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 :O).


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 %)