Would you like a modern times XP?

[marioflag]

Warlords seems to be a really good XP but it is also focused on ancient times.
Wonders can be built in ancient times, UU and new units seems to be from ancient times, scenarios are all about ancient campaigns.
All this stuff make the game a lot unbalanced between ancient and modern eras (with modern eras in civ4 vanilla often boring), so the gap in Warlords is widening.
Would you buy a XP that is focused only on modern times?
Except for new civs and UU, wonders,units,improvements,new concepts and so on shall be all related to modern or industrial age.
So what do you think?

 

[Louis XXIV]

Only on modern times? Probably not. But one that expanded modern gameplay while giving a little bit more for everything else would be nice.

The unbalance does exist for a reason, the ancient age will be played far more often than the modern age, especially competitively and especially in multiplayer.

But there are a few units I'd like for the modern age (and some rebalancing). A modern age expansion pack would suggest modern civs, which I don't think need as much inclusion as some others (Babylon is extremely ancient, but some mesopotamian civ needs to be included).

 

[JavierLQ]

THe problem in my view is that an expansion focused solely (or even just heavily) on modern times would make a lot of wasted content. As others have said in the other "modern times" post, the game is very often decided or done by the modern period, what would more content give it do to fix this?

Perhaps a fix would be to lengthen the time of a game (so when cultural wins and what not happen), make the winning conditions take longer (so make maps bigger so it takes longer to win etc), and then extend the amount of turns per game before the score win, then perhaps it would be worth it with enough content PER age to make a lasting impact, including modern.

Would it happen? I doubt it, I think that they would need to change too much of the game for them to agree on doing this expansion.

Perhaps Civ V could be a different story thou...

 

[Zombie69]

I don't want any XP period, but if i did, modern time would be the last thing i'd want. Civ gets boring in modern times anyway (enough so to quit and start a new game), and no XP could change that.

 

[joshuakira]

i'd be down with a more modern centered expansion. i guess one of the main ideas of the game is to try to win as early as possible, but close games can get really lame when all there is left is to either mop up straglers for a domination (shouldn't be an issue with vassals) or go for a space race (lamest victory e v e r). i'd like to see something that makes modern worlds feel more accurate; heavy ideologies, limited resources, less monolithic "modern culture" bonuses, something that reflects a rapidly shrinking world like advanced communications and something that makes very-high-tech a type of tradable resource.

I'd especially like to see some extentions to the current tech tree that would allow someone to turn off the space race win and keep a late game interesting. in fact, i think a space race that more accurately reflected the race to the moon, or somekind of space station that works as a wonder with bonuses (like increased research or something), that replaces this crazy idea of a ship to another star. how about a military unit tied to genetic engineering? how about some chemical or biological weapons? how about weaker civs being able to deploy terrorists to help catch up? and i know most people who spend any time in the modern world wish they had some reason for a nuclear weapon beyond "using" it. how about clandestine nukes?

 

[Lars_Domus]

I wouldn't buy an XP that exclusively focused on modern times.

 

[King Flevance]

I voted that I wont be buying any expansion. I probably will end up with whatver expansions but only at 60% off or less. The only reason I will pay for it is because I don't believe in illegal activities in concerns to copyrighted material.

A modern times expansion pack is something the game is in desperate need of but even if it came out tomorrow I wouldn't buy it. The reason is because I think it in poor taste for the game to "need" this so desperatly but be on shelves anyways.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I wish Warlords had some kind of Cold War campaign...

 

[JavierLQ]

I think one of the reasons for firaxis to not include things such as terrorist and suicide bombers (same as kamikaze pilots..which are the same thing) is that it would create controversy.

What do I mean? Well it is considered an extremely hanious (sp?) act, specially when it targets civilians. It is considered evil by most of the world (which is totally in the eye of the beholder, as the suicide bombers themselves believe it is the greatest thing in the world).

Also, on a gameplay basis, I think it would be hard to implement. For example, if it is powerful enough to cripple or slow down the top power down, what is stoping the top power or the more technological advanced power to use it on the lesser to make sure that they stay at the bottom? In my view, something like using it created unhappiness in your civ would not work, as usually the top civ has more resources, or more trading options, not to mention the option to go out and conquer more from the "lesser" civs.

If the penalties are made too harsh, then would it really be worth using it? I mean sure, you may be able to slow down the top power, btu with harsh penalties, are you just delaying the inetivle?

 

[Judge Dee]

I'd be interested in a couple of things to do with a modern-centric mod.

The first, oddly for me, is scenarios. Ones I have in mind are the Cold War (thanks GoodSamaratian), the Bolshevik Revolution, and the Industrial Revolution, which would be a nice builder / expansionist scenario.

As far as additions to the core gameplay, I don't have much in mind. Perhaps a revamping of the espionage system (which needs to be retooled for the entire game, but I digress), more meaningful modern diplomacy (including such things as the bluffing / scare power of owning nukes), and a sense of how ridiculously powerful the advent of oil was for the world.

The trouble with the modern age as it is currently implemented is that it's kind of blah. Sure, you get very strong units, but that's relatively true for all eras. Bombers are the most exciting addition to the combat sphere (sorry, I don't tend to use navies, but I gather I'm not missing anything terribly fascinating), and city production feels simultaneously high-octane and repetitive. Part of the problem is that anything truly unique / worthwhile in the modern age (nukes, spaceship components) is given such a high hammer cost that the cities producing those things slow down to a crawl, and you find yourself blipping the end turn button in a disgruntled fashion waiting for these things to be built already ...

 

[Elrohir]

I don't know - if properly implemented, and well done (Not just two "new" scenarios, and a badly made tech-tree) then I would probably buy it. I would wait for everyone else here to review it, though, before spending my money.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I wish Warlords had some kind of Cold War campaign...

I had that thought. They really could make a scenario where, through vassal states, two competing powers (the United States and Soviet Union) have to supply proxies to win (you can use spies and unit gifting to help and can even commit troops yourself, but there has to be some way to prevent the two main powers from fighting each other. Not sure how that'll work, but I guess it would involve some kind of nuclear diplomacy that could show you who you can and can't outright fight).

Anyway, the key would be expansion of espionage powers there (I'd probably make them more useful than the regular game, although those spies need a boost too). I have plenty of ideas for spies, although I'm a bit limited in knowledge in this area.

The key to scenarios would be finding different games that offer different experiences. If you end up with a World War II scenario (probably a definate inclusion) and 5 scenarios that also involve land-based, modern warfare, its a giant mistake.

I'd suggest expanding the Space Race to include other goals (such as first in space and first to the moon). First one to complete this goal gets cultural and scientific (free tech?) boosts. Those who complete it later also get advantages, just not as good. These smaller steps would be needed for a space-race victory, but could have other uses as well (the free techs could be military techs instead, reflecting the practical applications of the space race and offering alternative reasons to persue production in this area. I think this idea will add variety that isn't necessarily military variety.

But speaking of military variety, you need the ability to do things differently. After playing an entire game with the same units just getting improved, the modern age should offer alternative styles of play. Spy improvements is a start (non-traditional warfare). I'd also add transport helicopters that can pick up units as well. I'd probably re-work some units so that there can be cheap versions of the same units that don't work as well, but can compete against the more expensive versions in some situations (give small civs a fighting chance).

Those are my main thoughts, I have a few others, but these are the least radical ones. Sticking to modern ideas (hell, sticking to ideas that are post-Napoleon) is hard. I could think of ideas needed for both the modern age and ancient age.

 

[JavierLQ]

I'd suggest expanding the Space Race to include other goals (such as first in space and first to the moon). First one to complete this goal gets cultural and scientific (free tech?) boosts. Those who complete it later also get advantages, just not as good. These smaller steps would be needed for a space-race victory, but could have other uses as well (the free techs could be military techs instead, reflecting the practical applications of the space race and offering alternative reasons to persue production in this area. I think this idea will add variety that isn't necessarily military variety.

I like the idea of changing the space win to more of bonuses or wonders such as the circumnaviating(sp?) the world, where maybe instead of +1 (or whatever it is) movement it give sbonus to science or what not. However, I believe that then you would need to stretch the tech line to make it actual worthwhile, how useful is a +50% beaker bonus (just an example) when the game will be over in 50 turns anyway? The changing of the apollo program into a couple of wonders or bonuses is a great idea that I think could be added as a mod, with the adition of more technologies to extend the tech tree (for example extend it into the "near future" with robots like Mechwarrior's etc).

However, I still sustain one of my original points, the problem with this is that the game has got to end at one point... even if it is not won with the space race, a lot if not most of the time you know who is going to win. The amount of time that EACH win takes would have to be increased (even domination or conquest, maps would need to be made bigger etc) in order to have the modern era techs and any techs that come after a chance to make an impact in the game. This is the reason why I don't see it coming to Civ IV, and perhaps in Civ V where they (I am assuming here) will take a look at what worked and what didn't, and then try and make aditions to that (so if they wanted the modern era to have more of an impact, make each victory have to take longer as I mentioned).

In a game, such as the Sims, where the game virtually doesn't end, these ideas would be great, but would need to be followed by an eventual end to the tech tree (you can only be so creative).

This brings me to another point, if the game were "everlasting", then a system would have to be developed in order to "introduce" new civs somewhat developed. Maybe something like some people mentioned, where one (or a few) of the cities in an empire revolt and gain units to try to gain independence (whether it be maybe by a number of turns it must hold out or something), as well as recieve part of the techs that the original civ holds. This can introduce a whole new strategy, where as some of the cities of your enemy revolt and gain independence, you help them out with units (or declaring war againts the civ yourself), or what not, in order to damage your enemy and gain a new ally (think US independence and france).

However, for ANY of this to happen, the first step would be to add more content to EACH age, and make EACH win type last longer than they currently do (including making maps bigger etc).

 

[Reg Pither]

but if i did, modern time would be the last thing i'd want. Civ gets boring in modern times anyway (enough so to quit and start a new game), and no XP could change that.

Agreed, unfortunately.

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

Definately. Especially if it added extra incentive to reach the modern age, and addressed the problem that the game is pretty much over by then.

 

[winddbourne]

I'd like something to make the modern age more FUN. Once the game is decided just hitting the button and waiting for the timer to run out, or even mopping up the scragglers isn't much FUN.

Espionage is definitely a good way to go. I remember having a lot of fun once my economy was going in Civ II, sending out diplomats to BUY enemy cities, poison their water supplies, even set off small suitcase nukes in their city squares.

Terrorism . . . Maybe it would be too much to allow players to participate much in terrorism, with some exceptions like a Japanese Kamakazi, but what is there stopping us from including it as set of "Barbarian" teams for the modern age? Just randomly generate 3-5 "terrorist" players, with their own diplomatic vendettas (perhaps based on the actions of various players earlier in the game), give them some special, sneaky & evil, units, and set them to altering the power structure of the world. Dealing with terrorists would be a terrible crime if you were caught, but in the meantime you could pay them to attack your rivals, if they were speaking to you.

Also, free up the UN, so that if my society is dominating the globe I can vote in my civics, maybe even my religion (rather than free religion). If the world is going to become homogonized by the UN, at least give us the option to make it in the image of our own civilization!

Also you could add in some technologies that make desert or mountain squares worthwhile. Say dynamite lets your workers move across mountains and roads on those mountains lets any of your units pass, suddenly you can put a mine there, and harvest hammers. The desalinization plant build in a coastal city lets you build improvements on desert squares in a certain radius around it, making the otherwise useless terrain bloom. Suddenly player X who had a worthless continent is growing dangerous!

More important late game resources might help liven things up too. But I haven't got any really good ideas for that. Still the four ideas I just put in would make a very worthwhile modern expansion pack, in my own opinion at least.

 

[boneys26]

The only reason the game is done by the modern times is because the game starts way before that. so if there was to be an xp, they would have to start it in modern times. there are alot of us that would like a longer modern ages game, me included, I always click one more turn I love the modern game but i think civ4 lacks alot in modern times even more so than civ3 because they taken some units away from the modern times like tactical nukes, cruise missiles, naval units, paratrooper and stealth fighter all were good modern units that were well liked and used. I think thats why from my point the game still feels unfinished, But back to the point. if they were to bring out a modern xp then I would buy it without thinking twice

 

[marioflag]

About terrorist acts or civilian massacres they are contrary to the morale but they are really funny.I don't know if implementing such concepts would be so controversial; there are a lot of games that have these concepts implemented, and in Alpha Centauri you could make with your probe team genetic attacks or you could use nerve gas against population (oh good old days).Why does it should be so controversial?Controversies can be creatted if there is a relation to a particular fact; for example in my opinion introducing Stalin in an XP can be a lot more controversial.

About modern times like boney26 said the coming back of civ3 units like nuclear submarine,paratroopers,cruise missiles,chinook and so on would be really important, i think also that reinforcing UN function in the game can become really interesting.

 

[Kan' Sharuminar]

About terrorist acts or civilian massacres they are contrary to the morale but they are really funny.I don't know if implementing such concepts would be so controversial; there are a lot of games that have these concepts implemented, and in Alpha Centauri you could make with your probe team genetic attacks or you could use nerve gas against population (oh good old days).Why does it should be so controversial?Controversies can be creatted if there is a relation to a particular fact; for example in my opinion introducing Stalin in an XP can be a lot more controversial.

Re. Terrorists in Civ. In Civ2 they were simply upgraded 'barbarians.' I think they were a fanatic unit or something. They could sometimes appear randomly and in large numbers, which kind of represented a terrorist organisation.

In addition, it also had the novel idea that when you conquered an enemy city, the enemy would recieve several free 'guerrilla' units that would surround the city, allowing them to act as partisans around the city, and pillage/try to retake the city as they saw fit.

 

[Tee Kay]

I'm not for terrorism to be included in any civilization games. The game should be celebrating human achievements, not human stupidity.

PS the only thing i really want to see in the next expansion pack is the concept of civil war. Maybe a few scenarios set in the industrial,modern age, but not a whole xp dedicated to a modern theme.