I'll just copy the post in whole, it's from this topic (http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?119180-What-would-you-like-to-know-from-the-dev-team) on the 2K forums:

Greetings forumites,

I am currently on a plane to Firaxis to spend the next couple days recording podcasts for Civ V GAK.

I've got a list of topics I'd like to do, but I want to make sure I cover the topics you guys are interested in! To that end, use the read to propose topics or questions for the dev team.

But please keep in mind that I'm not looking for things like "what is the ninth civ" or "name all of the new units". I already know that you guys want every last detail about what exactly is in the expansion ;P

Instead what I'm looking for is questions for the devs about what they do. "How did you decide which civs to include" is a great example (and already on my list!)

So please reply to this thread with your proposals and I'll be sure to read them before we start rolling tomorrow :)So go over there and help Greg think up some good and interesting decent questions!

Oh, and post them here as well, otherwise this'll be a sad lonely topic :p

as many of us have seen, theres a unit under penicillin. some say this is a marine, others say its the WWII infantry. could you confirm what this unit is? also, is the battleship/other ranged ship types limited to range only attacks, or can they melee as well?

first to reply, i saw this when it was posted :p

This is bizarre.Dont they have like dozens of questions submitted from various website already that haven't been answered yet? Remember?

I'm not a member there and I'm too lazy to create an account, but someone should ask if and how religion and espionage affects the social policy trees.

Yes it is strange, but I asked anyways.

Edit: Ill ask Bonafide

This is bizarre.Dont they have like dozens of questions submitted from various website already that haven't been answered yet? Remember?Yeah, that's also someone in that topic asks.

Did they have shower rooms like in the Ant Farm ? [/joke]

Can we expect the come back of international trade between civs (civ-civ or civ-CS) at some point ?
If positive, will we have a slider to decide if we are importing food or rather new ideas ?
With the new intrigue system, will we see the return of pacts of secrecy ?
Is it possible to add a new yield that deals with civics (bills that can be passed or abrogated like "mobilization" [cf. Civ2], ... ) and corporations ?
Will we have a SDK 2.0 in the near future ?

Thats all, folks !

Someone, please bring my questions @ 2k forum. Thanks b.a. !

I'm too lazy to make an account over there as well. Can some one ask about what the Austrian UU and other unique thing is please?

This is bizarre.Dont they have like dozens of questions submitted from various website already that haven't been answered yet? Remember?

I fully agree.
But i have one question. When i buy the dvd version, will steam force me again do download the hole game 2 times( more then 8 gigas). Because that is what with the original version( buyed the german version in the week of release) happened to me and my bandswitch is limited!:mad:

I doubt that questions like what UU will what civ have will be answered:
But please keep in mind that I'm not looking for things like "what is the ninth civ" or "name all of the new units". I already know that you guys want every last detail about what exactly is in the expansion ;P

What language is Attila speaking? Has it been a hard task to find voice actors for all the different leaders? What has been the most difficult to find?

Will there be equal amount of different City state types? Are there only 2 resources for mercantile city states? How much less influence you get now with gold compared to Vanilla Civ V?

When will we hear more about G&K scenarios? How much new stuff there will be in the scenarios? Will there be new animated leaders in the scenarios that are not in the normal game?

Yeah, I would love for them to talk about the process of recording voices this time, whether there were any difficulties, and whether they had to compromise on any.

But I'm too lazy to register.

I posted the link for this thread on that thread. If Greg bothers to click it, he will also see questions here.

Did Michael Curran and Geoff Knorr compose the new musical themes again?

Did Michael Curran and Geoff Knorr compose the new musical themes again?Yes, they told us at Pax :)

I posted this question
I made the question not about the details minor things but the hole package
I am pretty sure I will get answer because I did what he said :

I already know that you guys want every last detail about what exactly is in the expansion ;P
Instead what I'm looking for is questions for the devs about what they do


This is the question :

Did you guy's change the goals you had for the AI when you start creating civ 5. john shaver had the goals to make diplomacy more mysteries and it olso seemed that the AI was playing to win wich means they will not conduct diplomacy but will try to stop you..

It seems that with the pathches you guy's are slowly changing diplomacy to make it less random and more aprouchable.
At the civ 5 god's and king demo it looked like there where actualy a lot of instruments to make friends and to get positif modifiers and I heard that the you are winning the game modifier is removed

Currently some player's don't know wich dirrection you are going with diplomacy

So my question is simple what are you're goals for diplomacy ? for example :
Do you want to make it like civ 4 able to change the attitudes and that that some leaders are backstabbers
Or do you want to make a AI who is cleary out to win the game and diplomacy is out of the question?

and I little side question: will the warmonger penalty be reworked?


I hope I will get a respons I thinx a lot of player's will be exited to know what the goals are because now the AI is currently between playing to win and interacting with them at diplomacy

If you guy's have some question's you really want to know I will post them I have a account

I tried to register there earlier but failed.

I question I would have, it kind of runs sink with Bonafide's:
"Seeing about everyone is now picking the Liberty Social Policy tree, has this been a discussion topic within the development team? With the introduction of Faith, did you get a chance for a new look at the Social Policies?"

My post:
I'm curious about the amount of 'waste'.
What percentage of ideas get through from, say, brainstorming to designing to quality testing to final product?

(eg. '50% of the brainstormed ideas go through to the design table, of that 20% actually ends up in the alpha and of that 50% stays in the final product.')

My post:

Good question pretty sure you will get answer


However I have the feeling that they are forced to only answer question's the marketing wants to be answered.
I really had that feeling when they interviewed denis

Can someone ask whether there could be additional victory conditions? It sounds like the cultural vc is tied more in with faith, for example. I'm wondering about the possibility of a religious-centric vc or perhaps (my long-time suggestion), a conquest vc.

My question is: Will there be a series of videos that are explanatory of the civs and their unique abilities? If so, when can we expect to see them?

And also I'd like to hear more about the new buildings and wonders in the game.

Actually read the post by Greg. Sorry :(

My question is: Will there be a series of videos that are explanatory of the civs and their unique abilities? If so, when can we expect to see them?

And also I'd like to hear more about the new buildings and wonders in the game.

You need to ask questions like these :
How did you decide which civs to include?

I already know that you guys want every last detail about what exactly is in the expansion ;P
Instead what I'm looking for is questions for the devs about what they do

You need to ask questions like these :
How did you decide which civs to include?

I already know that you guys want every last detail about what exactly is in the expansion ;P
Instead what I'm looking for is questions for the devs about what they do

(I DO want to know what made them choose these civs, I love what the devs have done with this expansion :3 )

So to fit more into those guidelines Greg asked for: What made the team decide to make Austria a civ? And how do you think Austria fits into espionage and religion, the two main features of this expansion?

I have been playing civ since Civilization II on the playstation 1. Since I began I wanted to have part of the techtree given to the WWI time period. I always would say to my brother, "Wouldn't it be cool if they added a biplane to the techtree?" He'd always agree with me.

So what I was wondering is how the devs came to the decision to add the WWI units that I have wanted in the game for so long?

I was also wondering will there be time enough to use those units before the WWII units take over? In other words, is the techtree spread out enough between WWI and WWII?

Thanks Greg for keeping us up to date on everything. :)

Oh BTW guys I have an account over there I'll post some of your questions.

Can someone ask whether there could be additional victory conditions? It sounds like the cultural vc is tied more in with faith, for example. I'm wondering about the possibility of a religious-centric vc or perhaps (my long-time suggestion), a conquest vc.

Okay, I posted your question, because I was curious about that myself. I hope for a conquest VC. I also posted several others.

If someone with a 2K account could ask this id really appreciate it:).
Do the developers come up with new and interesting concepts with both single AND multiplayer in mind? Or do they feel that civ is predominantly singleplayer and thus worry more about balance there?

Id love to hear their response to this as most games now cater to a multiplayer base since it can be quite lucrative and multiplayer strategy games tend to evolve more so than a singleplayer game.

I'm reading this thread as well; no need to cross post over there.

But please, please read my OP in full. Many people are asking the exact kinds of questions I have said will not be used for this ;P - I'm not saying this because it's annoying; rather I just want people to get the most out of these podcasts!

This is bizarre.Dont they have like dozens of questions submitted from various website already that haven't been answered yet? Remember?
Just trying to give people a chance to pose creative topics. As I said, I've already drafted a list of topics myself. This is just a last minute prod for things I may not have thought about :)

Which sort of Unique Abilities/Units/Buildings etc. are the most fun to have designed - the wacky, out there ones (such as the Carthaginian ability to cross mountains, or Germany's barbarian recruitment) or the basic, streamlined ones which balance fun and power regardless (such as Catherine's bonus with strategic resources, or France's culture bonus)?

To rephrase - do you get more enjoyment out of making simple ideas relevant, or coming up with crazy, off-the-wall powers?

How do you decide the backgrounds in the leader screens?

Is there any general time frame we can expect these fantastic podcasts to hit the internet, Greg? :)

Do Firaxis play any of the mods created by fans of the game/look at which fan made leaderheads are popular and use this information when deciding which civs and scenarios to create?

I'm of the impression from the interviews with Dennis and Ed that they decide some of the civs by first looking at the theme or scenario and thinking, "which civs fit with that?" and then create the civs with this in mind. Is it then a balance between which civs fit and what would be popular with the fanbase and used in mods?

Final question: can we expect to see more DLCs after G+K comes out?

Hey, that's post 6,000! A landmark indeed ;).

I tried to register there earlier but failed.

I question I would have, it kind of runs sink with Bonafide's:
"Seeing about everyone is now picking the Liberty Social Policy tree, has this been a discussion topic within the development team? With the introduction of Faith, did you get a chance for a new look at the Social Policies?"


+1 interestd in there thoughts on this

My question:

How far did the discussion/ideas about new civ/unit abilities went? Where there really exotic ideas at any point, that where dropped for any reasons?
Do the devs read all these proposals at fan sites and do they really take them as an inspiration (not necessarily using them one to one, of course!)

If they do: is there an example that actually inspired them?

One reason for asking this (among general interest) are the Huns.
While I'm fine with their actual representation, some really out of the box ideas would have been thinkable for a nomadic civilization!

And - if not in G&K - can we hope for new DLC Civs with really exotic UA?
(Please be assured, that I *love* what is done so far in CiV! It is so much more creative than Civ4 traits!)

So, my question might be as well: How far are you willing to go?

Are there any Civilizations that you have be unable to add even though you wanted them in?

How hard was it to create the graphic of units moving up on top of mountains?

I loved the way it looked when the African Forest Elephant moved up onto the mountain in the demo, and part of me wondered..."did they have to create that look for this expansion or did they already have that graphic coded in but just not available yet?" :mischief:

I'd like to know more about the discussion and thought process that the developers go through when they decide which Wonders to add into the game, and what benefits to attribute to those wonders. For example, what kind of benefits is the CN Tower going to provide, and why have these benefits been chosen? Are these benefits in any way historically significant?

I'd also like to know whether the new Faith system is well-balanced. For example, if a civilization misses out on a religion (or chooses not to found one), can it still be competitive in other ways?

I'd like to know more about the discussion and thought process that the developers go through when they decide which Wonders to add into the game, and what benefits to attribute to those wonders. For example, what kind of benefits is the CN Tower going to provide, and why have these benefits been chosen? Are these benefits in any way historically significant?And also I'm wondering in what order it goes.
Are there certain benefits which are needed gameplay-wise (eg. 'we need a modern culture wonder') and do they choose a fitting wonder for that or is it the other way around (eg. 'we need a modern Western wonder') and is the gameplay molded around that?

Edit:
And another question, two actually, for Ed Beach:
* What experiences for designing board games were really helpful in designing G&K?
* And in what way was the experience with board games completely incomparable, maybe even a hinderance, with the design-process of G&K?

Looks like my earlier questions are already covered:

I would like to know a bit about the process behind choosing the Civilizations/Leaders for the expansion pack.

- What are your general rules of ruling out or taking in certain Civs(the ones you chose) ?

Also, going a bit ahead of things, I would like to hear about future of CiV.

- Will there be more DLC Civs after Gods & Kings ?

I am sure many fan-favorites are left out and people would like to know will their favorite Civ have a chance to get in the game anymore.


So this time I would like to ask: "Will there be any new Social Policy Trees or Branches in the Expansion ?" and "Will it be possible to raze Capital and City State cities ? If not, why it was decided to limit this kind of play style ?" :)

EDIT: One more :)

"How about the new "City State bullying" element, I would like to hear more about it, say do the Mongols for example have higher chance to get free Great People from CS's if you bully them (moving many units near their borders and making demands for them) ?"

So this time I would like to ask: "Will there be any new Social Policy Trees or Branches in the Expansion ?" :)Incase you missed it, there was a screenshot of the Social Policies in Sunday's stream and it looked exactly similar to what we have now.
They said something about Order and some other later policy to have an impact on diplomacy, that was the reason they showed it. From what we've seen, the best we can hope for is individual trees being adjusted.
You would expect some new features, introduced with Religion, to be worked into the Social Policies. I would certainly like to hear more about that.

One question on a topic I've seen little discussion. I find the empire-wide happiness to be one of the more limiting aspects of the game. I feel like I get punished for expanding, and consequently do things like raze a lot more cities or sell of cities - which seems contrary to "building" a civilization.

what are the dev team's thoughts on empire happiness in general (e.g. do they like the current approach, etc) and are there any considerations for tweaking?

Article from Escapist told us that siege units like catapults are now more essential when trying to capture cities. Do you stil need iron to make catapults? What about Arab UU camel archer, do you still need horses to build them?

One question on a topic I've seen little discussion. I find the empire-wide happiness to be one of the more limiting aspects of the game. I feel like I get punished for expanding, and consequently do things like raze a lot more cities or sell of cities - which seems contrary to "building" a civilization.

what are the dev team's thoughts on empire happiness in general (e.g. do they like the current approach, etc) and are there any considerations for tweaking?

That's way too major of a change for them to do at this point. The happiness is such a central point to the game that changing that would require reworking the entire game. You can't expect them to revolutionize the game that much in an expansion pack.

You can't expect them to revolutionize the game that much in an expansion pack.

Especially not, when there is no revolution necessary... ;)

One question on a topic I've seen little discussion. I find the empire-wide happiness to be one of the more limiting aspects of the game. I feel like I get punished for expanding, and consequently do things like raze a lot more cities or sell of cities - which seems contrary to "building" a civilization.

what are the dev team's thoughts on empire happiness in general (e.g. do they like the current approach, etc) and are there any considerations for tweaking?

An excellent question. I have been doing these things in my game. Razing and selling cities. I just don't have the happines to keep them all. I have even had to sell some decent ones. The other thing they should look into is allowing you to raze captials, it gets annoying to keep them sometimes as well. Some empires are too far between. To build roads and connect everything is a drain on the economy. I am curious what the devs think about this. Good thinking abc127.

An excellent question. I have been doing these things in my game. Razing and selling cities. I just don't have the happines to keep them all. I have even had to sell some decent ones. The other thing they should look into is allowing you to raze captials, it gets annoying to keep them sometimes as well. Some empires are too far between. To build roads and connect everything is a drain on the economy. I am curious what the devs think about this. Good thinking abc127.

The thing is, if happiness doesn't exist to limit your number of cities, then some other mechanic will, otherwise there's just no limit to the number of cities you can build.

I think they don't allow razing of capitals because it allows the civ that loses its capital the chance to regain it. It ties into the requirements for Domination victory as well - capture all capitals. So if they allow capital razing then they'd have to tweak the settings for Domination victory.

What will be included in the patch before the expansion, i.e changes to the tech tree, combat hp, siege units, naval units, unit values, etc. It would be nice to see how the game functions with existing civs (of course minus religion, espionage, new city states, etc.). It would be an error if these basic changes were not included without the expansion. And what about those who purchased Spain DLC? will there be a discount on the expansion, a free future DLC?

And what about those who purchased Spain DLC? will there be a discount on the expansion, a free future DLC?
The fact that they've had Spain for up to 16 months, plus the Inca and the scenarios. They won't be giving a free future DLC on the basis that Spain is included in the expansion.

The thing is, if happiness doesn't exist to limit your number of cities, then some other mechanic will, otherwise there's just no limit to the number of cities you can build.

Fair enough point - I don't necessarily mean they should get rid of it entirely. I only mean, that as implemented, I wonder whether the team feels that the results/consequences of the mechanic match the intent, or if it's something they ponder tweaking in some way.

I'm more curious about this siege thing.

Does this mean that swarming a late Medieval capital of less than 40-def with Riflemen is now impossible, that I actually have to research cannoe in accordance to siege upgrade and bring those slow things along to blast the walls and brimstone?

I think we should focus on more dev aspects and not so much on functional aspects of the expansion. In particular I would like to know how devs have made the ai better in combat. The AI try to follow some generic combat guidelines, how AI plan an attack to a city? On the same subject how did the dev team try to make the AI better with artillery? It's no secret the AI never do anything right with that. It is harder to program AI combat on earlier ages or in later ages?

While Greg is out there, can he chop down some forests near Firaxis headquarters in order to speed up production of the game?

While Greg is out there, can he chop down some forests near Firaxis headquarters in order to speed up production of the game?

Yeah or use a great programmer to finish it in time. He will finish the liberty tree soon there is hope :lol:

I rather let them have more time for it then finsihing it with flaws

Serious question:

What were the opportunities that arose and challenged faced by doing an expansion for a very in-depth game with a different Lead Designer than the original?

The thing is, if happiness doesn't exist to limit your number of cities, then some other mechanic will, otherwise there's just no limit to the number of cities you can build.

I think they don't allow razing of capitals because it allows the civ that loses its capital the chance to regain it. It ties into the requirements for Domination victory as well - capture all capitals. So if they allow capital razing then they'd have to tweak the settings for Domination victory.

Oh I know all that and your right. Still it is interesting to hear the devs thoughts on questions we come up with.

The things that irks me is having to keep the capitals you capture in domination. It just stupid to have to keep all those places spread throughout the map. They should just have it that if your capital is captured, you lose it and another city in your empire is then relegated to that role. If you have no city left you lose. You are dominated. However, if you recapture your old capital city then you should have choice whether or not to give it that staus again.

They could make two victory conditions, one could be Capital Domination, another could be Civilization Domination. I also, do not agree with the idea of having to leave your enemy in their one remaining city. Many of you may not agree with me, but keep in mind, I started with Civ 2 and we gave civs in that game no mercy. Mercy is for the weak. :lol: And I do love to play domination, but we need a conquest victory condition for us old warmongers. Conquer a certain percentage of the map and you win, that type of thing. Thats all I ask. :)

One other thing I wanted to say. I do like playing where you turn off the victory conditions and play a point victory game. Thats a lot of fun. Although my first game on Emperor is all victory conditions, which I am in the middle of now. Its harder than king, but easier in some ways because the other civs have money for luxuries you sell. The hard part is that they have so much cash and can sign research agreements at will. Many times I cannot do this, but I need to get better at this level of play.

I have one more question for the Dev team I would like to ask :)

- Will Morgan Sheppard return to voice the new nine Civilizations?

( http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=454675 )

Greg said in the chat of the live stream he's almost certain Sheppard is returning

Nice. Great to hear this and thanks for the info :)

While Greg is out there, can he chop down some forests near Firaxis headquarters in order to speed up production of the game?

Awesome post is awesome.

Brainlazy article says that Civ5 vanilla was made by the Wrong team. No wonder why it was flawed at the beginning.

Brainlazy article says that Civ5 vanilla was made by the Wrong team. No wonder why it was flawed at the beginning.

IIRC,there's an thread somewhere in the forum,where someone develops a theory to explain why Civilization 2/3/4 were made in one way and Civilization 5 was made in another way .

Brainlazy article says that Civ5 vanilla was made by the Wrong team. No wonder why it was flawed at the beginning.

Wrong team not because they are bad at programming but have bad idea's.

THe idea of making diplomacy more myteries of john shaver was a fail

You can check the article in the other thread btw.

Yes, (over the top) hidden diplomacy was a fail, in my regards. I am fine with some mysterie, though. (As, for example, the possibility of being backstabbed, no matter how good your standing seams.).

But...
- 1 UpT was a great (and brave!) design decission.
- Hexes where a great design decission.
- Range combat was a great design decission.
- CSs where a great design decission.
- Limited strategic resources where a great design decission.
- UAs instead of Civ4 traits where a great design decission.
- Getting rid of all the dead weight of prior civ games and try a new start was a great and brave (!) design decission.

Sure, not everything went well, at the beginning. But rebalancing and tweaking is something that will happen in nearly every game, nowadays. (And this is good, as a big fanbase can give way more feedback than a small testing team.)

And sure, not everything went to my taste. Lowered field yields for bonus resources, for example.
This is, in my thinking, a consequence of the effort to make CiV more of a multiplayer game. An effort, that was one of the biggest fails (in my regard! Please be aware, that this statement is totally subjective! And yes, I know that Sulla blamed it to other things. But even if Sulla seams to be considered as a Civ-genius, I am sure he is *wrong* in this regard!)

All things considered, I think the original dev team (including Shaffer!) did a good job! They created a solid base to build up uppon. A base, that - after several patches - delivered a fun to play game. (AI deficites aside, which are a different issue.)

And one thing is true: If you take new and seldomly walked pathes, you will anger some people.
But I think, they don't deserve all this hatred and bashing at all!

Cheers,
Deggial

Brainlazy article says that Civ5 vanilla was made by the Wrong team. No wonder why it was flawed at the beginning.

Where? I see that they're saying this is made by the same team, which will prevent it from becoming flawed due to having a new team unfamiliar with the engine work on the game.

How did you go about selecting and developing the new Civilizations? Did you focus on which Civs had the potential to incorporate the new gameplay mechanics or bring a balance to the focus of the current Civs? Or do you grab onto a Civilization that is requested or might be interesting and develop the unique attributes from there? Or both?

We already know that the UAs of the Songhai and British are getting updates. Did you folks find that you had to review the unique attributes of the existing Civs in light of the new mechanics or did you feel that those Civs were already generally well balanced?

I also am on board with those who would like to know how you all find these wonderful voice actors and go about developing their script.

Could you talk a little about the process that goes into writing the dialogue and flavor text for the leaders? How much effort is put into making them accurate to their historical personality, and how much artistic license is there? Are certain leaders easier to write for than others?

Yes, (over the top) hidden diplomacy was a fail, in my regards. I am fine with some mysterie, though. (As, for example, the possibility of being backstabbed, no matter how good your standing seams.).

But...
- 1 UpT was a great (and brave!) design decission.
- Hexes where a great design decission.
- Range combat was a great design decission.
- CSs where a great design decission.
- Limited strategic resources where a great design decission.
- UAs instead of Civ4 traits where a great design decission.
- Getting rid of all the dead weight of prior civ games and try a new start was a great and brave (!) design decission.

Sure, not everything went well, at the beginning. But rebalancing and tweaking is something that will happen in nearly every game, nowadays. (And this is good, as a big fanbase can give way more feedback than a small testing team.)

And sure, not everything went to my taste. Lowered field yields for bonus resources, for example.
This is, in my thinking, a consequence of the effort to make CiV more of a multiplayer game. An effort, that was one of the biggest fails (in my regard! Please be aware, that this statement is totally subjective! And yes, I know that Sulla blamed it to other things. But even if Sulla seams to be considered as a Civ-genius, I am sure he is *wrong* in this regard!)

All things considered, I think the original dev team (including Shaffer!) did a good job! They created a solid base to build up uppon. A base, that - after several patches - delivered a fun to play game. (AI deficites aside, which are a different issue.)

And one thing is true: If you take new and seldomly walked pathes, you will anger some people.
But I think, they don't deserve all this hatred and bashing at all!

Cheers,
Deggial

Nice post and agree very much with your bulleted list. While I found the initial release playable and fun, it had lots of problems and I was very happy with the direction of the patches and DLCs. However, I disagree about lowered field yields - that was one of the best changes from the ridiculous over-abundance of Civ4, imo. The reason simple is that it forces more critical choices, esp. early in the game where 1 single food, hammer or gold can make or break short-term success. There is not much difference between 4 and 5 food but there is from 1 and 2 food. Regarding that, I do wish there were more variety in the numbers between the resources, particularly the luxury ones.

Sorry I don't have another question but for G&K, I hope that in giving us more variety of stuff (natural wonders, resources and faiths/beliefs) they do not increase the quantity on any of the maps. Scarce resources (like lower yields) make each one worth fighting for and trying to obtain.

Will Gods and Kings please fans of Civ4 (especially Beyond the Sword)? And why?

What motivated the dev team to add four women leaders in the expansion?

Will Gods and Kings please fans of Civ4 (especially Beyond the Sword)? And why?



Haha, I don't think anyone's going to believe an answer to that from a Rep (even if they're being honest). :D

Yeah, the honest answer would be that Civ4 fans (which I had been one) need to adapt to change or just keep playing Civ4. :lol:

What language is Askia speaking?
Which Quechua and Nahuatl languages are Pachacuti and Montezuma speaking?

Okay, this is probably my seventh question, but just have to ask. :D

- Is the Gods & Kings soundtrack going to be released ? Perhaps a pre-order Deluxe Edition with soundtrack, like the Vanilla CiV had.

Yes, (over the top) hidden diplomacy was a fail, in my regards. I am fine with some mysterie, though. (As, for example, the possibility of being backstabbed, no matter how good your standing seams.).

But...
- 1 UpT was a great (and brave!) design decission.
- Hexes where a great design decission.
- Range combat was a great design decission.
- CSs where a great design decission.
- Limited strategic resources where a great design decission.
- UAs instead of Civ4 traits where a great design decission.
- Getting rid of all the dead weight of prior civ games and try a new start was a great and brave (!) design decission.

Sure, not everything went well, at the beginning. But rebalancing and tweaking is something that will happen in nearly every game, nowadays. (And this is good, as a big fanbase can give way more feedback than a small testing team.)

And sure, not everything went to my taste. Lowered field yields for bonus resources, for example.
This is, in my thinking, a consequence of the effort to make CiV more of a multiplayer game. An effort, that was one of the biggest fails (in my regard! Please be aware, that this statement is totally subjective! And yes, I know that Sulla blamed it to other things. But even if Sulla seams to be considered as a Civ-genius, I am sure he is *wrong* in this regard!)

All things considered, I think the original dev team (including Shaffer!) did a good job! They created a solid base to build up uppon. A base, that - after several patches - delivered a fun to play game. (AI deficites aside, which are a different issue.)

And one thing is true: If you take new and seldomly walked pathes, you will anger some people.
But I think, they don't deserve all this hatred and bashing at all!

Cheers,
Deggial

Wow, great post, well said. It's absolutely true. They made alot of changes, most of them good. You can't expect big changes to go perfect the first time. And my expectation is that with G&K this will be one of the better civilization games.

What language is Askia speaking?
Which Quechua and Nahuatl languages are Pachacuti and Montezuma speaking?

I'd just cut to the chase and ask "What language are all of the leaders speaking?" Especially Attila, since he seems to be getting the most attention on that front.

The civilopedia was pretty much useless in Civ 5 - has it had a much-needed overhaul?

Will there be DLL modding?

That's it. I don't really care about anything else. Been waiting for some DLL modding since day 1.

The civilopedia was pretty much useless in Civ 5 - has it had a much-needed overhaul?

This. Also are there any changes made to advisors to make them 'actually' useful for players ?
It could include things like :-
- Hiding messages
- Revamped suggestion messages for trading luxuries which would generate most profit i.e stop suggesting me to sell silver to Elizbeth who is hostile towards me & won't give me more than 50 gold.
- More sensible suggestions regarding expanding ur borders & what cities u should priortize to capture during war/weak cities or rich cities not too hard to take.

Will there be DLL modding?

That's it. I don't really care about anything else. Been waiting for some DLL modding since day 1.They already said a few months ago that'll come in a patch.

Also are there any changes made to advisors to make them 'actually' useful for players?
I swear, if my military advisor tells me how poorly a war is going for me one more time...

What ever became of this? Did Greg already go to Firaxis?

What ever became of this? Did Greg already go to Firaxis?
Yes, he went there with Elizabeth Tobey and flew home Thursday evening. I'd guess that given that they'd both worked 11-12 days on the trot, they decided to have a long weekend - so the podcasts would therefore be posted early next week.

I feel sorry for them not getting an Easter break. :(

This. Also are there any changes made to advisors to make them 'actually' useful for players ?
It could include things like :-
- Hiding messages
- Revamped suggestion messages for trading luxuries which would generate most profit i.e stop suggesting me to sell silver to Elizbeth who is hostile towards me & won't give me more than 50 gold.
- More sensible suggestions regarding expanding ur borders & what cities u should priortize to capture during war/weak cities or rich cities not too hard to take.

Since when any advisors have been useful and not a waste of time (to include) in any civ games??

Civ2 was worth it for entertainment value.

They already said a few months ago that'll come in a patch.

Haven't they been saying that since release, though? :/

Since when any advisors have been useful and not a waste of time (to include) in any civ games??

I think they would be a good addition if they were done properly.

Haven't they been saying that since release, though? :/

It's coming June 18 or 19 when G&K is released. I think Dennis Shirk said that in the PAX interview.

It's coming June 18 or 19 when G&K is released. I think Dennis Shirk said that in the PAX interview.

Hmm are you sure of that :think:

Obviously they will release a patch to vanilla that will allows DLL to be loaded/unloaded for G&K compatibility before the release, and they've also said that the SDK for the DLL will be out at some point, but I don't remember them saying that the DLL's SDK will be available immediately after the release of G&K.

Ahh. That's it, then. You're probably right about Firaxis being diplomatic.

Nothing new on when we might get some answers?

Nothing new on when we might get some answers?

I'm sure it's sometime this week. It's one a matter of when. O.O

What language is Askia speaking?
It's Zarma, the most widely-spoken Songhay language.

When will we find out some more info? May 6th now and no word since Sweden.

Which was about two weeks ago, right? I think they need to drag things out a bit more. They have six weeks left. There are only two big things I can think of left, the civ trait reveal (where there's a detailed description of the civ) and the scenario descriptions.

More info about the tech tree, maybe we'll get that before release?

More info about the tech tree, maybe we'll get that before release?

That would be nice. They should tell us about this new era. Some real AI gameplay would be a plus, so we can see for ourselves, what this supposed reworked AI is capable of. Many remain skeptical that it will be lame improvement. There is plenty they still can show us.

More info about the tech tree, maybe we'll get that before release?

Probably not, the tech tree is something they constantly adjust for balance issues, as the lead designer told at PAX. So that is something that can easily change.

Which was about two weeks ago, right? I think they need to drag things out a bit more. They have six weeks left. There are only two big things I can think of left, the civ trait reveal (where there's a detailed description of the civ) and the scenario descriptions.

We've not yet seen Theodora and there's a few units we don't know about either. Those and what you mentioned about civ traits and scenario descriptions are the main things as far as I'm concerned.

The dev team info was never going to be specifics, it was more "how does the team decide which civs go into the game" type questions Greg was looking for.

The few units would probably be left for a surprise when the game is released. Assuming they aren't UUs, in which case they'll be revealed with everything else for a civ. Theodora's art almost certainly would be revealed when we learn the rest about Byzantium.

I'd guess they will tell us a few things about the scenarios shortly before the release... We practically know nothing about the Smokey Skies Scenario f.e. Besides that, they can tell us about the Byzantines and Maya or for example the world wonders... So there's still a few things left.

Whatever happened to the element of surprise? I actually don't want them to tell us a lot, maybe even leave the scenarios a mystery so we can have fun experiencing it ourselves for the first time :D.

Liz said there ain't any major events in May so I doubt we'd be getting any major news on God and Kings, I think we'll have some on the E3 in early early June.

I REALLY want to know this. I play Starcraft at an EPM level of 200+, Master League 1v1, Rank 1 Master on all other leagues.

WILL we be able to hotkey and set rally points for units / cities? This was possible in Civ IV, and made managing an already easily manageable army easy. In Civ V, I will literally THROW away a game because the stress of managing / rally an army with an already broken pathfinding system is too much for me to put up with.

There's so many UI changes that need to be implemented. We had hotkeys in Civ IV to allow a city to produce a unit type indefinitely. In Civ V, there's a cap (I think 5?) of how many units you can queue up at a time.

Playing Civ5 is too stressful?

I'm honestly confused as to why you play it then...

I wonder why they don't have the technology to show us a full size screenshot? They show us these little tiny screenies. You might as well wait until you can show them at fullsize. I really don't mind waiting. Just make it a surprise, we only have a few more weeks to wait.

Playing Civ5 is too stressful?

I'm honestly confused as to why you play it then...

That has nothing to do with the argument at hand. Mediocrity should never be an acceptable standard for a game to abide by.

I wonder why they don't have the technology to show us a full size screenshot? They show us these little tiny screenies. You might as well wait until you can show them at fullsize. I really don't mind waiting. Just make it a surprise, we only have a few more weeks to wait.

I agree with this. There is no excuse for tiny images now. If the magazines want to use small images to keep bandwidth costs down, then Firaxis ought to have the screenshots at their website as they are published.

I'd like to know if they are going to tweak the netcode to make things more stable, or at the very least make it so that you do not permanently and recurrently desync as soon as something goes wrong- just make it so you can stay in the game client and stay connected, and just transfer whatever data needs to be transferred...

I know they won't, but I pray that they will.

Oh, that, and include a "remove only marsh and fallout" option. "terrain features" includes forests, which I generally don't want removed...

Oh, and a "remove improvements if there is a resource available" (for example, if theres a spot where I have a trading post and then I uncover an oil resource there... although now that I think of it, that could destroy a manufactory or other great person improvement... so there'd need to be a toggle for that too).

And maybe bring back some of the older multiplayer features (can you still map ping and rename individual units, and tag spots for everyone to see?)

Oh and make the AI better without having to resort to cheating.

I'd like to know if they are going to tweak the netcode to make things more stable, or at the very least make it so that you do not permanently and recurrently desync as soon as something goes wrong- just make it so you can stay in the game client and stay connected, and just transfer whatever data needs to be transferred...

I know they won't, but I pray that they will.

Oh, that, and include a "remove only marsh and fallout" option. "terrain features" includes forests, which I generally don't want removed...

Oh, and a "remove improvements if there is a resource available" (for example, if theres a spot where I have a trading post and then I uncover an oil resource there... although now that I think of it, that could destroy a manufactory or other great person improvement... so there'd need to be a toggle for that too).

And maybe bring back some of the older multiplayer features (can you still map ping and rename individual units, and tag spots for everyone to see?)

Oh and make the AI better without having to resort to cheating.

Great People Improvements automatically work the Strategic Resources, so the ability should simply be "connect resource to trade network"