New Civilization 5 Expansion - Brave New World

[MJW (ya that one)]

nevermind... If you want to find out why I posted you can just PM me.

[Ichabod]

New Civ, the one they said would be completely out of the box:

Unique Ability: Serenissima
Cannot gain settlers nor annex cities. Double the normal number of trade routes available. A Merchant of Venice [Unique Unit 1] appears after researching Optics. May purchase in puppeted cities.

Unique Unit 1: Merchant of Venice
This Venetian unique Great Person replaces the Great Merchant. Aside from the ability to conduct a Trade Mission, the Merchant of Venice can purchase city-states outright, bringing them under Venetian control as a Puppet.

Unique Unit 2: Great Galleass
A brutally powerful Medieval Era Naval Unit used to wrest control of the seas with its ranged attack. Better at attacking and defending than the normal Galleass it replaces, but more expensive.

Holy stupid gameplay, Batman. Yeah, let's make a civ that can't make 80% of what the game is about. Let's make another out of the box civ, maybe one that starts the game and already loses or one that can't build units.

This expansion is working out to be the complete downfall of the game (after some improvements on G&K). Of course, all in my opinion.

---

The other new Civ:

Shoshone
- Leader - Pocatello
- Unique Ability - Founded cities start with additional territory. Units receive a combat bonus when fighting in friendly territory.
- Unique Unit - Pathfinder; Replaces Scout It has 8 combat, costs 30 p, allows you to choose ancient ruin bonus.
UU - Comanche Riders; Replaces Cavalry. 134 p, it seems to have 4 movement like Cavalry but has an ability that gives +1 movement, the explanation says they have quick attacks.

Choosing Ruins bonuses? I would think you can only choose each result once, otherwise that could be enormously game breaking.

[Sullla]

New Civ, the one they said would be completely out of the box:

Unique Ability: Serenissima
Cannot gain settlers nor annex cities.

Legitimate question, not trying to troll here: do the makers of Civ5 understand the idea behind this series at all? We've come a long way since the first game:

[Ichabod]

I think they are just creating a bunch of random stuff to sell a lot of expansions. Let's see:

*They added Brazil and Poland only for the community desire.

*They separated culture into culture and tourism for whatever reason, making, apparently, culture as a defensive thing and tourism as an offensive thing (you hear that Englishmen, Brazil's powerful Tourism will make you forget all about Shakespeare - Oh, wait! As far as I could understand, Hamlet will create Tourism in Civ 5, so nevermind).

*They separated Great Artists into Great Artists, Great Musicians and Great Writers, for whatever reason again (yes, there will be writers specialists and music specialists). Oh, yeah, Musicians will give tourism (concert tour ) and Writers will give Culture, because we had to separate both things.

*They separated Social Policies into Ideologies and Social Policies, making two things from where there's only one. Just read when the ideologies become avaiable: "- Unlocked in Modern Age or once you have built 3 factories; at which point you must choose an ideology" If you don't build factories, you don't get ideologies... Poor Venice, how will it build 3 factories? No ideologies for you, stupid no settler civ.

*They added Archeologists for a second round of goody huts.

*They added a X-COM unit.

*They added a Civ as stupid (gameplay wise) as Venice.

All these features don't seem to add anything to the game other than just more features. There's even more, World Congresses, Trade Routes (which give production and food from a city to the other), but these are features that I can actually understand from a gameplay perspective. But those others... Those just seem like Merchandising.

[Kurumi]

But Poland greatest country.

[Ichabod]

But Poland greatest country.

I don't really see any problem with they adding Poland, nor do I doubt that it deserves it. It's just that I think the reasoning of the developers was to please the great amount of people that wanted it in a Civ game. As far as I can recall, Brazil and Poland were always very high in the "What Civs do you want on the game?" polls.

[Kurumi]

But Poland greatest country.

I don't really see any problem with they adding Poland, nor do I doubt that it deserves it. It's just that I think the reasoning of the developers was to please the great amount of people that wanted it in a Civ game. As far as I can recall, Brazil and Poland were always very high in the "What Civs do you want on the game?" polls.

The biggest overlook they did is going for Poland instead of the Commonwealth. We were a country run by masses of nationalities and faiths, why focus on Poland in XIIIth century? People deserve their credit , because Poland might not be as known but the Commonwealth should be...

[Jowy]

Civilization is all about alternative history, that's why there is nothing wrong in less important countries making the cut. They must have something cool for their unique unit/building/trait and an interesting leader, but that's all that is needed.

[Brian Shanahan]

But East Ireland 2nd greatest country.

Fixed that for you. As any fule kno, Poles are Irish with a bad accent (and greedy neighbours to the west as well as the east).

[MJW (ya that one)]

They will probably add a rule saying: "In order to pick an ideology you must build three factories or have factories built in all your cities".

All the free stuff has to be free. Otherwise you would not have enough production to build all of it. If they just gave you the production to build all of it you could flood the map with units without even trying. That said I agree with Ichabod that they are just dumping in new ideas.

The Venice civ seems really silly. If you get a bad start you are screwed to give an example. There's a good chance that the start basis will big rigged for Venice so that doesn't happen. Firaxis doesn't look awful here as they themselves said that this Civ would "shatter the box".

I agree with Jowy's point on Civ selection.