leaf state should be renamed "Not America". And not should be a civ. Or at least after Tibet, Olmec, Huns, Khmer, Assyria and others.
And I'm Canadian.


Most of your posts completely ignores the points I made in my original posts. Remember that I am focusing on modern times, since that is what this expansion will focus on.

Goonie:
Remember that I am focusing on modern times, since that is what this expansion will focus on.

It depends on your definition of 'modern times' but that's probably inaccurate.

Ignoring that the title has a double meaning - it alse represents the expanded non-military options - the expansion is focusing on the eras after the introduction of gunpowder. In European terms that's from the 15th century onwards. So if you consider the golden age of the Netherlands (16th-17th century) and Portugal (15th-16th century) modern then you're right. But then that statement no longer makes sense in the context of using it to justify the inclusion of Canada.

For what it's worth (nothing going by the civs Firaxis has introduced), civs should be predominantly (but there are exceptions) be made up of governments that led regional powers. Canada doesn't qualify under that definition (though I don't think the Netherlands ever did either).

I don't think Canada should be in the game but i don't think the U.S. should either, they are both to young, for the main game I mean. They should both be in the Second World War scenario.

You don't think the US should? We started out as thirteen small colonies and became the largest modern day super power in less than three hundred years...WITHOUT HELP FROM THE BRITISH (Canada). The exact point is that we ARE young and we're still able to become an Important world power in a short period of time.

still... it is kinda odd talking to the Americans in 3000BC... I think some civilizations can now revolt with this XP... that is where they come in.

still... it is kinda odd talking to the Americans in 3000BC... I think some civilizations can now revolt with this XP... that is where they come in.

I don't agree with that.

Does anyone know if they will actually ever finish the BtS website? :rolleyes:

Does anyone know if they will actually ever finish the BtS website? :rolleyes:

I check it every couple of days in the hopes that maybe......:sad:

I'd bet on them to finish the site 30 days prior release.

Is the site likely to have a comp list of all new units do you reckon?

Rather a text mentioning a few I'd wager.

Does anyone know if they will actually ever finish the BtS website? :rolleyes:

I can't remember. Was the Warlords website up before or after it was released?

Has it been confirmed officially that this expansion pack will make Civ4 Vista compatible?

Because the box art has the Windows logo on it. I downloaded the Civ4 demo and it won't run on my new computer. I'm really hoping BtS will let me play Civ4. My old computer could barely run C3C.

Lord Neil

You said,
still... it is kinda odd talking to the Americans in 3000BC... I think some civilizations can now revolt with this XP... that is where they come in.

I don't know about others, but I enjoy the anachranism of seeing the Americans fighting, say, the Japanese in 2000 BC. I don't want my civilization games to simulate history. I like it to just be a real-time strategy game with historical flavor.

Lord Neil,

Of course Icompletely understand that you might want your game tobe strictly historical, and that's fine too.

A half-decent game editor would be soooo coool...
Yeah, dream on...

Does anyone know when/if BtS is going to be released on Direct2Drive? All the previous ones were, but I can't remember how long after the box release.

This is going to be a great expansion, I can't wait to play the Final Frontier! I've never played a scenario or played online, so does anyone know if scenario's are multiplayer capable?

so does anyone know if scenario's are multiplayer capable?

They should be. Unless they are designed for one player.

Does anyone know when/if BtS is going to be released on Direct2Drive? All the previous ones were, but I can't remember how long after the box release.

This is going to be a great expansion, I can't wait to play the Final Frontier! I've never played a scenario or played online, so does anyone know if scenario's are multiplayer capable?

I got Warlords from Direct2Drive; I noticed it about the day after it had been released in the US, so I got it before it was available to buy from the shops here in the UK. It's good not having to have the CD to play!

I know why it isn't working, LeeT911. There are two files that if you copy those across to your direct X directory from Direct X 9 you can use the game without uninstalling or mucking around with Direct X 10 which is what you would have in Vista. I forget which thread exactly I saw this but if I get the chance I will post a link or someone else can to that tech thing about this issue. BTS won't fix this problem in that way as it is built around Direct X 9 but this will help you play the game. Try it with the demo and see before you rush out and buy the full game...

Want to happen:
Find some way for late game units to show up more (even a military nerf, anything but the "start in era" or always peace feature)
Late game units make more of a differance then early game ones, since you are less likely to use them


Definately won't happen.
The AI becoming smart in defense and offense.
Fixing relationships so it would be more human-like.
Good map editor.

To earlier should US be in it comment:
Yes it should, it's been a superpower for long enough (60 years about now?).
Canada shouldn't, although canada hasn't actually lost a war, it really hasn't been influentual to anything other then stopping the states from annexing them, and the suez crisis (and that was a short conflict peacefully resolved). Canada honestly is a country that i think could be forgotten.

I'm a canadian by the way.

One who clearly does not understand his own history, and the role his country has played in all military conflicts of the 20th century and on the international stage more generally.

I can respect your opinion if you don't think Canada should be included; but there is no justification for the type of comment that Canada is a country that could be forgotten. Try forgetting Canada's war efforts. Impossible.

Come On!!!!!!! I want more info.

Come On!!!!!!! I want more info.

:lol: You and me both! Like I mentioned in another thread, I'm guessing we won't see anything new until the Chat this coming Friday.

They were on what seemed a media blitz just a couple of weeks ago...and then its all quiet again. I can only expect that, yeah, the next PHASE starts on the 15th.

Give the audience a fix and then let them simmer... simple marketing basics.

Hell, it works. GIVE-ME-MORE-INFO dammit!! ;)

Well neither Canada or the U.S. would be alive without the Aboriginals.

Could someone just one more time restate what all the new civs and new leaders for civs are? That would be great...:goodjob:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5439458&postcount=2

Could someone just one more time restate what all the new civs and new leaders for civs are? That would be great...:goodjob:

Check the 2nd post of this thread, as already linked in the post above.

Goonie, you said

One who clearly does not understand his own history, and the role his country has played in all military conflicts of the 20th century and on the international stage more generally.

I can respect your opinion if you don't think Canada should be included; but there is no justification for the type of comment that Canada is a country that could be forgotten. Try forgetting Canada's war efforts. Impossible.
Jun 13, 2007 02:22 AM


What huge effects did Canada have on 20th Century Warfare? I know you guys had some pretty tough battles in both world wars, but war casualties in both world wars were relatively light. There's of course your membership in NORAD and NATO. And of course your industry was vital forthe British war effort in WWII. But on the whole I wouldn't judge your contribution to 20th Century History as "unforgettable."
I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but I'd like to know what you're citing as evidence that canada was a major player int he twentieth century.

God i'm tired of all these canadian fans saying canada should be in. (and don't quote me, i lived 5 years of my life in canada)

God i'm tired of all these canadian fans saying canada should be in. (and don't quote me, i lived 5 years of my life in canada)

Same, Poland too. ;)
:joke:

Check the 2nd post of this thread, as already linked in the post above.

Alright, thanks Methos for posting this thread, I appreciate all the hard work...:goodjob:

Well, Rhye's mod will be included, and it uses a 24 Earth map, so my answer would be "yes." Probably. ;)

I wonder if his mod will include the Byzantines...? Well, no matter. You can change them on the basic Earth map.

Man do I really hope they add an 24 Earth map. I wonder why in warlords they did not allow us to play with more than 18 civs with huge maps. Oh, well, if they don't add an Earth 24 I will be disappointed with the expansion in a way. I just want to play with 24 civs or more. Anyways I will buy the expansion the first day it comes out.

Gaius Octavius have you seen Rome on HBO?

battle of philippi -rome on hbo

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7820013000940347538&q=battle+of+philippi&total=11&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1708017583598036518&q=caesar+triumph&total=6&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Man do I really hope they add an 24 Earth map. I wonder why in warlords they did not allow us to play with more than 18 civs with huge maps. Oh, well, if they don't add an Earth 24 I will be disappointed with the expansion in a way. I just want to play with 24 civs or more. Anyways I will buy the expansion the first day it comes out.Me too! I want to play a massive game but currently I can't even play a Huge map default game without getting biiiiig slowdowns in the mid game. My PC is well past the stated specs but I can't play Huge map games. I am hoping that BtS will address this issue. But I'm still waiting on that Warlords patch so I'm not holding my breath.

Goonie, you said



What huge effects did Canada have on 20th Century Warfare? I know you guys had some pretty tough battles in both world wars, but war casualties in both world wars were relatively light. There's of course your membership in NORAD and NATO. And of course your industry was vital forthe British war effort in WWII. But on the whole I wouldn't judge your contribution to 20th Century History as "unforgettable."
I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but I'd like to know what you're citing as evidence that canada was a major player int he twentieth century.

Okay valid question.

Let us start with WWI and the "Cent Jour du Canada". I am not here to give you a full history lesson; that's your job. Go get a book. In those one hundred days, Canada moved into Arras through the Drocourt-Queant Line, across the Canal du Nord, over the stricken field of Cambrai, and thence to Valenciennes and Mons. Germans were so scared of Canadian troops that any movement by Canadian troops was regarded as preparation for attack; they were forced to only move at night unlike other allied forces, and the allies sometimes used this perception to deceive the Germans. King Albert (commander of Belgium) said that there was no corps in Europe of higher renown than the Canadians. The Hundred Days of Canada set the pace for the rest of the war where as Arthur Currie says "in the last two years of strenuous fighting the Canadian Corps never lost a gun. Never failed to take its objective and has never been driven from a foot of ground it has once consolidated." There is also the little matter of Vimy Ridge which I probably do not need to remind you about. Foch said this: "By their valor the Canadian troops won back at Vimy the most valuable of our remaining coal fields. These are the nerve centre of France.We can not afford to entrust their defense out of the hands of my Canadians." A sign of Canada's strength is that at one point it held one-fifth of the Allied line, despite it's size. Canadians received the dangerous and previously failed missions, yet managed to triumph.

Okay, I did sort of give a history lesson. I am going to avoid that for WWII. Read up on D-Day and the Canadian Beach (Juno). See who pushed furthest that day. Read up on Caen. Read up on the Liberation of Holland. I guarantee you they would not think that Canada is unforgettable. Also read up on Navy, Airforce, and Army sizes by the end of the war.

And about NATO. Read up on Canada and Lester B. Pearson's role in founding NATO. Not exactly forgettable either.

WWI, WWII, and NATO. Three of the biggest events of the 20th century I'd say and any omission of Canada is simply ignorant.

God i'm tired of all these canadian fans saying canada should be in. (and don't quote me, i lived 5 years of my life in canada)

It's easy. Don't participate in the discussion and do not post these useless posts which contribute nothing to the overall quality of this thread. Take your . .. .. .. .. .ing elsewhere.

Please refrain from swearing in the forums.

Canada's role in the 20th Century was major...ok. But what about other time periods? What has Canada done OUTSIDE the 20th Century (please tell! In your own thread though. Get all your info together there)? Every other Civ has contributions spanning several centuries (America is pushing it though). The only people who are pushing for Canada to be in are the die-hard Canadians. I think that its proof enough that Canada should NOT be in when people from many different countries speak against a Canadian presence in the game. Perhaps they just don't know the guiding hand that Canada offers. Perhaps it is up to you to do it. But do it in a different thread.

It's easy. Don't participate in the discussion and do not post these useless posts which contribute nothing to the overall quality of this thread. Take your . .. .. .. .. .ing elsewhere.

Please refrain from swearing in the forums.

Goonie, the thread is called 'BtS : Info Center' for a reason... What is the point talking about Canada here ? We don't care about Canada in this thread. Just go elsewhere creating a 100th thread 'We want Canada in' and everybody will be ok.

There are several new units that are available:
Privateers



Wow. Have they announced yet how the privateers will work? :confused: They were by far my favorite part of Colonization. But without ships carrying goods, they can't possible be as fun in Civ IV, can they?

Maybe they'll just be for anonymous naval attacks without having to declare war.

H

Well, if we just stop saying Canada's nothing, and maybe he'll stop to post to tell us it's something. I didn't saw any valid argument for Canada to be included as a civ.
Some talk so much about opening history books that they seem to forget history is much longer than WWI and tells about much more than a medium power (not to say a small one), a small and a so young country without great impact in history. Winning a ton of battle is not a great impact.
Canada's a boring country, but it's a great place to raise children.

Well, if we just stop saying Canada's nothing, and maybe he'll stop to post to tell us it's something. I didn't saw any valid argument for Canada to be included as a civ.
Some talk so much about opening history books that they seem to forget history is much longer than WWI and tells about much more than a medium power (not to say a small one), a small and a so young country without great impact in history. Winning a ton of battle is not a great impact.
Canada's a boring country, but it's a great place to raise children.

Hehe, it's nice camping along the Saint Lawrence River. :lol: Does anybody know if there are any other Screenshots out?

Ivan K., I'm pretty sure I based my argument on the 20th century, nothing before that. Actually try reading my posts before commenting. I never once said they should be in the game based on earlier history. I simply said that since the game is trying to focus on the modern day, it would be good in my opinion to include Canada based on the points I laid out earlier. If you do not like those reasons, fine. But I maintain that Canada's influence over the 20th century is extremely hard to ignore.
Hell, Holland (one of the new civs) was liberated by Canada during the Second World War.

Canadian history may not be sensationalised and popularised the way American history has, but that hardly means it is uninteresting or boring. What do you even know about Canadian history to back up such a statement?

Please remember guys that someone else brought Canada up in this thread and I simply responded. Posts equivalent to "quit posting about that subject" really do contribute nothing to CFC. If you don't like the subject, don't post about it. It contributes nothing. I did not start this portion of discussion.

Though there is no problem with discussing Canada in this thread, it would probably draw more interest if a new thread dedicated to the discussion were created. Just remember, whether the discussion is in a new thread or this one, please keep your posts respectful to each other.

Hopefully this expansion will allow for 34 nation games. Kinda surprised the stock Warlords expansion only allowed for 18 instead of 24...

Though there is no problem with discussing Canada in this thread, it would probably draw more interest if a new thread dedicated to the discussion were created. Just remember, whether the discussion is in a new thread or this one, please keep your posts respectful to each other.

So is it alright to discuss anything that has to do with BtS on this thread? That would be awesome...:goodjob:

Hopefully this expansion will allow for 34 nation games. Kinda surprised the stock Warlords expansion only allowed for 18 instead of 24...

There are plenty of mods that allow for a lot more civs.

So is anyone going to transcribe the chat tomorrow? 4pm eastern is still working hours for west-coasters.

So is anyone going to transcribe the chat tomorrow? 4pm eastern is still working hours for west-coasters.

I'm going to join, but I don't know how chats work. Can you ask anything anytime? I'll just lurk unless no one is asking the big questions.

So is anyone going to transcribe the chat tomorrow? 4pm eastern is still working hours for west-coasters.

Someone usually does.

Ok, so at higher difficulty levels, the AI will fight better. Not to be negative sounding, but they need to do more when fighting EACH OTHER. The AI sees the computers as AI and the player as human, and each civ seems to know who the human is.

Also, you fixed up some things i never thought of, GOOD JOB!!
Just make SURE - that the AI knows how to fight other AI and the AI attitude should determine the victory condition.

I picture america wanting the space race or a victory that involves making the rest of the world its vassals, Shaka and Montetzuma should aim for conquest and Ghandi should aim for cultural.

Also, aggressive AI should be more... well, less aggressive. I wanted a more competitive opponent, not a game where EVERY AI builds nothing but warriors an declares war every 3-4 turns of peace.

Actually according to a recent survey, Canadian Children prefer to play Soccer rather then Hockey. SO that can change quite quickly.

I hate Hockey :P


I know, this is a ton of pages back, but I just saw it and had to throw in my $.02

[Edit] I don't know if this was mentioned or not, I didn't see it, but Canada IS a G8 member, and our dollar has been catching up to the American one very quickly, and could forseeably overtake it (which is a bad thing when you're involved in the film industry in Canada, like I am >.<). I refuse to accept that Canada is a "boring" or "insignificant" country. I'm no nationalist, but my country has achieved it's fair share. The first bill of rights ever was a Canadian invention, universal medicare, Mike Myers (hehe), etc. I don't see why some people are so opposed to Canada as a civ. I see a lot of talk about how underrepresented South East Asia is, which it is, but how about North America? We have one North American civ! Now that's underrepresented!

Also, i agree with Canada. America is a fairly new "empire" ourselves. Maybe we need a friendly non-expert themed interface for making new leaders etc because i just get lost in code.

But it would be nice to be able to choose weather i play as Bush, Clinton, Washington...

I would also like to see a "New Civ" option, similar to the WWE Create-a-wrestler or tony hawks create-a-skater model.

Start by designing your "leaders" appearance, then choose his 2 traits, then his 2 techs, then his favorite civic. Maybe you can even make 5 blank spots so people could make-delete-make new ones as they saw fit but i digress...

If they did that, they wouldnt be able to sell more civ games because that would about wrap it up. i mainly buy the new ones because scripting is a bit much for me, and well... i need new civs.

I don't think Canada fits. They arn't their own unique civilization just like Sweden isn't. And both are already represented in a way.

Canada is already represented in a way through the presence of England, France and America. Sweden by Scandinavia (Vikings). And to be fair, America is the home of the developers, and the top power in the world atm.

For a civilization to be included, I think it should be unique, not already be represented.

For example, there would be no idea to include the Franks, Taiwan, Macedonia, the Nanda Empire, Abbasids, Uighur Khaganate, Khazar, Kievan Rus, Goguryeo, or the Seleucid Empire to name a few.

Some of these might belong in scenarios or mods. But as Canada, they are already represented by another civ, or arn't unique enough to be included.

I don't think Canada fits. They arn't their own unique civilization just like Sweden isn't. And both are already represented in a way.

Canada is already represented in a way through the presence of England, France and America. Sweden by Scandinavia (Vikings). And to be fair, America is the home of the developers, and the top power in the world atm.

For a civilization to be included, I think it should be unique, not already be represented.

For example, there would be no idea to include the Franks, Taiwan, Macedonia, the Nanda Empire, Abbasids, Uighur Khaganate, Khazar, Kievan Rus, Goguryeo, or the Seleucid Empire to name a few.

Some of these might belong in scenarios or mods. But as Canada, they are already represented by another civ, or arn't unique enough to be included.

Very good point, one i did not think about. I was merely thinking that some smaller nations should serve some relevance besides barbarian tribes.
Example: Myanmar/Burma may already be represented, but they are very culturally different from India or China (i work with 3 ladies from burma). So while there shouldnt nessacarily be a nation for it, it would be nice for a mod to feature this conflict, as well as the wars of Iraq, Isreal vs Palestine, or the massacres in Sudan.

I would think its easy to place some influences as barbarians (Hamas, Al Queda, or the foreign arabs trying to sabotage Iraq, or the taliban) and others as nations.

Im not an anti-patriot or a fanatic-patriot or anything but i would like to see around the industrial age, barbarians get a facelift and become terrorists.

They would have terror camps that are invisible until found, and would have barbarian spy units to commit their terrorism. The same could be said that in the classical era, barbarians should sail in "boat camps" as pirates.

Thats just my opinion, im sorry if its off topic.

The best we can hope, i guess is the ability to create your own civ from within the game (and not through scripting).

Stop it ppl this is the BtS Info Center not another "What civ should be included"-Thread.

I wonder about on-map-trade routes. Will the generate themselves automatically, will you have to have a building to enable them (e.h. harbor) and will the player be able to determine where the route goes? How will we be able to disrupt the route? Placing a ship on it, or will we have to pillage? If so, Is one square sufficient or will we have to pillage multiple squares on the same route? Questions neverending....

The first bill of rights ever was a Canadian invention

Em, correct me if I'm wrong but I always assumed that the Magna Carta was generally thought of as the first document to secure public rights against the ruling elite?

Obviously as this was in the early 13th Century (500 or so years before Canada existed) it was subject to the whims of whichever Monarchy was in power, none the less, I think that stating Canada 'invented' the bill of rights is a bit misleading.

As to "Universal Medicare" my understanding is that this came about, in the late 1950's, approximately 10 years after the British N.H.S. was created, although feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

There are plenty of mods that allow for a lot more civs.

Grey, I know about mods. I'd rather it see available out of the box without having to recompile the new version of the SDK myself, first...

As a neutral party (I have no concern of which civ gets included), people check this thread to see whats new in BTS and the slinging match that is unfolding is detracting from this thread.

Please use the appropriate threads already in existence for this kind of topic.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=224008
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=226057

I am not saying this to be a smart ar*e and just want to point out that a lot of people read this thread for updates and dont like having to filter posts about civs rather than new features in the game.

Thanks.

Thadian, Hamas were a democratically elected government. Hardly fits the bill for barbarians. Just because you may disagree with them (I'm no fan of them myself) dosent mean they are barbarians.

Are we reckoning on getting more or less all the remaining info tonight?

I wonder about on-map-trade routes. Will the generate themselves automatically, will you have to have a building to enable them (e.h. harbor) and will the player be able to determine where the route goes? How will we be able to disrupt the route? Placing a ship on it, or will we have to pillage? If so, Is one square sufficient or will we have to pillage multiple squares on the same route? Questions neverending....

I think it should be that on certain points along the trade route you can place a ship to disrupt the trade. Maybe 1 point for a short route and 4 in a long route. Otherwise the AI will have a hard time countering you if you can just place a ship at any of a couple-dozen spots.

Also, i agree with Canada. America is a fairly new "empire" ourselves. Maybe we need a friendly non-expert themed interface for making new leaders etc because i just get lost in code.

But it would be nice to be able to choose weather i play as Bush, Clinton, Washington...

I would also like to see a "New Civ" option, similar to the WWE Create-a-wrestler or tony hawks create-a-skater model.

Start by designing your "leaders" appearance, then choose his 2 traits, then his 2 techs, then his favorite civic. Maybe you can even make 5 blank spots so people could make-delete-make new ones as they saw fit but i digress...

If they did that, they wouldnt be able to sell more civ games because that would about wrap it up. i mainly buy the new ones because scripting is a bit much for me, and well... i need new civs.I whole heartedly agree about the Civ and Leader editor. But I don't think it would create a scenario where Firaxis couldn't sell future expansions. There would still be the need for new game mechanics like Vassalage, Corporations etc. And the Modding community has already gone far past Firaxis in terms of incorporating new Civs, Units, Buildings, Wonders etc into the game. BtS will sell despite the brilliant Mods that have been made.

If Firaxis were to create an XP that allowed us to customize our Civs
(complete with a simple graphics editor), I for one would buy it.

I wonder about on-map-trade routes. Will the generate themselves automatically, will you have to have a building to enable them (e.h. harbor) and will the player be able to determine where the route goes? How will we be able to disrupt the route? Placing a ship on it, or will we have to pillage? If so, Is one square sufficient or will we have to pillage multiple squares on the same route? Questions neverending....I wonder about all this as well. One of my guesses is that we might see an animated line of ships representing the Trade Routes. Perhaps smaller scale units that are sort of 'greyed out' and spaced 5 or 6 tiles apart? I'm hoping that the player who interrupts a Trade Route will gain some Commerce for it. That might make it possible to get some real Privateering in the game. Micromanagement could get intense though. So I also hope that ships will have a 'patrol trade route' feature.

please dont tell me that on the map trading works the way it does in Call to Power, where each route was symbolised by a colored line on the map. Advantage was that trade worked from city to city, and you could re-distribute your routes to make goods more profitable.

Flaw was that a pirate in the water could pillage your route, giving you an AI penalty because you stopped trading. Now, if they "siezed" the route gaining the resource themselves temporarily instead of just killing your trade and reputation it could be nice...

I I see a lot of talk about how underrepresented South East Asia is, which it is, but how about North America? We have one North American civ! Now that's underrepresented!

America, Aztecs, Maya & Native American makes 4. Seems about right to me.

I'm definitely in the camp of putting the remaining new ones in Africa & Asia, but if they must add another to the western hemisphere, I'd prefer a 2nd South American civ.

Methos, will you keep the chat log?

^^ someone asked that in the thread about the chat and ThunderFall said he'd put up the log after the chat, and maybe even in Q & A format a couple of days later

Oh great! :) Then i wont sit down and read all stuff now!

Wow, all threads eventually boil down to Hitler, armaments, or whether to include someone's country into the game. Please, for the sake of those of us who read the forums for CIV related information, please stop with these amateur history debates.

Frankly, very few of us care about Canada's contribution to the 20th Century (or Poland's for that matter); or the various issues with Hitler and nazism; or for that matter - was this tank better than that tank?

I have nothing against Canada nor Canadians (or Poles, or anyone else). I am just sick of people talking nonsense on here and going so far off topic that a moderator has to step in.

So . . . back to the topic at hand . . . what about BTS?

Methos, will you keep the chat log?

I'll be one of the Chat Ops and will keep a log, just as the other Chat Ops will.

thanks methos! looking forwarding to reading your chat log :thumbsup:

America, Aztecs, Maya & Native American makes 4. Seems about right to me.

Mayans are in Central America and if you don't count that, they are closer to South America. Also I don't think he was including the Northern Aboriginals since they have yet to be released.

And to be fair, America is the home of the developers, and the top power in the world atm.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Russia or China could own the U.S.

[QUOTE=Lord Neil;5561823]Mayans are in Central America and if you don't count that, they are closer to South America. Also I don't think he was including the Northern Aboriginals since they have yet to be released.


Central America is a part of North America. There is no "closer" to South America. Just in case, http://worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/na.htm should help.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Russia or China could own the U.S.

Russia couldn't but China could certainly give a fair fight. I think the days of Country against Country world warfare are coming to a close. If China really wanted to wreck the US it would call in all of the United States debt (since China owns it) or something else to cripple the American economy. It has also threatened American computer systems (China has an army of hackers!).
:nuke:

Let us hope that American foreign relations will improve in the near future.

Everyone go to the chat, its good so far.
@Red Ralph Wiggum- Nice Signature! hehe

Russia could destroy the US, the US could destroy russia, china could destroy neither. Russia has 8000 nuclear warheads, america 6000, China 200 and its doubtful whether thier delivery systems would be up to scratch. If we were talking strictly conventional warfare things might change, but as it stands Russia could annihilate any nation on earth, as could the US. China couldnt

[QUOTE]


Central America is a part of North America. There is no "closer" to South America. Just in case, http://worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/na.htm should help.

Still it isn't really part of North America...anyway does it really matter...

How many of those "8000" warheads are still operational? ;)

7200:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_wmd

Russia could own due to there nukes and EMPs

China could own due to their overwhelming numbers, and as stated above the U.S. is in dept to China for a few trillion dollars...

Just so you know the Russians have developed EMPs that can cover the entire U.S.A.

P.S. don't make the Russians mad...

Everyone go to the chat, its good so far.Well, I'm working, so I don't think I could dl the chat client. Any good tidbits?

OT:
Who could nuke who is hardly a good indicator of global influence these days, since the power of atomic weapons renders otherwise important factors moot.

Russia or China could own the U.S.Russia is hardly in a good situations these days. Below replacement birthrates, disease epidemics, and an increasingly despotic ex-KGB president who seems to have had several journalists assassinated means they have bigger problems than their nuclear arsenal.
China looks to increase in power, but they have their own demographic problems as well, such as a skewed gender ratio due to selective abortions.

[QUOTE=rcuellar97;5561862]

Still it isn't really part of North America...anyway does it really matter...

If it is not "really" a part of North America, and Central America is not a continent, then what exactly is it "really" a part of? If we ignore geography completely, then you are right, it does not matter at all.

[QUOTE=Lord Neil;5561939]

If it is not "really" a part of North America, and Central America is not a continent, then what exactly is it "really" a part of? If we ignore geography completely, then you are right, it does not matter at all.

Not exactly sure what your saying but the land in the Yucatan in more like South America than North America.

Not exactly sure what your saying but the land in the Yucatan in more like South America than North America.Culturally, you mean? Certainly not geographically.

Any good tidbitsNever mind this, I saw the other thread.

The HRE will be an epic civ inBtS !

How do you feel about that as a French person, snipperrabbit!! ? (You are French, aren't you?)
I always figured Charlemagne would be a French leader if he ever got added.

The HRE will be an epic civ inBtS !

The only reason I would like the HRE in would be as a replacement for the french and the germans so I have room for other civs.:crazyeye:

As I said in the chat thread there appears to be an announced SE Asian and African Civ. More than likely either Khmer or Siam and Ethiopia.

Well, It's like a 'coup de poignard' in my heart ! You know, I'm more of Gallo-romanic descendance than Frankish but I accept well the Frankish legacy and rule over the centuries. In f