PC.IGN's Warlords preview (4/28)

Thunderfall

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Oct 25, 2000
Messages
12,624
As expected, PC.IGN also posted a Warlords preview, shortly after they posted those five screenies:

http://pc.ign.com/articles/703/703730p1.html

:)

All six new Civs are revealed:

The new expansion will add six new civilizations and ten new leaders. Players will finally get the chance to lead Shaka of the Zulus. Some of the other heavies from the series' history will be returning including Brennus of the Celts and Hannibal of Carthage. Players can also take on the role of Ragnar of the Vikings, Mehmed II of the Ottomans and Wang Kon of the Koreans.
 
Looks Good
 
"The expansion will automatically include all the multiplayer fixes from the recent v1.61 patch but the team isn't planning on adding any new multiplayer features specifically for the expansion. "

"New multiplayer features" What's it?
 
cool, the Zulus are back! :) I liked playing them, even only just to have the green civ color (especially back in Civ2 when there really weren't any civ traits)
 
As posted in the news page,

Here is a summary of the new info:

* The new Warlord unit emerges as your civilization gains combat experience. You can use them just like other Great People to discover technologies, start golden ages, and join cities as Great Specialists. The real special ability of a Warlord though is to venture out into the field and attach themselves to military units. The units attached to these leaders gain combat advantages.

* The six new civilizations and their leaders are the Zulus (Shaka), the Celts (Brennus), the Carthaginians (Hannibal), the Vikings (Ragnar), the Ottomans (Mehmed II), and the Koreans (Wang Kon). The new civilizations have the same unique unit as in Civ3, with the exception of the Ottomans. The Ottomans's unique unit is the Janissaries (in Civ3 it was Sipahi). Rameses II is confirmed as the new leader of Egypt.

* Some of the civ-specific buildings are the American Mall, the German Assembly Plant, the Roman Forum, the Greek Odeon, the Spanish Citadel, the French Salon, the English Stock Exchange and the Aztec Sacrificial Altar.

* Vassal states is like an "asymmetric alliance." Basically, one civilization serves as the master in the relationship and collects tribute from the weaker, vassal nation. The vassal nation is automatically at war with any of the master nation's enemies. Most importantly, the vassal's land counts as the master's land for domination purposes. You can get a nation to be your vassal if you can get them to "trust you enough to protect them or if they're scared enough of your power."
 
Sounds like a solid expansion. I'm looking forward to vassal states in particular, as I hate having a crapload of cities when I go for domination.
 
What I was hoping was to be able to grant 'independence' to parts of your empire to create new vassel civs that are aligned with you. This would cut down on some of the tedium that comes with managing a huge empire.
 
Yes. Also, I'm curious if it's possible for a nation to get out of that vassel agreement. And in addition, can the player's nation become a vassel itself?
 
I assume the civ-specific buildings will become obsolute at some point to prevent a game inbalance with having civ's with ealier building having an advantage until the other civs get theirs.
 
subanark said:
I assume the civ-specific buildings will become obsolute at some point to prevent a game inbalance with having civ's with ealier building having an advantage until the other civs get theirs.

Balance shmalance. Have 'em "stand the test of time!" :lol:
 
Mayhaps CF should create a running info page, kinda like how they did for Civ IV with the tidbits gathered in the eons up to its release.
 
Looks like a war elephant for carthage too.
 
Gumbolt said:
Looks like a war elephant for carthage too.
Carthage gets Numidian Mercenaries as their UU which should be a horseman if historically correct - or a spearman of some sort if they are duplicating the Carthage UU from Civ3.


Considering the political correctness about adding the historically insignificant Zulu's then I am surprised they named the Scandinavian civ Vikings - which actually only means Sea Raider and was never the name of a nation or a people as such(although I am aware that many have the false impression that it was/is).
 
I have to say, the civ/uu selection is incredibly lame and unoriginal. I'm mainly disappointed with the inclusion of the Zulus (stereotypical African savages - why wasn't Abyssinia chosen instead?) and the lack of a Mesopotamian civ.

Well. I guess I'll buy it for the vassal states and the new art.
 
I think a UU elephant is a missing UU in civ4 and i still hope one of the new civs have one. After all the Indians dont have one anymore.

A UU pikemen? strength 8 pikemen or perhaps the pikemen str 6 but has 50% v's melee?

I only suggested a UU elephant as they looked more distinct on the new screenshots. Historically Carthage were one of the nations to use elephants in combat so its not impossible. if the English are to get Specialist Bowmen and riflemen pending leader why not carthage a war elephant. The screenshot wasnt posted on forum but might have been added since last night.

You have to look at the pool of units and ask which unit has not yet been made a UU unit.
 
Back
Top Bottom