FFG, you are killing me!

Oh man, there goes my money another end of year hehe

Fantastic! Civilization is THE game screaming for an expansion, and here it is finally!

Will be REALLY interresting to see how they've handled the map building for 5 players... Pentagonal Donut World perhaps?

Surprised Great Britain is not included although nice to see India and Greece. So FFG, when will you add Great Britain? either under Victoria or Elizabeth. Cant really have a game about great civilisations and empires without the British now Maybe under an Imperial expansion - i'd like to see Napoleonic France too.

Fnoffen said:

This is one thing I'm hoping to see in one of the previews.

I would expect to see rules before any preview is released.

Then I must sadly inform you that your expectations have, imo, already been smashed since I would count the announcement itself as a sort of preview insofar that it gives a pre-view at some parts of the expansion.

It seems to me that a Five (5) player expansion would be easy with a few additional tiles. The Board would be something like this...

[X][_][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][X][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][_][X]

...where the X's indicate the starting locations for the Civilizations....

SIX Player might look like this...

[X][_][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][_][X]

Seven Player...

[X][_][_][_][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][X][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][_][_][_][X]

And Eight Player...

[X][_][_][X][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][_][_][_][X]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][_][_][_][_][_]
[X][_][_][X][_][_][X]

...and So on... Just making sure that at least 2 tiles are separating each of the initial civilizations...

Now, I know what the next protest will be...

"Putting a player in the center of the board is putting them at a disadvantage",

...but I would counter with... How is that any different that starting on the same continent with 4 other civilizations surrounding you in the Computer game? SM's Civilization has been a challenge since it's beginning, and often times, it wasn't "fair" either. Remember, in the BG you're usually playing against your friends and associates, and the game doesn't have to be about combat. You can be a diplomat too...

Maarek said:

FFG always do previews first, rules last.

ballpark7 said:

I would say it's extremely unlikely that the 5-player map would place one of the players in the centre surrounded by the other four.

Second that. Much more likely they've come up with a pentagonal map. They did come up with a triangular so why not?

My attempt at a "donut"-world layout:

[x][_][_][x]
[_][_][_][_][_]
[_][_][o][o][_][_]
[x][_][_][o][_][_][x]
[_][_][_][_]
[_][_]
[x]

[x]= Starting tile
[_]= Regular random tile
[o]= Simply a hole in the map.

Maybe not absolutley beautiful but it might work...

Bleached Lizard said:

Did you even read my second post?

ballpark7 said:

This says it all... and the draw back with the "Donut World", although an interesting idea, would be the size of the Game Table needed for the playing area alone...

ballpark7 said:

I think this is a poor justification for starting one player in the middle of the board.

First of all, the differences between playing a board game with 5 people and a video game with 5 people are that you are in the same room instead of spread all over, and you are in that room for a set period of time. All of the conflict, decision making, and emotional investment are crammed into those two or three hours that you're all playing the game together. This means that disadvantages are perceived as more disadvantageous, players who are losing badly will complain more vocally, and if someone's not having much fun, it greatly affects everyone else's experience. Starting a player in the middle of the board could easily result in a feeling of hopelessness that would cause that player to have less fun, which would in turn cause everyone else to have less fun.

Second of all, just because the game doesn't *have* to be about combat doesn't mean it *won't* be. I guarantee you that in the groups I play with, if one player started in the middle of the board, we would all go after him. And he would have less fun because of it. Which sucks. Games shouldn't force that upon their players.

Is really 5 player, is true in the expasion?

Agusan said:

Quoting (and editing by adding bold type on the issue-important part) from the second paragraph (third if you count the quote from Captain James Cook) of the News article:

"With exciting new game options, new map tiles, and components for a fifth player , Fame and Fortune will deliver your civilization to remarkable new heights."

And to be honest, I don't think FFG would lie about something like that.

ballpark7 said:

There are so many details that are different between the board game and the computer game that I for one don't really think that one can compare them that straight up.

Besides, FFG prides themselves about balancing their games. At least starting-position-wise. This, combined with the triangular world setup for three people, leads me to believe that there will be a pentagonal world. Donut or not.

Just annoyed by the fact that the Forum tells me there are new posts in this thread when I've already read my own posts. Trying to fix by posting again...

Guess i wasn't too off when guessing for a pentagonal donut world...

Just seen the 5 player map (who came up with that?), but I'mwondering whether having a void space in the middle is such a good idea...

And still no British civilization? I'm begining to wonder whether this is some sort of US prejudice playing up, it always seems to me that Britain is never promoted in the Civilization games even though they built the biggest empire in the world.

axmeister said:

I can't say I'm happy with the idea of a 'Hole in the Map' either... I still like my Square with the 5th player in the center better....

As for a British Civilization.... Wait for the next expansion... LOL

Drinkdrawers said:

Of course, you justification for calling my justification is Poor as well, because you didn't offer any alternatives yourself....

So, basically what you are saying that the guys you game with are a bunch of jack-arses... ... and that you prefer an "Artificial Hole" in the board rather than a challenge? I can accept that... I've played against players that wanted the game handed to them on a silver platter before... Remind me never to play a game against your Gaming "Buddies" any time soon...

ballpark7 said:

Alright, I'm going to refute your proposition, because it is poor.

• Boardgames aren't like Computer games. You can drop out of a game of Civilization IV in the first five minutes if you don't like your starting area. Civilization the Board Game? Nope. You're stuck with it for 2+ hours. That's completely unfair to the middle player.

• Putting someone in the middle is indeed a challenge and this is not balanced. Said player is in a position where he has to fend off attacks from four other players. Any other position is just 3.

Basically, it's cool if you want a challenge. But don't imply other peoples' playstyles are wrong simply because they care about a balanced setup. I don't think that makes them weak or "jack-arses" - in fact, quite the opposite.

mykelsss said:

Now I see why we differ. I'm gathering from your statements that you've never played Civilization (the Computer Game, any version) against LIVE Opponents, either thru Hot Seat, Network, or On-Line... Your PC doesn't give a crap if you restart the game... Live Opponents do...

...and, Yeah, if your opponents are stuck in the "100% Combat Mode" rut in every game they play, and can't play any other style, they are Jerks... end of line...

...And once again... You too didn't offer any alternatives to the "Hole in the Middle" scenario, so your responds IS also poor .