Posts: 6,491
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
@DerangedDuck:
Wow, what great commentary. I agree wholehardedly with (almost?) everything you said. Your discussion of "vital" vs "non-vital" was one of the best Civ game mechanic discussions I've ever seen.
As for your contention that espionage is a decision already made however, you overlook one possibility: perhaps the developers are interested more in selling copies than in making a balanced game (Civ3: Conquests anyone). In that case, goodbye estabvlished game mechanic, hello overpower espionage feature.
One thing you left out is how potentially catestrophic BTS could be for the MP crowd. Aside from odd and unbalanced modern war which will probably affect SP folks more, siege weapons have been "nerfed into oblivion" to quote MookieNJ over at the Civ Player Ladder forums. Additionally, has anyone checked Sitting Bull's UU + UB lately? 20 turns into an online quick game, with a research path of Mystacism-Hunting-Archery-Bronze (and quicker if Mysticism and Hunting are starting techs) you can have a 4 promotion archer and a strength 8 vs melee unit outside an enemy city. Tell me any opponent will be able to recover from that.
Posts: 855
Threads: 26
Joined: Jul 2006
I whole-heartedly agree with the commentary.
I personally cannot gather up my own thoughts towards BtS. There is so much that I am intrigued by, and so much that I hate. I will only buy it if the majority of experienced players agree that it brings a new dimension to CIV.
One thing that I cannot stand is the assumptive agglutination to form the "Native Americans". Thats just as bad as adding a civ called the "Asians". I had always enjoyed Civilization for the historical aspect, but I feel that the game is losing that connection. (HRE?... I don't even know what to think of that).
Posts: 6,491
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2006
Kodii Wrote:I will only buy it if the majority of experienced players agree that it brings a new dimension to CIV. Here's where you and I differ. I probably don't appreciate how much debt I'm about to go into for law school, but I'm planning on spending the $30 or so on launch day. On one hand so many SGs and even RB games will move to BtS (not to mention MP) and I want to be able to keep up.
More than that though, as much as I complain about Bts and the attitude Firaxis seems to have these days, I still respect and admire lots of folks who work for the company or on the expansion. I'd like to put my money where my mouth is (or isn't) and support their work by making the sales numbers that bit better.
Posts: 1,229
Threads: 27
Joined: Aug 2006
Blake Wrote:If nothing else, I can say that BTS is fresh - it does not play the same as CIV. I think this is the most interesting comment so far from someone with experience of BtS. From a personal perspective, I can see some of my favourite tactics and strategies (slavery, siege and tech-whoring) have been made less effective, though by no means obsoleted. I think a 'fresh' take on the game will spur more interest than a CIV with knobs on, so once I get over some initial frustration and (re)learn the game, I expect an enjoyable summer shut indoors...
Posts: 1,922
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2004
Hi,
Swiss Pauli Wrote:From a personal perspective, I can see some of my favourite tactics and strategies (slavery, siege and tech-whoring) have been made less effective, though by no means obsoleted. I think a 'fresh' take on the game will spur more interest than a CIV with knobs on I look forward to the "fresh" feel of BtS, especially since I haven't bought Warlords. But what I'm really afraid of is that there will be too much micromanagement added in. Longer modern age? Having to construct trade routes manually by laying down sea buoys? Having to send out individual spies to conduct spy missions? Hrmpf.
What happened to their pre-CIV-release promise of providing us with a game with less micromanagement...?
Overall, what I'm looking forward the most to is initial reactions from people who have already bought the expansion. 
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Posts: 77
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2006
Kylearan Wrote:Having to construct trade routes manually by laying down sea buoys?
What??
That does not sound good in my ears either...
Where does this info come from?
"Trying is the first step towards failure" - Homer Simpson
Posts: 599
Threads: 21
Joined: Jun 2005
Swiss Pauli Wrote:I think this is the most interesting comment so far from someone with experience of BtS. From a personal perspective, I can see some of my favourite tactics and strategies (slavery, siege and tech-whoring) have been made less effective, though by no means obsoleted. I think a 'fresh' take on the game will spur more interest than a CIV with knobs on, so once I get over some initial frustration and (re)learn the game, I expect an enjoyable summer shut indoors...
To add to Blake, I would say that BtS has TREMENDOUS variant potential, something RB appreciates.
On League of Legends I am "BertrandDeHorn"
Posts: 1,922
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2004
Hi,
Kronoz Wrote:Where does this info come from? There was an extensive list of changes somewhere in a civ forum - I forgot where exactly (CFC probably?). But it must have been linked to from here at RB, or otherwise I wouldn't have found it.
The gist was that a workboat has to lay down sea buoys forming a route to other civs to be able to trade with them overseas, and that enemy ships could blockade (destroy?) these buoys.
Sorry I can't be more specific...I don't have the time right now to search for that link.
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Posts: 1,404
Threads: 53
Joined: Apr 2006
Yeah, I linked to the CFC thread describing all the BTS changes a few weeks ago but the cigarette-smoking-man from the X-Files deleted the thread. Don't still have the file, but remember reading a lot about trade routes which become more valuable and you get more control over.
I think it works as Kylearan described, but laying one bouy does not seem excessive MM to me to establish a trade route. This is only for overseas TRs (ie post-astronomy) by the way, and I read that these types are becoming more valuable. TRs alway seemed a mystery to me. Really important to your economy, but no way to control where they go to/from. Think it will be a good idea. I'm in favour of more control (call it MM if you are being pessimistic) when it comes to things like this, but less MM when it comes to artificial things like granary overflow or binary science rate.
Anyway, should have the game by the end of the week so I'll write up my first game here as I play and describe the changes. Hopefully that will satisfy Kylearan's thirst for initial reactions to the expansion .
Posts: 8,808
Threads: 75
Joined: Apr 2006
sooooo Wrote:Yeah, I linked to the CFC thread describing all the BTS changes a few weeks ago but the cigarette-smoking-man from the X-Files deleted the thread. Don't still have the file, but remember reading a lot about trade routes which become more valuable and you get more control over.
I'm still bummed I missed this list...if anyone stored a copy of it can you PM it to me?
Thanks,
Darrell
|
