Any word on new DLC?

[AbbieRevo]

Well, some folks did a bit of sleuthing in the game files when G&K came out, and there were a number of unused assets that appeared to be related to the American Civil War, so I'd say its a fair assumption that we could be seeing an ACW scenario fairly soon, though I highly doubt it would include a full fledged CSA civ, as it would be rather odd to include a "nation" that was never recognized as such by the international community.

It could however include an additional Indigenous American Nation, as several of those were involved tangentially in the conflict (The Comanche come to mind)

 

[Socratatus]

Well, you're still missing the Korea & Wonders of the Ancient World pack.

But yeah, the nickle and dime model of DLC sucks.

So I don`t already have Korea? great.

Yes it does suck. I should`ve waited another year. I don`t like having 6 or 7 bits of a game that`ll cost me more than the whole original game cost.

 

[OmniPotent42]

So I don`t already have Korea? great.

Yes it does suck. I should`ve waited another year. I don`t like having 6 or 7 bits of a game that`ll cost me more than the whole original game cost.

Or you could get a game like WoW where you have to pay $15 a month for it. Even though I've already paid $100 total for CiV, I'd rather have that than a monthly fee. Otherwise I'd be even more addicted.

 

[AbbieRevo]

The other possibility is the rumored "Screw It" DLC Pack, which includes such never-thought-would-be-included civs such as "Nazi Germany (With Hitler and mad swastikas)" "Israel (With Jersualem as Capitol), "Palestine (With Jerusalem as Capitol), "Tibet", "Confederate States of America", and "Taiwan (With Beijing as Capitol)"

 

[Gucumatz]

Meh I can understand how people would view both Tibet and Israel as controversial - but historically they are both interesting civs.

Tibet was a major empire that conquered a lot of modern day China in the 700s. And as its empire began to fall religion spread through the decaying empire. Various forms of writing and culture got spread throughout Asia by their empire.

Israel is another that would be interesting. Modern day wise - its kind of hard to ignore its power on the crossroads of the Middle East. Religiously it would be the only "Jewish" State in game to add both flavour/fill gaps in the world (Khazars could also fill the Jesish slot). And America/Europe is very familiar with its ancient period.

Ultimately I think its a case of risk v reward. How many people buy Civ 5 in the middle East - or would be offended at the creation of an Israeli Civ? Some sure - but I don't think the numbers are that significant. And the payout in Europe/N.America where this game sells the highest would be worth it. And its not like its anything toooooo controversial

Tibet is another case of Risk v Reward. Upsetting the Chinese is something 2K obviously doesn't want to do. There have been references of ancient Tibet rather than modern day Tibet without censorship (Mostly because the Chinese probably love touting they eventually beat the Tibetan Empire - just my guess).

And besides - things have gotten more flack before. Including Stalin for example. Or excluding Spain with the formerly large Spanish/Iberian market for Civ. Etc.

===

Historically god though I hope no Taiwan/Nazi Germany/Confederates would come out. Those could bring very real controversy, criticism, and just would look tacky.

------------------------

From the Civil War DLC - I am thinking we get 1-2 Native American Civs. Either the Apache/Comanche/Cherokee/Sioux. Those are my top 4 if its in regards to the Civil War (Which from looking at the files it seems to be what the next DLC might be).

 

[fat_tonle]

1. Exploration scenario: Zulu/Congo and Portugal
2. Industrial/North American scenario/Manifest Destiny scenario
3. Asian scenario: Tibet and/or Majapahit

Xp 2: Modern world. Year 3000+ with a space colonization scenario. Vanilla game goes to 2100ish. Change up Space Race victory to colony or Mars or something more realistic than Alpha Centauri. Maybe an interstellar probe or something.

 

[duhu]

Zulu is the only dlc I'd buy.

 

[crawf0rd]

I could see them doing a war-themed XP (How do you think they get the war buff / common-day 9-year-old-world-destroyer-type to come back? With Mongolia? With Attila?). Include Zulus, some other war-oriented civs, that Civil war scenario, and some new combat features, and call it an XP.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Naw, I think they ought to just expand on the city-state concept a bit:

Allow them to take & KEEP other cities instead of always razing non-caps. If they take (& keep) a city however, they become a full-fledged civ diplomacy-wise in addition to their city-state status.

The details such as CS teching, economics would take some balancing, of course. Leader graphics would have to be abstracted probably.

You're entirely missing the point. I'm not talking about improving on City-States, I'm just trying to guess what the next DLC could be. We're all assuming there will be some. They can either (1) use a civ that currently exists as a city-state or (2) they can try to find one that doesn't. If they do the latter (second option), it will be considerably harder to think of a good choice.

Anyway, I'm going to try to approach this from a different method: Language.

Most DLC uses modern languages because they are a hell of a lot easier to find. However, some popular suggestions are Sumer, Hatti, etc., which don't have modern equivalents.

 

[The_Quasar]

I think it would make sense if they made a Ancient Civilizations expansion that would include Israel, Assyria, and Sumeria. Would synergize with the introduction of faith, and they might make a bundle option for those who haven't bought Gods and Kings yet. Maybe -10%? Something like they always do. That's my prediction for what it's worth.

Nice idea, and you could add to those the Hittites and the Philistines... could be interesting.

 

[Louis XXIV]

They aren't going to release three full civs at once. I would be shocked if they even release two again (just think about all the people complaining about Spain being in G&K but not the Inca).

 

[de_baser]

Pity they wasted Poland's perfect unique unit on Austria. Hussars! Still livid, really, that Poland never had a civ throughout all of it. Massive historical and military force, strong national identity, always part of what was going on in Europe.

And: how does Sweden get and Denmark get civs when Norway doesn't?
Speaking of the Swedish UA, the Peace Prize is the diplomatic one of them, and that's a norwegian virtue - entirely decided by norwegians, too. Not to mention the stupid, useless "Norwegian Ski Infantry" - Danes are allergic to skis ffs.

 

[Kwami]

And: how does Sweden get and Denmark get civs when Norway doesn't?
Speaking of the Swedish UA, the Peace Prize is the diplomatic one of them, and that's a norwegian virtue - entirely decided by norwegians, too. Not to mention the stupid, useless "Norwegian Ski Infantry" - Danes are allergic to skis ffs.

Denmark is meant to represent both Denmark and Norway. Since the two nations were under one monarch for hundreds of years, there's historic motivation for this. Likewise, Sweden seems to represent both Sweden and Finland.

The Peace Prize may be awarded by the Norwegian committee, but Nobel himself was Swedish and the overall Nobel Prize is Swedish, so I have no problem with the UA.

 

[de_baser]

I get the idea with the unionized denmark/norway, but denmark and sweden were in a union for several hundred years as well! "One monarch" shouldn't be the criterion either, they both shared (meaning, the danish/swedish ruled over the norwegians) for ages.

The most legitimate claim to Vikingdom is obviously also from the Norwegian. Making him a dane is kinda cheesy and disrespectful. Kaupanger and Nidaros (Trondheim) are known as some of the oldest settlements, both Norwegian. Denmark's history is far more european than the scandinavians would like to admit.

Anyway, i like the idea of one modern (sweden) and one ancient (denmark) version of an entire region (scandinavia), but i feel miffed about the historical accuracy. There are several variants of this, by this point, of course, and would love to see a few more - a nicer expansion on the civ4 format of leaders, where you could have Charles De Gaulle or Henri XIV.

Who's with me for a modern Italy (instead of Rome, ha) or Mexico/Brazil/Argentina (with Zapata as leader, or how about Evita/Argentina? Ha!) or, uh, hell, Czechoslovakia, leader Vaclav Havel? He's dead, it works!


As an aside, has there ever been a Civ with a leader that was still alive at the game's release?

 

[OmniPotent42]

Now that I think about it, it would be more likely to have a double expansion with only Assyria and Sumeria, and not Israel, especially due to the turmoil in the middle east and the fact that Jerusalem is a city-state. Would cost 9.99 or -10% with Gods and Kings. Double expansions are still possible. Both are dead civilizations, so no controversy would be made.

 

[Dragonflow]

Anyway, I'm going to try to approach this from a different method: Language.

Most DLC uses modern languages because they are a hell of a lot easier to find. However, some popular suggestions are Sumer, Hatti, etc., which don't have modern equivalents.

They could always use the language spoken in the region today, like they did with Egypt.
But you are right to consider the fact that they need a language to do a civ and therefore certain civs are more likely to appear then others. The Portuguese, Zulus, Khmers, Tibetans and Moors could be done easily.

Although, I have to wonder how well ancient civs will sell as DLC. I doubt most people can tell the difference between Babylon, Assyria, Sumer or Hatti. Civs like the Zulu or Portugal will probably sell better and it's more likely that they will be released as DLC.

 

[Liex]

I think the Zulu are the best bet, followed by a North American native people.

Maybe we'll get an American Civil War "scenario pack" - with some small additions to the game, such as buildings, units or resources - and a "civilization and scenario pack": The Zulu. I guess it'd work as a combo pack, just like Korea + Wonders of the Ancient World.

 

[Gucumatz]

I am just glad if the Zulu arrive its probably by DLC. That way not everyone has to buy them and it probably means that while "tradition" that the Civ designers realize they are a controversial pick in general and there is actually an anti-zulu base.

 

[Uberfrog]

I am just glad if the Zulu arrive its probably by DLC. That way not everyone has to buy them and it probably means that while "tradition" that the Civ designers realize they are a controversial pick in general and there is actually an anti-zulu base.

When you're selling something, you don't care about antis; only pros, and the Zulu regularly come near the top of "what civ would you like to see?" polls. Besides, as vocal as some opponents to the Zulu are, I don't think any of them would actually boycott an expansion solely based on their presence. So I don't think they will recognise the anti-Zulu base.

 

[cakes]

When you're selling something, you don't care about antis; only pros

i think people do care about antis which is why ads get pulled from tv