This is great news! So once we have resettled (pun intended) a bit again after the initial shock, we can begin speculating... what will be different from the Eagle Games version? I surely hope a lot, since that one was really an insult to our beloved series. I already love the modular board, and even the colors feel very Civ-like. Not many plastic units though, but I bet the 'hundreds of tokens' will make up for that

I loved the Eagle Games version. Yeah, it was 12 hours long, but my best gaming experiences were with that beast of a game. I just hope this retains the majority of fun I got out of it.

But will it come with a Leonard Nimoy to give special quotes to me as I research technologies

Huh. I got all excited and thought that somehow this was a remake of Avalon Hill's classic "Civilization" but instead it's another videogame license. Oh well.

Yeah, kinda funny....A 'New' board game version of a video game that was based on....a board game....

While I'd like to see this I'm a little confused...

Keggy said:

I had some fun with that game too, but for the 12 hours it took there were just too many times when one player was screwed out of the game after 1 hour, be it by bad luck or by an opponent.

El Ravager said:

In every game I played, every player always heavily contributed to the actions of the other players, no matter how bad off anyone was. They may not have the best chance of winning, but they weren't 'out of the game' by any means. I think that's part of the reason it was a group favorite, even though it ate up an entire day.

I just wonder how well it plays with 2 player. Also wonder if it's possible to solo. I've played and liked Sid Meiers-Civ the Boardgame,but the length was prohibitive,and the amount of players necessary to enjoy the game was greater than I can get together.Shorter length is good and less players is good as long as the experience is enjoyable.

rmnhammer

Looks awesome so far, i like the modular board setup (i may buy 2 copys just to build bigger maps ).


The only thing i'm concerned about is the combat system (once again).
"combat is resolved through unit cards and a paper-rock-scissors trump system"

Paper-rock-scissors trump system doesn't sound good at all. I just hope a Stone-Age guy can't kill a Modern Tank with the paper-rock-scissors trump thingie...

I personally liked the other Civ boardgame with 10+ hours gameplay, and atm i can't imagine how combat can be fun without dice in the FFG version.

I already disliked the combat cards in Runewars, Starcraft & Horus Heresy... i don't think this game will change my mind.
Yes dice are expensive, but FFG shouldn't turn every game into just cards... this is getting annoying, seriously.

I'm glad to see this as a FFG game, as I am interested with what they can do with this type of game as usually with enough players to make the style of game fun it tends to be too long, and the other players tend to have to follow along with the leader of the game, even after it is apparent that that individual is going to win. I have played Civ and Advanced Civ from Avalon Hill from which Sid Meier may have designed his computer game around, but thankfully he much improved upon those games designs. Through the Ages and Eagle Games Sid Meiers Civilization are in style much closer to Meiers version but still take too long to decide the actual winner.

Will we have it for Christmas?

It may sound optimistic but during the last months, FFG has put a lot of emphasis about the release of the Battles of Westeros game, without giving that much space to the Battles of Napoleon game. Therefore, when Napoleon came out, I was pleasantly surprised since I tought that there would be some months of previews/videos/speculations about Napoleon before it comes out.

So, I hope that this game will be quickly available since it has been a while that FFG presented me with a game I am really eager to try!

I'm assuming the Rock-Paper-Scissors (RPS) system would only work within an epoch.

So stoneage R>stone age p but Inron age P>Stone Age R

Personally i'm ok with a slim-lined combat system, after all diplomacy has the simplest of them all (who has the most wins) and thats a great game. It also allows the players focus on other aspects of the game. Also on the main page it says "a fast resolution system that takes into account the "era" of your military technological development"

I'm curious to figure out who much we can work out about the mechanics from what we already know.

1 Market Board, 4 Refernce sheets, 6 Civ Sheets, 20 map tiles, 33 plastic figures, nearly 300 cards, 55 combat cards, hundreds of markers and tokens, 6 trade dials, 6 economy dials

Obvious

1 Ref sheet per player

6 different playable civs

Speculations

Market Board where civs can trade goods? Or is this too simple would you need a board just for this, can't they just pass resources to each other aka Setterlers of Catan.

Each civ has a different trade and economy dial. These may represent developments in tech in each of these fields. So maybe there are 3 different types of tech you can research in. The thrid being military.

33 Plastic figures. Doesn't divide by 4 or 6, but each may represent the armies a civ can have. These then move around the board and when they meet an opposing army, you use the military cards they have. So maybe each civ can have a max of 8 armies going around the world and the remainder being the rocket for the space victory!?

Other thoughts please?

Was excited until I saw who the designer was. Am now expecting it to be very similar (balance-wise) to the Eagle version.

I am personally psyched about this release. I never had the chance to play the Eagle verison, but I'm a huge fan of the PC series and am looking forward to FFG's interpretation...

The Eagle Games version was drek so this can't help but be better. I'm not stressed about the combat system yet. I HOPE it's a bit simplified and abstracted, maybe similar to that of the Age of Mythology boardgame. I think a good Civ game needs to be more about moving through the tech tree and less about using your tanks against the other player's spearmen. However, a poor military sysytem is one thing that keeps Through the Ages from being perfect for me. The abstracted military strength is okay, but I really don't like how the game encourages the military leaders to smash the players lowest on the food chain.

Hm. So simple battle mechanics... Trump-paper-scissors to determine winner in civilization? That's not funny... My mind's going collapse %)

The Eagle games had RPS combat and dice rolling. The RPS system winner got a bonus, but it didn't ensure victory.

Also, I like how this is still the only thread.

According to the news item on the main page, Civ's being demoed at GenCon. I hope someone is planning on going and wants to post a report here.

I personally liked the Eagle Games version (but prefer Through the Ages). My biggest comlaints though have already been mentioned. To truly enjoy that game you needed:

• 3 or more players
• At least 6-8 hours to play
• Lengthy setup
• Very enthusiastic players (a must for any game)

Being an FFG game, i'm sure we can count on lengthy setup still being an issue. I don't mind this as long as the setup time mitigates play time wasted with complexities and still allows richness and variety. Enthusiasm is something every game benefits from, but some games are better at inspiring this than others. Our group has had great success with FFG's game line keeping us coming back for more. FFG is claiming 2-4 hours, which does mitigate my concern about EG's version. Finally the 2-4 player window. Better than Catan's 3-4, not as good as Arkham's 1-8. I just hope it plays as well for 2 players as it does for 4.

• Different customizable board for every game
• Different playable factions
• Several routes to victory (like Android but easier to explain and vizualize)
• Many pieces to allow for wonderous complexity that's easy to manage

Yep, wallet is already creaking open...

I really can't wait for the rules to read

And who knows, maybe i can use the minis of the eagle version for the FFG version ? If not then, meh, np at all, i can live with counters. I accepted the boring looking counters of ASL already, so i'm sure the FFG unit counters will look by far better.

Bleached Lizard said:

I'm not sure how you can complain about Kevin Wilson. He's given us some of the best strategy games in recent years that FFG has released, and did an amazing job updating Arkham Horror (my favorite game of all time).

Still, I wish this had been the old Avalon Hill game, which also ranks in my top 5 games of all time. Perhaps if enough of us ask, there could be a line of Civilization style games being released by FFG.

What can this mean for card sleeves? Will I finally be able to sleeve my favorite decks with Napoleon Bonaparte and Chairman Mao?

JerusalemJones said:

Oh, don't get me started.

Speaking of Arkham Horror specifically, I really enjoy playing it, but you could in no way say that any part of it is "balanced" - it's just a random, chaotic mess (which is fine, considering the theme) and the outcome is based mostly on luck. If Civilisation comes out anything like Arkham Horror, it will be the final straw that will send me round to FFG's offices with a tommy gun (or at least, some very strong words).

I wonder if the gameplay will be based on Civilization IV, whose logo it appears to be imitating, or go boldly into Civilization V, with a hex board and the 1-unit-per-tile rule. Personally, I'm hoping it's the latter, since the less tokens on the table, the easier it is to sort through them.

MarthWMaster said:

Looks like square tiles/spaces and sounds like Civ IV, which I'm fine with it being my favorite incarnation