Civ V - One World Speculation Thread!

[AbsintheRed]

As an Australia, I do not like the idea of Australia being included. We still have the Queen as our head of state and the Union Jack in the canton of our flag, I mean, we aren't all that distinct from Great Britain even now. The United States is very different in that they have had a very long time since their independence (and they are truly independent) to forge their own history and identity, and we are still in the process of building ours.

As for Civs, consider who we had for the last expansion pack, which was based around religion and the various time periods were religion played a huge role:

Austria - Leader from 18th century
Byzantium - Leader from 6th century
Carthage - Leader from... not entirely sure, if I recall she was supposed to be the founder of Carthage, which would make it around the 8th century BCE
The Celts - Leader from 1st century
Ethiopia - Leader from 20th century
The Huns - Leader from 5th century
The Mayans - Leader from the 7th century
Netherlands - Leader from 16th century (if I recall correctly)
Spain - Leader from 15th century
Sweden - Leader from 17th century

So there is a flavour towards some religious leaders and civilizations, but ultimately there is a lot of wiggle room in that seemingly. I think we'll see some Civilizations that are based around the "One World" concept, which I'd guess is to do with the modern age, colonisation and globalisation (please, please fix diplomatic Victories!), but ultimately there will always be a few surprises.

In terms of the concept though, the Zulu will almost certainly be in. Along side colonisation is the what went on with local groups, and the Zulu are the perfect one for them. You can pretty much pen that one in already.

I also doubt that they'd go for too many "modern nations" as it just doesn't really fit. Brazil is a maybe, but ultimately in Civilization games they generally don't put modern nations in unless they are of the likes of the United States. In terms of colonisation though I'd expect Indonesia to also be in. Personally I'd think they'd put in Sumeria as well, and would like to see the Moors and a return of the Khmer, but they all move away from that concept of "One World" seemingly. Phoenicians might be a shout due to their colonisation of various areas, but I doubt that one.

Based on Gods & Kings I think we can expect about 9 new civilizations and one other included, one which is currently DLC that would fit with Colonisation or the modern age. Maybe Polynesia?

We'll also probably see a second native North American group in the game, although I'm not a fan of over representing the region simply because of the origin of the game, but hey... that's what's likely to happen. To me at least, the Olmec and Zapotec would make more interesting and more relevant inclusions if you were to go down the path of more Native civilizations from the Americas, but the groups of what is now the US and Canada generally get more representation and it will likely be the Sioux based on previous inclusions. Nothing wrong with that of course.

So long story short, I'd expect to see:

The Zulu
The Sioux
Portugal

I think it's likely we'll see:

Indonesia or equivalent

...and there's a good chance there will be:

Sumeria
Phoenicia

I'd also love to see:

The Khmer
The Moors
Mali - yes I know that some will say that we already have the Songhai, but they are different

Whilst others have suggested:

Poland
Kongo
Brazil

There will most likely be 10 civs with one already as a DLC, I'd guess Polynesia, but it's just as likely that it'd be the Inca, although I get the feeling that they gave people Spain so the more concern with completeness would still need to buy that DLC, but maybe I'm just cynical.

As for announcement and release date, as I've been saying for a while now, it'll most likely be announced on a Thursday based on previous announcements, at a guess the 14th or 21st of February, with the 21st more likely as I doubt that they'd announce it on Valentine's day, although you never know. If it is indeed a mid to late February announcement I'd expect it to be released in June, if it's announced in March instead, it would be for a July release.

I absolutely agree with your thoughts
Btw, the civs you choose are all doing great in the civ poll: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=460009
You only missed the Hittites, Hungary and Tibet from the most popular ones

EDIT: new link to the poll itself

 

[bkn42]

Also, return the clock to the top! (yes, there is mods, but I'm still chopping away at the forest trophy)

 

[mitsho]

If we are on the topic of small textual changes that don't really change anything, I'd like special calendars for every civ, not just the Maya. I want to see Ab urbe condita for the Romans and Year of the Hijra for the Arabs.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I've been thinking on how Corporations might work if they are in One World. We don't even know what's in the X-pack, but I just feel like speculating.

I think that you would probably need a Great Merchant to found a corporation, and a civ could found more than one. I think that they will allow you to build new corporation-specific buildings. I don't think there will be a maintenance cost for corporations themselves, but the buildings would. You wouldn't need a guy with a briefcase to spread the corporations within your borders, and you would have to make a diplomatic deal with another civ to allow them to build the corporation buildings in their cities.

examples of possible corporations:

Electronics Corp (think Apple). produces science and gold in headquarters. allows you to build Electronics Stores yielding local happiness.

Automobile Corp (think GM). makes factory in HQ more productive. can build Dealerships which consume Oil and generate hammers and culture.

Oil Corp (think BP). oil wells around the HQ make more production and gold and 1 extra oil resource per tile. can build Gas Stations which generate gold (no maintenance).

Food Corp (think McDonalds). wheat and cattle tiles around HQ produce more food. can build Restaurants which make food and culture.

Military-Industrial Corp (think Raytheon). produces gold at HQ. can build Experimental Weapons Labs which generate science and reduce unit production costs (one might hope, lol).

and so on and so forth.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I think it woudl be nifty if they made the equilivent of religions in Corporations, for example, nations could found Monopolies, which would focus on a single resource, and would be the equilivent of Pantheon. Then, a great person would be able to found a Corporation that enhances the bonuses given by a resource type.

 

[Menzies]

I absolutely agree with your thoughts
Btw, the civs you choose are all doing great in the civ poll: http://forums.civfanatics.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=23910
You only missed the Hittites, Hungary and Tibet from the most popular ones

I'd like to see the Hittites too, but I don't see them as being particularly likely.

Hungary is another that would be good to see, but I'd expect that with Austria and the Huns in they will probably not be included in Civ V, would be a good option though.

As for Tibet, would love to see them in, they really should be, but I'm almost certain there is absolutely no chance due to certain political issues, which is sad, but... what can you do.

Looking at that poll is a tad surprising to be honest. There's a lot of support for the Hittites than I would have though, in fact more than Phoenicia, which sticks out to me as a tad odd. Mali has strikingly low support, as do the Khmer, whilst Brazil gets a huge amount of support.

We'll see what happens.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I'd like to see the Hittites too, but I don't see them as being particularly likely.

Hungary is another that would be good to see, but I'd expect that with Austria and the Huns in they will probably not be included in Civ V, would be a good option though.

As for Tibet, would love to see them in, they really should be, but I'm almost certain there is absolutely no chance due to certain political issues, which is sad, but... what can you do.

Looking at that poll is a tad surprising to be honest. There's a lot of support for the Hittites than I would have though, in fact more than Phoenicia, which sticks out to me as a tad odd. Mali has strikingly low support, as do the Khmer, whilst Brazil gets a huge amount of support.

We'll see what happens.

They could, still, in theory, release Tibet as DLC.. wonder if that would work?

 

[AbsintheRed]

I'd like to see the Hittites too, but I don't see them as being particularly likely.

Hungary is another that would be good to see, but I'd expect that with Austria and the Huns in they will probably not be included in Civ V, would be a good option though.

As for Tibet, would love to see them in, they really should be, but I'm almost certain there is absolutely no chance due to certain political issues, which is sad, but... what can you do.

Looking at that poll is a tad surprising to be honest. There's a lot of support for the Hittites than I would have though, in fact more than Phoenicia, which sticks out to me as a tad odd. Mali has strikingly low support, as do the Khmer, whilst Brazil gets a huge amount of support.

We'll see what happens.

Unfortunately you are probably right both about Hungary and Tibet
Both would deserve their place in Civ V without any doubt, but at this point not that much chance for them...

Votes for Phoenicia are probably low (relatively low) because of Carthage, for Mali because of Songhai, for Khmer because of Siam
I would love to see all 3 of them, but we will see
Hittites are also a legacy civ btw, they were in Civ III

PS: Sry, I gave you a link only to the results of the poll
This is the thread itself, where you can vote if you want to: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=460009

 

[Menzies]

They could, still, in theory, release Tibet as DLC.. wonder if that would work?

I don't see how it being DLC would change the issue here. Yes, it could be a regional thing, but I think the very act of including it at all, even if it's only regional, could be an issue. Would be great if they could though.

Unfortunately you are probably right both about Hungary and Tibet
Both would deserve their place in Civ V without any doubt, but at this point not that much chance for them...

Votes for Phoenicia are probably low (relatively low) because of Carthage, for Mali because of Songhai, for Khmer because of Siam
I would love to see all 3 of them, but we will see
Hittites are also a legacy civ btw, they were in Civ III

PS: Sry, I gave you a link only to the results of the poll
This is the thread itself, where you can vote if you want to: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=460009

Should be less than a month now to an announcement, so hopefully we'll start hearing about what's in the expansion before too long.

 

[nokmirt]

Erm... who is "We all"? Please, don't generalize!

I always thought the "CiV is dead!"-tattle was ridiculous and that there would be at least one Add-on. Maybe not two, but one for sure. And there were plenty of others thinking the same...

Most of us that were saying that. I am glad you saw through it with GnK. I did this time. Of course I would have liked a DLC after GnK sometime, who's complaining though? Not me.

In speculation I wonder if they will expand espionage a bit. I'd like to see a cruiser added that would be nice.

 

[compwiz1202]

Also, return the clock to the top! (yes, there is mods, but I'm still chopping away at the forest trophy)

MSI Afterburner. You can also have graphic card specs show or can just have a clock show or both.

Also I wish they would make a way to differentiate between info only mods and mods that change rules, and make info only not disable achievements.

 

[dagriggstar]

I think I read somewhere, they intended religion to "fade" out of the game, as espionage becomes more important (although in my experience, espionage is only really useful in the Industrial era only).

Some sort of global trade mechanic shouldn't be strictly speaking a "late game" mechanic, given the importance of trade throughout all of history. My personal vision, involving caravan units (that you cannot control, moving along trade units by themselves, and may be destroyed by others) could obviously operate in the early game.

That would seemingly leave ideas for late game mechanics to corporations (Kind of a nothing idea in my opinion) or an increased role for the UN (Which has potential, but would be difficult to implement). If anyone remembers in Rhyes and fall, there was some conference like mechanic in the late game (Which would come into effect before an enhanced UN / League of nations mechanic), where you could basically acquire cities if the majority voted in your favour.

Or alternatively, they could buff the espionage mechanic, you know some more options there would be nice...

 

[Nyanko]

Its time for a new expansion.
Hopefully this time around they will add Civ's that have been overlooked in all past Civ games that really shouldn't have been.
Like Assyria
or Vietnam
or Tibet

 

[Pouakai]

They won't add Tibet (With the possible exception being as a DLC right at the end) for Political reasons - I doubt they'd want to lose out on China because of a single civ.

 

[adampjr]

I am mostly looking forward to playing some new and interesting scenarios.

 

[Nyanko]

They won't add Tibet (With the possible exception being as a DLC right at the end) for Political reasons - I doubt they'd want to lose out on China because of a single civ.

If they focus on the pre lamaist Tibet of the Tang dynasty era, shunning all mention of the current state; I think it would be okay. The Tibetans did take Chang-an at one point, and along with the Turkish states were a powerful force in East and Central asia's history.
By the way; is CiV even avalible for play in China? I don't think it is, to be honest. Why worry about antagonizing a country when the game isn't even available there? Tibet would be a good choice for a civ.

 

[ehecatzin]

From the name of the expansion I agree with many people here, the focus should be ravamped trade, deeper diplomacy and colonization/revolutions.

I think Portugal will be there, and hopefully, Poland. but thats about how much more euros should be in the game, there's still plenty of world to go around. Sioux , Apaches, Zulu, Kongo, The Moors, Majapahit, Tibet.

If part of the focus of the game turns out to be colonization and revolutions, it could open the door, for the inclusion of a new type of civ in the map (besides playable and city states) a nation state. They could form after revolutions (or be granted independence before that and create allies) and be somewhat of a midle ground betwen a civ and CS, if diplomacy and trade get a boost, messing with your rivals colonies while keeping your own sphere of influence intact would be tons of fun.

Of course its just speculation, but it would be a great way to introduce tons of post colonial nations into the game without having to make them playable and live side by side with ancient Egypt.

In the end Im really hoping for much more content and things to do in a peace time, with lots of ways to mess with neighboors between wars.

 

[Kennan]

I hope for more social policies:

-Pity should be split into two: One religious and one cultural. They could both be available from the start. This would add a lot more options for early game strategies and more specialization.

-Commerce could also be split into two. One focusing on exploration and colonization. The other could focus more on economy and also corporations (if they will be included).


I also hope for more options when setting up games:

-One thing that was great about Civ4 was the "toroidal wrap"-option. Both west-east and north-south ends of the map are connected. A bit confusing at first but for large maps it adds a lot to the gameplay. You have no "safe" direction since everybody usually will be surrounded. Exploring and expanding is also less limited and will be more balanced since it depends less on your starting location.

-More difficulty options would also be great. I would like to play against opponents with more constant bonuses and less starting bonuses. Now I usually play Immortal and are hopelessly behind in the beginning. If I survive to the mid game, I will totally out-preform them in the late game. Diety with no starting benefits for the AI would make a much more even difficulty throughout the game. Starting bonuses for the AI could be an option separated from difficulty.

-Always war/always peace and some other options would also be great to try out.

-The option to have a terra map with almost no alu/oil/cole/uranium on the starting continent would be fun. You are forced to colonize, expand and fight over seas in the late game.


Some really strong late game wonders would also be great. This would make the last 50 turns more of nail-biter and less "next-turn"-clicking.

 

[Menzies]

Its time for a new expansion.
Hopefully this time around they will add Civ's that have been overlooked in all past Civ games that really shouldn't have been.
Like Assyria
or Vietnam
or Tibet

Assyria maybe, but not before the likes of Sumeria or Phoenicia.

Tibet will sadly never be in the game due to political issues.

I don't understand the desire for Vietnam, I really don't. The Khmer Empire, yes, but I don't understand Vietnam. What makes you want them in the game?

 

[Villager720]

I don't understand the desire for Vietnam, I really don't. The Khmer Empire, yes, but I don't understand Vietnam. What makes you want them in the game?

Distinct culture, dynastic history that contended with both China and the Khmer, gives SE Asia a bit more representation, and its relationship to Imperial France* could all be grounds for its inclusion.

(If its a colonial/revolution expansion)