Which scenario are you most excited about ?

[EricTheGreat12]

I think the SFA scenario is the best because it has a rich diversity of civs to choose from and I like the Zulus

 

[anandus]

The SFA scenario, it looks really interesting!

 

[Haig]

I look forward to the Scramble too, I'm just craving to know all the unique abilities and units for the participants.

 

[Ryoga]

Definitely SFA, the civil war one seems a bit unappealing to me.

Of the old scenarios "conquest of the new world" is one my favorites and scramble for Africa seems pretty close conceptually.

 

[Buccaneer]

No interest in SfA but the only previous one I played was CotNW and loved it. I would be interested to see if they made any changes.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I don't mess around with scenarios much, but the SfA looks more interesting than the ACW one. Maybe if the scope of the ACW scenario were wider, it would be more interesting.

 

[Talcove]

Aww, no love for the Civil War... And I can see why. The Civil War scenario just seems bland; a general duel between two similar sides on some very uninspired terrain. Scramble for Africa seems to have interesting mechanics and gameplay!

The Scramble gets my vote!

 

[Loaf Warden]

Scramble for Africa. The large number of civs, the drive to explore, and the malleable landscape make it sound like it's going to potentially be rewarding to multiple plays.

The American Civil War scenario just looks dull. It's just a straightforward race for two civs to take each other's capitals. Even if I were a Civil War buff (which I'm not), I doubt I'd be very thrilled at the implementation. A larger map and more civs could have been nice. Maybe throwing in Britain and France and having the two sides jockey to get them to join the war or stay out of it could have been interesting. As it is, no. I'll probably only play it once--if I ever get around to playing it at all.

 

[Securion]

I missed the "Neither. Period."-answer.

 

[chrisjwmartin]

Should have been WWI and WWII scenarios.

 

[Loaf Warden]

Maybe throwing in Britain and France and having the two sides jockey to get them to join the war or stay out of it could have been interesting.

Of course, as soon as I say that I realize the leader of Britain would have been Queen Victoria, and it strikes me as a little odd that both of this expansion's scenarios focus on things that happened during her reign. Considering one of the major focuses of the expansion itself is Ideology (see also: the box art, and the entire expansion's bloody name), why isn't there a Cold War scenario? Forget this nondescript Civil War scenario. Instead, make a whole scenario dedicated to showing off the Ideology system. Have the playable civs of NATO (United States, British Commonwealth, France, etc.) locked into Freedom and the playable civs of the Warsaw Pact (Soviet Union, Poland, China*, etc.) locked into Order. Have them trying to convert all the other countries to their Ideology and fighting proxy wars for dominance all over the world. Make the goal not to be for any one civ to come out on top, but for their Ideological faction. Whichever faction controls more of the world at the end wins, and all the civs in that faction share in the victory. There's your scenario right there.

*No, China wasn't a member of the Warsaw Pact. But it was one of the major Communist powers of the era, so thematically it fits what I'm talking about.

 

[crawf0rd]

I generally don't play scenarios, but I think I'm gonna give The War Between the States a try. The south will rise again!

 

[headcase]

Going by the special rules and other information about Civil War, it looks pretty good. Still excited for SFA as well.

 

[Rynyl]

I'm a little disappointed how little information we were given about SFA. I've seen so many playthroughs of the Civil War scenario but only one or two screenshots of SFA. Unless I missed something...

 

[HemlockMartinis]

The more I hear about SFA, the more excited I am to try it. I wish we'd heard more about it before now, but I guess they couldn't tell much without giving away Venice.

 

[MadDjinn]

I'm a little disappointed how little information we were given about SFA. I've seen so many playthroughs of the Civil War scenario but only one or two screenshots of SFA. Unless I missed something...

yeah, you didn't miss any pre-release info...

yet

 

[Bad Wolf]

I've been pretty disappointed by the Civ V Scenarios. Into the Renaissance was particularly awful - I don't know what they were thinking with that one, it's virtually unplayable. So I don't have high hopes for these.

I've never really been a scenario player anyway, I prefer the main game. Though I did love the Chinese Unification scenario in Civ IV, it was very well done.

 

[jddods]

Definitely SFA, the civil war one seems a bit unappealing to me.

Of the old scenarios "conquest of the new world" is one my favorites and scramble for Africa seems pretty close conceptually.

ditto on all your points.
They could have done so much more with the ACW one, not that I am really into that period, maybe it was a resource issue.

 

[God of Kings]

Scramble for Africa obviously.

The ACW scenario would have been more fun if "Britain" (based in Toronto) and "France" (based in Quebec City) were in.

 

[Loaf Warden]

"France" (based in Quebec City)

In the 1860s?