Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by UncivilizedGuy, Nov 25, 2018.
Depending on what the next expansion brings to the table, new expansion.
Personally, I've never seen 2nd civ expansion to be polished enough - they come to close to the game lifecycle end. 3rd expansion is just a joke.
At the risk of sounding crude, I think a third expansion would be milking a dead horse at that point. Expansions sell a lot less than the main game, and while a Civ VI expansion is still likely to sell well, at a certain point too much is too much. Especially when you start exceeding 40 civs and have to really dig deep to get new ideas incorporated to keep the civ designs fresh. It's not impossible to do, but it would mean several civ designs become superfluous.
The Maya, more economics, and ecotopia in the future era is the thing. This content needs expansion.
I‘d rather try to milk a dead horse than one that is still alive and kicking. But I agree nonetheless. If Firaxis wanted more expansions they would have designed R&F and GS narrower in scope.
In the current one unit per tile system it is way to easy to create bottle necks and shoot down invading units. It is not fun and it takes for ages (literally). I like Civ VI but the current combat system is so boring and tedious I never go on or have time for big invading campaigns like in earlier games. I have never won a combat victory in Civ VI. Have you?
I would make a new expansion that overhaul the combat system. The current system could be kept for skirmishes when you have lone units fighting. But I would ad a new army mechanic where could you stack up to perhaps 6-9 units. When a battle occurs you would zoom into a battlefield generated by the hex where it occurs and those around it (Much like in Age of wonders 3).The combat would be automatic like in Call to power. Perhaps would you be able to chose your tactic before combat and arrange your troops. You would arrange your troops in two or thee lines. Outflanking would be good but having your line broken would be very bad.There would be mechanics for scouting the enemies likely tactic. The combat would play out and the armies unit composition, setup, chosen tactic and terrain would be the mayor factors of the results. Perhaps could the armies be led by generals that could level up 3-4 steps but become obsolete much like the present generals when moving into new eras. Giving them abilities to boost certain unit types, tactics or preferred terrains. The battle would be animated and maybe take 30 to 90 secs depending on size. This army system could work from the ancient ages until the modern ages where artillery is more effective and bombardment would make them rather obsolete. Bombarding army stacks would hurt all unis a percentage of their hit points much like in earlier games. I would also ad stats for attack, defense and hit points for each unit type. Also enhance the system where some units types is better against others. Archers would be good against infantry but you would like to have a screen of melee in front of them or they would take mayor damage.
The armies should also have some sort of morale. One battle would normally not kill units completely. The beaten army would retreat a tile if possible and take a bigger morale loss. The morale would affect combat outcome. Perhaps should the normal early era army map movement speed be 1 tile (unless only cav) But you would be able to march the armies. That is moving 2 or 3 tiles at marching speed. But each march move would lower your army morale. Moving armies along roads in friendly territory would hurt much less. If you been marching to much or taking to much damage you would have to rest the troops a few turns to regaining hit points and morale. Each battle would also lower morale. The troops get tired. Big losses would give worse morale penalty. This would help against the stack of doom syndrome. No big doom army would be able to beat too many smaller ones in a short time without resting, or move so fast you wouldn't have time to build or arrange countermeasures.
This would allow the game to ad more units without slowing down the game. Perhaps would you be able to build them twice as fast. More units would give much more choices concerning army composition.
So a faster and more interesting combat system would be the result. But the main benefit of the enhanced army and battle system would be to be able to build a better ai.
This. I think Civ VI looks far nicer. As it should considering all the processing power it's taking.
Personally I enjoyed Beyond Civilization and the other one that more like a mobile game. I enjoyed the interactions between them, at least the concept of exporting data from one to the other . Also achievements in one of them gave you new things in the other one. The games themselves were average but interactivity, albeit yielding limited new scenarios, was something I want to see replicated and improved.
No kumis for you?
Maybe the expansion could add a biological research center... and then you'd be able to create godzilla as a counter to the GDR
I think though there might be room for an additional expansion that's maybe $20, just consisting of civs and tieing in the existing mechanics/polishing Civ 6 as much as possible. Something that could be easily ported over to the other platforms. Then again a new game built on the Civ 6 engine could be a good opportunity to capitalize on the existing processes. Glad to see what Firaxis come up with - I didn't buy Beyond Earth but I'd be willing to try something new too, I've actually been thinking of picking it up, though time is running out before the storm comes
A 3rd expansion is a tough one for Civ 6, especially with GS adding global and environmental challenges.....
For me, a gaming aspect that is missing is a more detailed colonization conquest system of some sort. Personally I would like to see a more detailed system developed based on the "Free Cities" system introduced in R&F. I feel like a "free city" could develop itself into its own nation and even introduce itself as an additional AI player. I might be thinking too outside of the box though...
I could definitely see an expansion around colonization. That would give FXS an opportunity to also expand governors, governments generally, loyalty and culture / tourism mechanics. Maybe even religion.
The other possibility would be an expansion on Ideologies and Global Conflicts. They’re a tonne that could be brought under that banner.
The real question is - what would the core gameplay focus of an expansion be? People always talk about specific mechanics. Thing is, while each expansion has had lots of mechanics, each exapansion has focused on really just one core gameplay issue (more or less).
So, RnF was basically about loyalty, putting a break on expansion and making tall more viable. GS seems to be about diplomacy generally, and making the map more important late game.
I think the core gameplay a third expansion would need to focus on is making managing your empire more engaging (eg more internal conflict) and or getting rid of so much empty map by the late game (eg having city stated expand, or making barbarians a more involved Mechanic). Tackling either or both of those issues would be a great jumping off point for new mechanics etc.
There really is a lot of room for a third expansion or at least some chunky dlc.
I, too, would like to see the barbarians become more prominent in the late game. Some ideas I have for them would include them developing into terrorist organizations and even becomming international targets of interest to completely pacify them. Or maybe some barbarian encampments that your previously destroyed could be running espionage terrorist missions to destroy and sabotage your empire? Or the opposite could happen and they could develop into city-state nations and benefit your civ in some way?
They could add a ton of thing sin a 3rd expansion
Health and disease
New units along with Bio and chem weapons (ties in with health)
Each pop having a specific culture/ethnicity like they have religion which would tie into loyalty and amenities
Colonization (the way they handled outposts in BE was interesting it could be improved upon)
Overhauled ideology system (perhaps each pop could have an ideology based on what you did like you have in endless space for instance)
Civ VI has so much potential there is no reason to drop it and start all over.
Separate names with a comma.