New info on XP

[N3pomuk]

Hmmm I would like to see a WWI scenario aswell, but you know the problem? CIV! how the hell would you implement trenchwarfare? no-mans land? And then think about the current artillary system. That and there were hardly any fights over cities in ww1, only strategic positions, bunkers and geographical anomolies... how about a napoleon or german/italian unification movements? way easyer to implement, or the opium wars...
cheers
oh PS: I for one feel this WW2 thing has been rehased too often and sets too high a standard. Plus what about religions in this scenario? no no this is a mine field around what is a nice picnick.

 

[Iuvavus]

I'm looking forward to the scnearios, they sound great. But Why does Firaxis stop in the Middle ages? Why don't they make Renn/Indust/modern - Scenarios. Like 30-Years-War (1618-1648), 7-Years-War (aka: French-and-Indian-War), World Wars, Napoleon, a Conquistador-Scenario in Southern America for instance.
About the Civs: Im glad to see Cartharge and the Vikings. Celts are also cool, but again there is a Western European Civ. Imagine a Europe-Map: West Crowded (England, France, Germany, Spain, Gauls) East: only Russia. Why don't they put in a Eastern European Civ, such as Austria, Hungary, Poland, or ancinet Eastern European Civs like Scythians, Huns, Goths. They also played a big role in European and in World History. I'd like to see one of them.

 

[Alter Ego]

As for the three unknown civs, I hope to see Assyria, Ethiopia and Khmer. We need a Mesopotamian civ - Assyria seems a better choice than Babylonia - and East Africa and South East Asia are yet to be represented in the series. Fortunately, Firaxis has shown a willingness to consider new civs (Mali).

 

[majk-iii]

It's really too early to say... whatever info's out there is not negative, only scarse. There might still be a ww2-scen. ...or not. One could argue that there is already one in vanilla, even if it is homing in on the north African theatre.

The "Gauls" might turn out to be the Celts after all... we just don't know yet.
Even more so since the only source up to date is a norwegian gaming-mag.
Do they know to discriminate between Celts in general and Gauls specificly?

We'll just have to wait and see people.

 

[Morten Blaabjerg]

Anyone who knows whatever happened to the SDK?

 

[Elhoim]

But Why does Firaxis stop in the Middle ages?

Because they are leaving them for the second expansion!

 

[Gumbolt]

I just hope warlords does not become like play the world. Conquests was released and play the world was included in this. Great give us some new civs with a different mix of starting techs and traits but add a new dimension to the starting game. Perhaps a new type of great person too?

Be nice to see some new civ traits. Perhaps some tweaking to them too so all combos can be played.

I do miss the babylonians. Perhaps it was just the half price temples and librairies in civ 3. Who knows

 

[N3pomuk]

ho boy was I mad when PTW was included in conquests... they could atleast have given me a discount. I fealt violated that day I got conquests

 

[DeathsHead]

Dont play scenarios much, but I look forward to any and all new Civs to add some spice.

On the note of WWII scenario, why would they add Churchill and Stalin to civs that already have two leaders each if they were not adding a WWII scenario? My money is on there being one.

All in all, can't wait to see it.

 

[Vael]

The list of scenarios has already been revealed, and it doesn't include anything related to WWII. They probably added Stalin and Churchill because they were so popular on the poll that the Firaxis website had a little while back.

 

[DeathsHead]

My reasoning ( such as it is )

Theres no information on scenario specifics in the Firaxis press release,only that there are six new scenarios.

The gamespot article doesnt list any sources for their detailed info on scenarios.

There are many civs needing a second leader, yet two civs with two leaders already get new leaders from the same time period ( WWII ) .

I dunno, Im still thinking there could be a WWII scenario.

Unless of course all Civs are getting an extra leader. We shall see in days to come.....

 

[Vael]

So you think Gamespot is just making it up? A Norwegian website also had the same information.

 

[CornMaster]

Am I the only person more interested in the Vassal State option then new civs, units and scenarios?

 

[Brave Jay]

Maybe the unique building is a special building that the new great person "the warlord" can make, much like the academy that great scientist make. and Maybe the building will boost production of units or give extra experience points.

 

[WillShakeyspear]

Wow, six scenarios I have no interest in playing. Do the folks at Firaxis look at this board? Of course they do.... what scenarios/mods are there? WW2 is being worked on.... Ancient Europe, TAM is popular. Look at the units people are working on.... How about a WWI scenario? But the ancient Greeks and Romans again? I guess they must have been the most popular ones in earlier Civ incarnations cuz we see them over and over again.

I think that looking at the fan communities is a good reason for Firaxis NOT to produce a WW2 scenario. All issues of quality aside (as mentioned by other people already), it makes a lot of sense for them to let well enough alone. People are already making their own WW2 scenarios, so there is no need to spend their time and effort on making ANOTHER one. Besides, they have mentioned time and again how much faith they have in the community at large to produce quality material, so they probably took a look at what was in the works and were satisfied that what is coming up will be good. With the upcoming SDK release, things will be even better for all the creative people out here, and the world war scenarios put out will be excellent, I'm sure, without Firaxis ever having to do anything about them. I think it's a smart move.

 

[Nials]

I must be one of the few people that are actually happy about NOT seeing a WW1/2 scenario.
Those wars have been done to death in strategy games, especially the second one.

 

[SewerStarFish]

Great Scenarios !!! I wanted Chinese unification in . This set is an unexpectedly pleasant surprise and forbodes an even better game play.

 

[JuanM]

Only six new civilizations?!? How incredibly cheap and lame!!!

And one of them is Gaul? It would have been better to include Italy. We need a hell of a lot more modern European civilizations. They made the modern world; at the very least, we need Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Poland, Ukraine, Czechs, Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Austria, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Scotland, Ireland and Portugal.

Plus several more from Africa, Mesopotamia, Indochina, the Pacific, pre-Columbian America, and modern Latin America. It is also about time they include Israel. We need at least 12-15 new civs per expansion pack!

And they should replace the ridiculous, childish-looking leaders with the new graphic style of the Churchill and Stalin models.

 

[DeathsHead]

*Edit Just in the news page, something more official looking. So much for WWII!!

 

[nebuchadnezzar]

Where are the other great warlords? Where is Attila? Where is Mehmed the Conqueror? (aka Mehmed II) Where is Tamerlane?

China and Mongolian scenarios are good but I'm tired of Greko-Roman scenarios. All Rise of Rome... Rise of Islam? Rise of Communism? Rise of Turks? Latin American Liberation? These would be much more interesting than Rome...

Turks should be included. The cause of Mongolian invasion was Turks. (see khwarazmid empire's history). If the history is to be re-written, Mongols can be stopped.