Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, but that could easily have been part of the dev process getting ready for the expansion. Not to mention it keeps code-monkey part of the team busy while the art/sound/whatever part of the expansion is being worked on.

I'm not saying it is close to finish; I expect a late spring release, just that there is enough where we will probably be seeing an official announcement of it in the next month or two.
 
5. Comanche (One of the most famous North American native empires. In fact its empire was the largest in all of North America and fits better into an American Civil War scenario which we already know the files exist for than the Sioux)

I second this, especially after reading Empire of the Summer Moon. :goodjob:
 
what scenario for the next expansion pack???
well when i'm looking in the ".FPK" files in resorce folder i found some civil war scenario files and napoleonic war files..
probably the new Scenario would be:
American Civil War
Napoleonic Wars

and i hope not European Civs will be added (most civ's on the game are european ones)..
american civ are already there, african civs too, pacific civ's too, mainland Asia civs too and middle east civs too, what they lack?? is the South East Asian Civ's Vietnam, Indonesia or Philippines. Just one would be enough.
 
maybe they would add a option when you conquered a city of enemy civ, which instead of razing, making it a puppet state or Liberate it, you could make it an independent City or a City State. that would be nice. :thumbsup:
 
I personally would like to have the Javanese/Malay "Indonesian" civ be Majapahit. I'm not terribly familiar with the medieval civ, but it seems more appropriate than post-colonial Indonesia. I'm thinking that a gamelan ensemble could replace the opera house as a UB. Throw in a sweet kecak song whenever you DOW, Borobudur as a wonder, and {civet} coffee bonus tiles, and you would have a sweet civ.

But as someone mentioned before, this "One World" theme could tie in with the age of colonization... this would make the modern nation-state of Indonesia more likely (although a civ like Brazil would be much more appropriate).

If Brazil is included and Portugal is not, then I would have to complain.

Regarding scenarios, a Civil War one would be awesome. It would allow for the introduction of at least 2 Native American civs (ideally the Navajo and the Comanche). While we already have plenty of horse-culture civs, a civ that is suited to rugged desert would be interesting. This could also lead to an Inuit style civ, although I don't know how cities would be named in this case.
 
For all we know this "leak" was deliberate, something to start our anticipation. I personally, knew that there was 2nd expansion pack because I followed a personal theory of the pattern that Civ 3 and 4 followed (2 expansions being released back-to-back year-to-year).
 
But as someone mentioned before, this "One World" theme could tie in with the age of colonization... this would make the modern nation-state of Indonesia more likely (although a civ like Brazil would be much more appropriate).

If Brazil is included and Portugal is not, then I would have to complain.

Regarding scenarios, a Civil War one would be awesome. It would allow for the introduction of at least 2 Native American civs (ideally the Navajo and the Comanche). While we already have plenty of horse-culture civs, a civ that is suited to rugged desert would be interesting. This could also lead to an Inuit style civ, although I don't know how cities would be named in this case.

Quite honestly the Majapahit would fit into a colonisation themed expansion better than a modern Indonesia. The Portuguese and later Dutch were colonising the Majapahit and other Indonesian sultanates lands, modern Indonesia came due to de-colonisation.

Equally Brazil doesn't fit either. All Brazil's economic power today comes from the wealth of the land Portugal carved for it and the immigration Portugal brought to it. Brazil's success today is if anything a further legacy of Portugal's colonisation of it.

The Navajo and Comanche are both only known because they posed a problem to the expanding industrial power the USA had become. There are civilsations in North America, Mesoamerica and South America which are far more deserving of a place in their own right, rather than simply being known as an opponent of the USA. The Anasazi would be very interesting and would be an incredible desert civ (based in and around New Mexico).

Cahokia would be another incredible North American civ to include, having a culture spreading from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico centred around the state of Cahokia. Cahokia already is involved as a city state too which gives me some hope they can make it.
 
Am I the only one on here who doesn't care what the new Civs are. I'm far, far more interested in new game mechanics that affect all Civs than anything else (including new tech tree changes / new generic units etc).
 
Cahokia would be another incredible North American civ to include, having a culture spreading from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico centred around the state of Cahokia. Cahokia already is involved as a city state too which gives me some hope they can make it.

Name me a non-generic leader name and a city list that has more than one entry without going to English names of archaelogical sites. The Uniques would also be very standard named. My point is there is quite frankly not enough information on them. It's bad if you make stuff up. Now take the Comanche (or Anaszasi or Navajo or even Sioux), where it's quite easy to find all this information and create a civ that is fun to play.

Thus, Cahokia is imho perfect as a City State.

As for Majapahit vs. Indonesia, you can have the former but name it Indonesia without problems. The latter name is familiar while the usual player will go "he?" over Majapahit.

@kamex, Yes that should be the topic of the discussion, but it always returns to civs...
 
Am I the only one on here who doesn't care what the new Civs are. I'm far, far more interested in new game mechanics that affect all Civs than anything else (including new tech tree changes / new generic units etc).
No, I'm with you on that. There are some civs I would like to see, but in the end, it matters very little to me which will be in.
 
Am I the only one on here who doesn't care what the new Civs are. I'm far, far more interested in new game mechanics that affect all Civs than anything else (including new tech tree changes / new generic units etc).


Well, new Reckon unit(s) would be absolutely great. I really hope OW will add something new to the Exploration concept, like Great Explorer (new GP), renaissance era Scout unit or even Balloon type Air unit. Map trading would be a fun concept as well. There just should be two type kind of maps "world maps" and "territory maps". :)
 
Am I the only one on here who doesn't care what the new Civs are. I'm far, far more interested in new game mechanics that affect all Civs than anything else (including new tech tree changes / new generic units etc).

Well, the Civs are more interesting to me since I like the historical base of the game.

Speaking of a game mechanic that always bugged me, the notion of a predetermined tech tree always seemed bizarre. Being able to 'choose' an innovation (and beeline to strategically important ones) would only make sense if the technology had already been developed. In addition there are quite a few innovations that were discovered with serendipity. Penicillin immediately comes to mind. It would make sense to focus research for certain purposes (military, economic, etc) and achieve an invention in the specific field according to some Poisson process. On the contrary, there were some other innovations that already had theoretical underpinnings and just need to be carried out. How this could be replaced is beyond me, and probably belongs in another thread. I doubt it will be changed.

The lowest hanging fruit for the next expansion seems to be more intricate diplomacy.
 
Speaking of a game mechanic that always bugged me, the notion of a predetermined tech tree always seemed bizarre. ... How this could be replaced is beyond me, and probably belongs in another thread.

Not in another thread, but in another game, if you ask me. Civilization had, has and probably will ever have a predefined tech tree.

Not that I dislike alternative ideas in general. In contrary, there is a game in my mind since years (really!), that features such sort of alternative mechanic:
Let's say, your Kigdom breeds and uses many horses (Civ-equivalent: has many pastures and cavalry units). The more you have, the more likely will be some horse-related innovations. Your cavalry might gain +1 strength, +1 movement or, after some time, a completely new unit wil be "invented".
If your empire doesn't rely on horses, but on infantry, those inventions will come slower or be missed at all. Instead, you will invent infantry related upgrades.

I think, something like that might be very interesting and fun. But, as I said, it will never happen in Civilization! And I am absolutely okay with this...
 
Quite honestly the Majapahit would fit into a colonisation themed expansion better than a modern Indonesia. The Portuguese and later Dutch were colonising the Majapahit and other Indonesian sultanates lands, modern Indonesia came due to de-colonisation.

Equally Brazil doesn't fit either. All Brazil's economic power today comes from the wealth of the land Portugal carved for it and the immigration Portugal brought to it. Brazil's success today is if anything a further legacy of Portugal's colonisation of it.

I was under the impression that the Majapahit were long gone before the Portuguese and Dutch arrived. Islam swept over Java, relegated Hindu culture to Bali, and turned the islands into various sultanates. It would fit better into a hypothetical "Spread of Islam" instead of some sort of colonial scenario.

For me, Brazil has had a rich history on par with the US in terms of colonization, immigration, and frontier life. It is less similar to Portugal than the US is to England, so it simply isn't a substitute for Portugal. I don't deny what you wrote is true, but it is just as true that American success is also a legacy of British institutions. And like the US, Brazil has been a melting pot that has given the world much, especially in the arts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom