Warlords: the Good & the Bad

[Snaerff]

Well, aren't horse archers supposed to be primarily pillaging units? Historically, light cavalry is not a city-smashing unit.

The Australian Light Horse may beg to differ ... as may the German and Turkish defenders of Beersheba and many other locations in Palestine.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Then it is probably fixed, because it would (presumably ) be much easier to tell that you weren't getting the correct number of hammers using the new 2-decimal place values.

It could be mostly fixed, but there could be some remaining bugs. Just like the last attempt to fix it. The only way for us to find out is to test it thoroughly. Remember how long it took to discover some of the Civ3 bugs.

 

[Sisonpyh]

In the Genghis Khan scenario, I was able to roll over the enemy civs fairly easily but then like a bolt out of the blue, I had to deal with these large barbarian incursions throughout the entire empire from northern Manchuria to the Russian steppes.... Because the game REQUIRES that you be constantly expanding, it leaves very little time to shore up your cities and so I was consistently losing cities to the Barbarians even in China.

Sometimes I said the hell with it and let the Barbs have them... but even if I'd kept no cities and razed every one I captured, the Barbarians were still making mince meat of my invasion forces while the civs whose lands I was invading had a couple of units fortified in each city and never bothered to emerge to make the slightest bit of effort to confront me.

Maybe you should learn how to play then? Instead of whining about Barbs when you could of easily prevented them if you used your Great Generals properly.

IThe Viking scenario was ok, but also with problems. Among them was that if you ransom a city, you can't recapture it again without forever preventing you from ransoming another city. That's fine.. what's not fine is that I wanted to check and see if there was some kind of a safety mechanism to prevent you from accidentally taking a city you'd already ransomed... so I saved the game and, of course, there wasn't. I just walked into the undefended city. I loaded the saved game and whatever trigger had been activated to prevent me from ransoming cities was still active in spite of the fact that I'd loaded a saved game from before I tried that out... Not of consequence if you play it straight through, but annoying nonetheless.

There is a red circle around the city you ransomed. What else do you need?

I also had no idea how much gold I needed to accumulate eventhough it was the victory condition. The manual simply says the amount varies based on difficulty level and there was nothing in-game to explain how much I needed.

If you bothered reading the pop-up texts when the scenario began, you would of saw how much gold you needed to achieve victory. The scenarios aren't perfect, but when you started whining about things caused by your own ineptitude - thats just silly.

 

[meatwad4289]

I enjoy Warlords, but I've yet to feel any real satisfaction for the 30 bucks I spent. It feels exactly same as Civ4... Civ3 Xpacks always expanded it. But I've yet to get any of the real reasons i bought Warlords, which is Vassal States and the Great General or warlord or w/e , I really only wanted Vassal states, so I could edit the mod from reg Civ4 for the Confederate States and force the United States to become my Vassal.

 

[I play 4 fun]

I dislike the fact that the protective trait almost brings back the stack of doom

 

[The 777 Hoax]

GOSH!! Is there a patch yet??? Geez!!!!

 

[Tarkhan]

Horse archers not a city smasher? Ask Genghis Khan how many cities he obliterated with his cavalry.

They were so well trained, they could time their shots with the movements of the horse's gallop to attain maximum accuracy. Though he did learn of siegecraft from captured engineers.

 

[caesarbear]

Oh the good: makes a great coaster...

Just paid $30 for what should have been a big patch

Gimme the world! Now! Now! Now! WAAAAAAA!

 

[BurntToast]

Warlords is now available in Australia, btw - just picked up a copy from EB in Brisbane City for those who are interested and were waiting for its release tomorrow

 

[Xavier Von Erck]

One bad I havent seen mentioned is the scenario I posted in "Bug or Feature" thread here.... Its a pretty big *bad* too...

Declare war on someone and right in the middle of the war they can vassal themselves out to another civ who will automatically declare war on you along with all their allies and other vassal states.

You have no option to end aggression, you just simply became a casuality of a brand new World War.

Hence the risk of picking on little Civ's.

It's called a "feature." And it's not bad. But good. Yay.

 

[AriochIV]

Horse archers not a city smasher? Ask Genghis Khan how many cities he obliterated with his cavalry.

The answer would be zero. Mongol light cavalry shot armies to pieces and raided towns like crazy, but infantry and siege engines did the job of storming walled cities, not horse archers. Horses don't climb walls real well. I guess technically no cavalry should have good city attack values, but there you are. The difference in the non-Civ world is that cavalry can dismount and attack as infantry.

 

[AriochIV]

Is there a way to play the earth map with warlords?

Yes, copy the Earth.Civ4WorldBuilderSave file to the Warlords\PublicMaps\ directory and rename it to Earth.CivWarlordsWBSave, and it works. I presume you can do the same with most of the scenarios.

Oops, sorry for the double post.

 

[subanark]

I also had no idea how much gold I needed to accumulate eventhough it was the victory condition. The manual simply says the amount varies based on difficulty level and there was nothing in-game to explain how much I needed.

If you click the victory conditions you will see a popup of how much gold you need.

 

[Pantastic]

, because Firaxis was on a mission to reenforce the asian cultures are xenophobic stereotype when they sat down to mess up the leader traits. I hate protective trait .

This doesn't make any sense at all, I'm not sure how in the world you believe that giving a civ a trait that doesn't say anything about xenophobia and that has the effect of making their archery units better make them look xenophobic. I think a number of people are just being silly and deciding that the protectionist trait has all kinds of negative meaning for no real reason.

 

[scottcstoness]

Yes, I also had a red circle, but I was curious as to whether or not you would get some kind of a prompt if you should accidentally try to move onto the city square. Didn't happen... but the bigger issue was that when I reloaded the game, I was still flagged as having recaptured a city even though I loaded a saved game from before I ran that little test.

There seems to be a serious bug with the persistance of information. I got Alexander killed in a silly attack, retired, and re-started (hoping to use my new-found insight to play a better scenario), and 5 turns into the new scenario, "Alexander recovered from his wounds". Nice little bug to get 2 Alexanders in the scenario, which has just *got* to make it easier, but quite possibly not an intended consequence of being a weenie and quitting when Alexander dies...

I see a patch coming out in a couple weeks; both of these "features" have to do with information persistance, which would be quite easy to fix, but is pretty serious, really!

 

[Dom Pedro II]

Maybe you should learn how to play then? Instead of whining about Barbs when you could of easily prevented them if you used your Great Generals properly.

Sisonpyh, I presented a clear, fair and for the most part unemotional assessment from what I saw... you, on the other hand, have been nothing but nasty and have managed to ignore half of what I wrote just to get in some cheap shots. Just from the few paragraphs I've read from you, I think you need to work on your manners and do a little growing up. I also said a number of positive things about Warlords and was certainly not "whining".

Let me stress again, I'm satisfied with the expansion pack and am excited about the new features as well as code changes that will make modding easier. Having tried them out, however, the scenarios are just not up to snuff with the kind of stuff the community puts out... and understandably so. A fan is not burdened with the kind of time constraints that the scenario designers at Firaxis have to deal with.

That said, I don't mind losing (in fact, I didn't lose that one)... my issue was with the fact that the threat posed by the Barbarians when compared with the threat posed by the other civilizations was completely disproportionate.

There is a red circle around the city you ransomed. What else do you need?

Try reading next time... the issue was not about the fact that there was no mechanism to prevent you from recapturing an already ransomed city. It would be nice just as a precaution but by no means necessary. The problem was the persistance of the information involving saved games, which someone else has already commented on in this thread.

If you bothered reading the pop-up texts when the scenario began, you would of saw how much gold you needed to achieve victory. The scenarios aren't perfect, but when you started whining about things caused by your own ineptitude - thats just silly.

Someone else pointed out that I could also find the gold amount clicking on the victory conditions, and they pointed it out like one human being talking to another... unlike you. And, I'll admit, on that point I stand corrected. I don't recall seeing a pop-up for the Viking scenario though I definitely do remember them for the Genghis Khan one.

 

[MqsTout]

They broke barracks. It's no longer possible to have nationwide 3-upgrade unit production unless you're charismatic. +3+2+2+2 = 9.

Stupid stables.

I agree with a lot of the posts previously: not enough for 'normal civ', too much on the scenarios. I wish they'd taken the time to make a leader for ALL of the combinations of traits. There are way too many not available.

 

[kcbrett5]

One bad I havent seen mentioned is the scenario I posted in "Bug or Feature" thread here.... Its a pretty big *bad* too...

Declare war on someone and right in the middle of the war they can vassal themselves out to another civ who will automatically declare war on you along with all their allies and other vassal states.

You have no option to end aggression, you just simply became a casuality of a brand new World War.

I don't mind this. If you are the aggressor, think WW2 Germany or Japan, you want the world to give you a chance to repent your dominating ways before ganging up on you? The world should unite against aggressor nations, that's realistic. It just means you have to be smarter about it. Fight limited wars or keep your flanks defended.

 

[Civrules]

Moderator Action: Sisonpyh - Lower the tone when you respond to others, and do so in a more respectful way. Thanks.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[facistal]

To me the thing that makes this expansion worth the $30 is the Unique buildings. They further seperate the civs and create soem very specific 'one civ' stats. Like the cultural expansion rushing the Incan Granery, or Getting a couple super early priests with Egypt.

Triremes and Trebuchet (sp?) were also a nice touch because they addedm soemthing the game was missing, something to fight Galleys with and a bridge in seige weaponry in the huge gap between catapults and cannons.

I undertand why many people seem disappointed by the relative lack of new things, but the genius on civ is its ultimate balance. I am glad they didnt just add superfluous units that fit a niche. Somtimes what they leave out can be just as important as what they leave in.

All in all - I just cant wait to get some poor sap up the sacrificial altar (-50% slavery penalty - Wow, Monty CoL slinshot late jag rush anyone?)