Nothing wrong with adding ogres or bandits or Edar or Iru or Sion's and Drath.. but there isn't a reason why they couldn't put out some traditional fantasy race packs and those of us who ARE interested in them can purchase them. And no one loses any skin off their nose as they are simply just another option for that person's game.. hence the non-canon where it applies.

And this isn't nerd rage this is simply folks saying that Brad mentioned he'd judge their dlc metric by this map pack option to help determine if they should put in any more effort's. And what many of us here are mentioning is that we're leary of the map pack as the metric for DLC. There are so very many other option's for interesting DLC that we're expressing our concern for this subject.

I'll be playing Elemental for years. And that's what I expected years ago when War of Magic was being worked on. It just took them a few years to put together the game in a really solid manner, and it's now there. And I'm just enjoying the hell out of it. But.. as I said years ago, I would want new race and faction DLC that I could pick and choose from to add to my games. And I would like those race's that aren't part of the canon story to be available for me to give my hard earned money for. That's all I'm saying.. make it and take my money please. Thanks you.

Based on my past experience with SD games, their patches are what other companies call DLC or expansions.  It will be interesting to see what SD considers DLC! 

If as you say the DLC is just a map pack, I will probably buy it just to show my appreciation.  Chances are I wouldn't use them much though, the random maps work very well for me.  So I'm not sure if that will be a good gauge of interest or not.  Although if that map pack included that full map you posted a while back...

Just speaking for myself, if the DLC was geared towards any of the following or some combination:

1) Continuation of the campaign
2) Adding new monsters
3) new quests (longer quests?)
4) more research options

...I might give you direct access to my bank account! 

The only problem I have with this game so far, is I'm having so much fun roaming the country side doing quests that when I do meet an AI opponent, I'm totally unprepared.  A few turns later, they've wiped me off the map and I'm starting a new game.     (P.S., don't fix this!)

We must be on different internets  

When I go to the "Civ5 - Custom maps" forum on Civfanatics the word "Earth" currently appears 11 times on the very first page of the forum.  The three top threads are an Earth map, a dude looking for Earth maps, and a Europe map.  Further down there's a "Maps of the World," "British Isles," "Map of Italy," "Toft's Earth: Based on Mercator projektion" etc etc etc.  I am a bit surprised there's no Middle Earth on the first page, but there are two different Westeros.  

And then there's this
http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/10/14/top-10-civilization-v-mods/

Top 10 Civilization V mods
1. Dale’s Earth Map

Ditto! I don't understand this outrage. Let us that will enjoy these maps buy them and increase Stardocks economical muscle to further expand upon this game, or at least help their artists to have something to do between the battles.

You others just wait for other dlc's or the expansion pack. 

NB! And if one of the maps is a huge version of the whole world of Elemental, oh my God, I'd pay 20 dollars for that one alone, especially if all races started on the right spot and our self designed Umber and Capitar sovereigns could join in. It would be my favorite way to play a grand campaign. You know; here in Norway 5 dollars isn't more then what you pay for seven cigarettes, and if you want a beer at a bar it's easely 10 dollars. I'm sure I'll get a hell more value out of this dlc then what half a beer gives me.  

NB2! I'd hope this thread could be more about the grand news of the first expansion pack. I'm really excited to know, or hear speculations on, how the new champion recruiting system will work.

I meant a tactical map designer.

You can create tatical battle maps in there as well. Although it's a little more tricky. I would prefer a better interface for producing such tatical battle maps.

I'm in the same position. Another big patch is only common sense really, you should definitely get a 1.1 out before Christmas with as many fixes as possible so you don't get bad word of mouth from all the Christmas purchases. I'll probably purchase the map pack if I continue to see quality support for this title. At first I was annoyed at hearing about paid DLC but tbh I'd rather have to pay for map packs and get non-expansion quality content for free than have to pay for more weapons/equipment from what would essentially be first party mods. The only thing that would hold me back from purchasing a map pack is the blandness of the terrain atm, even the random maps all feel exactly the same for me. Its far better than WoM's 3 shades of brown though, thats for sure!

I would buy some map packs if only to support the development of the game. Currently i havent bought fallen enchantress yet. The main reason is that i never heard about the title until 3 days ago. I happen to stumble upon it when seeing it appear in my recommanded games on steam. Ive played loads of civilization (all of them since civ 2) and heroes of might and magic. This game seems it has potential to be the perfect blend of the 2. + customalization which is very nice. I truly like the combat system + the massive amount of customization. The game has loads of potential but my experiences with civ 4/5 tell me that it could take up to 2 years for a game to be fully playable. Some reviews say this game is full of bugs while others say it is highly recommanded. But i`l think i will probably still have a blast with it.

Currently i am playing Civilization 5 with the new patch. Which is a blast. I dont have much free time as i spend most of my time playing civ and drawing/painting fantasy art. I will lurk a bit in these forums to see what the state of the game is and how it is improving with new patches and mods. Probably ill pick it up when i have some more free time or when i am impressed on what i see of the game.

I did buy all the dlc from civ 5 even if i never played a map pack. Since ive played the game for 400 hours even when the game was still unplayable before gods and kings. I had faith in it and am not dissapointed. I would probably buy all the content from FE as well as money is not much an issue. Im more worried if i have the free time to enjoy playing the game to the max.

ll be hanging around and hopefully playing the game in a couple of months.

Lantros,

"Some reviews say this game is full of bugs"

It might have been an article about the game and not an actual review. I am not sure about this. I have seen this comment a couple of times as a responce to a revies. I have not played the game yet but only watched a small portion of a let`s play of Maddjinn. Ive read some reviews and articles. Been reading some in the forums. So i have no clue if the game has bugs or balance issues in this state. My experience from some games the last few years is that at release some issues might come up which might be somewhat annoying. I`m expecting i can live with this when i pick up the game (again i have no idea what the state of the game is after release and 1 patch) as probably i am to excited about the game and want to explore everyting afap.

Ive thought a lot about this game before i even know it came out. If i would make a game myself it would be a blend between civilization 4/5 and total war in a fantasy setting. This game comes very close except the thousands of thousands of units TW has to offer. But if i can costumise and really get attached to my units when they die etc. this is very cool.

Again, this game has so much potential from what i saw of it already and how it is build. And i guess i already made up my mind that i will buy and play it as soon as time comes available. It just that im not sure when the game is at a state that is is good enough to dig into it.

I`ve seen a lot of possitive reactions to the game.

I think u are right this game will not dissapoint me.

Yes but it sucks pretty bad. And very buggy

I personally thing Civ 5 is a terrible example of a 4x game, but Civ 4 with all of the expansions was a great game. Also this game is nothing like the total war games. They're more RTS/Tactical War Game, where as this is a turn based strategy game with a minor emphasis on tactical battles that are also turn based. The difference between 4x and tactical war games in my opinion is the city building ability, while you can make minor improvements in TW city building is a really minor part of the game because there is an emphasis on warring and political intrigue. The game is more of a mix of Civ 4, GalCiv 2, and some rpg flare thrown in. 

Emperor_Nero,

Visually Civ 5 looked way better than 4. Not perse that it has better graphics but the stacking of units in civ 4 was the biggest issue i had with that game. Seeing a huge blob of units on the scteen is more satesfying that a stack of doom. Still civ 4 is probably the best game ever made.

Seeing a huge army with thousands of soldiers marching towards eachother in real time is absolutely awsome. If the micromanagement is done in turnbased and the actual battle in realtime it would be perfect for me.

I understand that making that kind of game would cost many millions of dollars. But if someday the companys would take over each others franchises and blend it into one game it would be perfect for me.

None of it is realistic.  A stack of doom , attacking one unit at a time isn't either.