Vahnstad
Emperor
Wasn't Joan of Arc also been rumoured?
These civilizations have been in Civ5, Civ4, and Civ 3 but have yet to make it to Civ6.
I definitely think Byzantium will make it because they want more female leaders and they definitely had their golden age while everyone else was in the dark ages.
- Babylon
- Byzantium
- Carthage
- Celts
- Inca
- Korea
- Maya
- Mongolia
- Netherlands
- Ottomans
- Portugal
- Zulu
We don't have a unique commercial hub yet, so that could point towards Mali? (or possibly Kilwa or Ottomans (the bazaar)
My suspicion is in Bazaar for the Ottomans
So does that put the Dutch as the frontrunner for a female leader that synergizes with the ages system?
"working with the ages system" is such a vague hint that it could be attributed to virtually anyone. Elizabeth could have bonuses to Golden Ages. Jeanne d'Arc could have bonuses to earning Heroic Ages. It's hard to say what that would actually mean.
IMO it strengthens the probability of Tamar of Georgia. That may be wishful thinking on my part.So does that put the Dutch as the frontrunner for a female leader that synergizes with the ages system?
Wasn't Joan of Arc also been rumoured?
For the Dutch, I could also imagine that the civ has something to do with Golden Ages and not the leader and that the famous leader that interacts in a unique way with the system comes from elsewhere. All speculation though.So does that put the Dutch as the frontrunner for a female leader that synergizes with the ages system?
On the other hand, they've shown a tendency to shy away from repeating Civ5 leaders, and a female leader of Byzantium means Theodora again. I think Byzantium's leader will be male this time, and if we're really lucky he'll be a Medieval emperor like Alexios I Komnenos rather than Justinian again...The Hittites might be a candidate for a female leader, though, in the form of Puduḫepa.There's the apparently compulsory "at least 1 from each of Europe, Africa, Asia, Americas and ancient era", with up to four possible female leaders given the focus on those and the current imbalance towards males (Korea, which we know, Netherlands, Byzantium and Madagascar).
Personally I expect the Maya over the Inca, even if the Aztec are nearby. Also, by the time the Dark Ages rolled around, Gaulish and Celtiberian were dead, Briton was being marginalized, and all three were so thoroughly Romanized as to maintain very little of their cultural distinctness (would have been interesting to see what kind of Briton-influenced Romance would have sprung up in England were it not for the Anglo-Saxon invasion). Unless of course you meant the Irish, which were sort of awkwardly tacked on to the Civ5 Celts, an abomination that hopefully won't be repeated.There's no particular reason to expect the Inca beyond the fact that they're a geographical gap and they'll certainly be added at some point. We may however get only one 'Americas' civ as Firaxis has tended to treat both continents as one for the purposes of civ selection. If one of those isn't there I'd expect the Celts, who are usually in the first expansion, certain to be added at some point, and fit thematically as a civ from the literal Dark Ages.
Given that virtually everyone seems to like Trajan as Rome's leader, I'd be surprised they'd waste a new leader on Rome. Also having Justinian and Theodora as alternate leaders would be bizarre; she was his queen-consort--whatever influence she had as a leader was through him. They were, essentially, the same leader.The leader could be more or less anyone but I'd expect a Roman given the expansion name, as I still expect a nod towards Gibbon's history given the expansion's title. Unless they're simply offering Justinian and Theodora as two alternatives for Byzantium.