New Information -- Finally! (June 3, 2007)

[Horizons]

I have preordered BtS from Amazon.co.uk but I hope it recognizes my Direct2Drive copy of Warlords.

 

[Psyringe]

We'll see. I'd be pleasently surprised if they added in all the leaders and civs from Warlords, and I don't say it's impossible, but I don't expect them to, and by no means I'm taking the inclusion of any Warlords assets for granted.

 

[bode404]

No, they don't have to change it. The earliest that Christo Redentor should appear is in the industrial age. By that time most civics are available so that - while it will be powerful, - it won't be anywhere near as powerful as the no anarchy offered through spiritual which has been active for the entire game. And only one non-spiritual civ (at most) can build it in any one game.

However, BtS will have some emphasis on later starts, then I think Cristo Redentor will get pretty powerful in these games (BTW, it Cristo, without h. Portuguese is complex but not that much ).

And I dont like this new tech trading option, you can have some advantage learning a tech from a civ and then trading with another. It's good to be just an option.

 

[Watiggi]

Why? Why should Firaxis give away stuff for free? For the people who bought Warlords this is a moot question anyway. For the ones who didn't: boo-hoo. If you want the leaders from Warlords go out and buy the game.
I really don't understand this mentality (am not referring solely to Titus001), where people refuse to realize that Firaxis is ultimately a business and therefore in some way obligated to bring in revenue. I for one would venture the opinion that we are already getting our moneys worth.. If you feel that the game is broken without Wang Kon or Ragnar, why haven't you bought warlords already?
The "core game functionalities" will be in. That is to say, Great Generals, Stables, Unique Buildings etc.; probably wonders as well. Asking for more seems to me a little greedy.

EDIT: Corrected a split infinitive.. My old English teacher would have had a fit..

I think the real issue that might concern people with this aspect is that people who DO own Warlords may end up loosing their new favourite leaders when they then get BtS.

That doesn't seem right though, as it would be shooting those who have bought the Warlords expansion. So I would say that the Warlords leaders would be included, and for simplicity in the patching department, that those who didn't buy Warlords would still get the new leaders.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

And I dont like this new tech trading option, you can have some advantage learning a tech from a civ and then trading with another. It's good to be just an option.

This OPTION will prevent AI's to outtech you so easily and it will make sense to invest in espionage to know what is going to happen.

 

[Thedrin]

Watiggi:
I think the real issue that might concern people with this aspect is that people who DO own Warlords may end up loosing their new favourite leaders when they then get BtS.

Nope. They'll be compatible. If you own Warlords you keep Warlords features.

 

[mice]

This OPTION will prevent AI's to outtech you so easily and it will make sense to invest in espionage to know what is going to happen.

The trouble is it will be seen as a weak option. In other words a game won with this option checked will be like a game with 'No Vassals' checked, not a real game.

Strat discussions will assume 'play now' settings.

It may take hold as the norm, but I doubt it because the hard core players will see it as too easy.

It will further complicate the discussion , which is inevitable, about new difficulty levels and game balance.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

As a member of the Multiplayer community, I can assure you that a middle road between trading techs & not trading techs has been demanded since the game first came out-especially in Diplo Games. I got sick of having to write down every tech that got traded to me to prevent me from accidently trading them to others (oh & frequently having to explain to fellow gamers "sorry, can't trade you that tech, 'cause I didn't research it myself!") This way, if I understand it correctly, we won't have to give it a second thought!

Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Mewtarthio]

I have sad news for you: it's 'only' 2007, and already the US military is drawing plans of deploying robots within the decade...

I'm not opposed to the inclusion of near future techs: Just watch any movie written before the nineties to see that we're in the future (spy films work best, what with their "hi-tech" gadgets that amount to nothing more than novelty cell phones and digital cameras). I am, however, opposed to things that we have no reason to believe we'll research soon. Robots are fine: We use them to build cars already, and automated fighters are practically inevitable. Gigantic bipedal "mechs" are not: In fact, I don't even see why we would build them if we could.

 

[LordGek]

Why? Why should Firaxis give away stuff for free? For the people who bought Warlords this is a moot question anyway. For the ones who didn't: boo-hoo. If you want the leaders from Warlords go out and buy the game.
I really don't understand this mentality (am not referring solely to Titus001), where people refuse to realize that Firaxis is ultimately a business and therefore in some way obligated to bring in revenue. I for one would venture the opinion that we are already getting our moneys worth.. If you feel that the game is broken without Wang Kon or Ragnar, why haven't you bought warlords already?
The "core game functionalities" will be in. That is to say, Great Generals, Stables, Unique Buildings etc.; probably wonders as well. Asking for more seems to me a little greedy.

EDIT: Corrected a split infinitive.. My old English teacher would have had a fit..

I think the split of ALL Core Epic Game stuff from the Scenarios is the only logical splitting point. Firaxis doesn't OWE any of us anything, but I see it more as just a matter of testing and support. To think they'd want to test and then main tain with patches two totally seperate lines (BtS Only and BtS w/ Warlords) seems like a whole lot of extra bother. Although I really doubt we can expect a third expansion, this system of always including all of the core game stuff and leaving out the scenarios will also be much easier to maintain down the line.

 

[DrJambo]

This new tech trading mechanism will be brilliant! Right now, as soon as tech trading becomes available it's just a matter of the AI researching one tech and the next turn most of the AI civs have the tech. This new way brings some proper strategy and thought to the way the game will progress once tech trading is allowed. Thumbs up.

 

[sooooo]

The warlords leaders and civs will surely be in BTS. BTS will surely ship with only 1 CivLeaderHeadInfos xml file and other xml files that deal with the different civs (their art files etc). I doubt they would check if warlords is installed, and then install a reduced version of the BTS xml files in the BTS folder if it is not present.

 

[Bongo-Bongo]

Seeing as Boudica and Suleiman are included as new leaders in BTS, and both their civs came with Warlords, I'd be extremely suprised if Warlords leaders and Civs weren't included. If they weren't, and the Celts and Ottomans were included as 2 of the 10 new BTS civs, then I think there will be an awful lot of disapointed people.

 

[Horizons]

I'm not opposed to the inclusion of near future techs: Just watch any movie written before the nineties to see that we're in the future (spy films work best, what with their "hi-tech" gadgets that amount to nothing more than novelty cell phones and digital cameras). I am, however, opposed to things that we have no reason to believe we'll research soon. Robots are fine: We use them to build cars already, and automated fighters are practically inevitable. Gigantic bipedal "mechs" are not: In fact, I don't even see why we would build them if we could.

'If man was meant to fly, he would have been born with wings.'

 

[bonafide11]

I'm not opposed to the inclusion of near future techs: Just watch any movie written before the nineties to see that we're in the future (spy films work best, what with their "hi-tech" gadgets that amount to nothing more than novelty cell phones and digital cameras). I am, however, opposed to things that we have no reason to believe we'll research soon. Robots are fine: We use them to build cars already, and automated fighters are practically inevitable. Gigantic bipedal "mechs" are not: In fact, I don't even see why we would build them if we could.

I'm still waiting for the hovercraft...

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

No, an Hoovercraft will be funnier.

 

[doronron]

I think Core elements are basically anything that can come up in a standard, random map SP/MP game. That means the new leaders, nations, units, buildings, UUs, UBs, Great Generals -- pretty much everything. What we'll likely not see are the scenario only resources, promotions, and powers -- the things that do not show up in a standard game.

Some of you do remember that Conquests included pretty much everything from Play the World, correct -- Leaders, Nations, Buildings, etc.? Just not the WW2 and Sengoku unit art that came with the Play the World CDs.

 

[sneaky]

No, an Hoovercraft will be funnier.

A hovercraft unit would be cool, but how would that even work. Can only move on flatlands, water, but not oceans, hills etc? It would be cool, but does it have a point?

 

[Psyringe]

I think Core elements are basically anything that can come up in a standard, random map SP/MP game.

Me too, but again, Mantzaris talked specifically about Warlords *code* for the core being included, not *elements*. "Elements" could easily encompass leaders (for example), "code" clearly doesn't. I'm not saying that they won't be included in BtS, but I also don't think that the Mantzaris quote proves that they are in, Mantzaris simply didn't tell anything about them.

Some of you do remember that Conquests included pretty much everything from Play the World, correct -- Leaders, Nations, Buildings, etc.? Just not the WW2 and Sengoku unit art that came with the Play the World CDs.

Certainly. But one single example isn't a good basis for a projection imho, PtW could easily have been a special case, given that it sold badly and was slammed by the critics Firaxis may just have wanted to make up for its shortcomings by throwing everything into C3C they could. Also, I don't think the second Civ2 expansion contained anything from the first (could be wrong, I'd have to look it up).

Again, I'm not saying these assets won't be included. My point is that we don't know yet, and that there are good reasons for either of the two possibilities.

 

[doronron]

The code for the nations and leaders are still code. They're not elements. Anything that is likely going to show up in a standard Warlords game is also likely to show up in a standard BtS game, as well. They've gone on record with that. Firaxis is also too professional a company to release leaderheadless Civs. The artwork for UUs, UBs, and Leaderheads are necessary assets. They will very likely be released with BtS.

PtW -> Conquests is not so much a special case as it is a precedent. MP play would've been impossible without the necessary content. Even moreso with Civ IV, which Firaxis made a great deal over having MP play.