Civ VI Future Expansions Speculation

[Ikael]

Well, the title is quite straightfoward. We know the civilization line up, and most features of this new Civilization entry.

People bemoan the civ-line up, and wonder if the new additional mechanics will make up for the lost ones.

So the question is now, how would you expand it?

In order to help the thread a bit contained and realistic rather than fill it with ultra-long wishlists, I think that a good format for each expansion would be:

New civs to be added (up to 7 total) and a short description of how they would play.
New leaders for already existing civs (up to 9)
New mechanics introduced

And now, that being said, here's my proposal for the next Civ 6 expansions!

New civs for the 1st expansion:

Mongols: A warmonger civ with a unique nomadic mechanic
Persians: A scientific and religious civ with a penchant for wide empire building
Ottomans: Wondrous & militaristic
Incas: Adaptation to rought terrains and mountain ranges is go!
Khmer: The ultimate uber-tall civ
Mali: Commercial and expansionistic African civ
Indonesia: Seabound civ with a multi-cultural push

Leaders for the 1st expansion:

Isabella of Spain. A more exploration focused version of Spain
Catherine of Russia. A more culture focused version of Russia
George Washington of the USA. A more founding-fathery version of the USA
Nahualtcoyolt of the Aztec. A more cultural, tall version of the Aztecs.
Ashoka of the India. A more agressive and religious version of the Indians.
Empress Ma of the Chinese. A more commercial version of the Chinese.
Julius Caesar of the Romans. A more militaristic, empire building version of the Romans.
Napoleon of the French. A militaristic version of the French
Frederik the great of the Germans. A more scientific version of the Germans.
Abderraman of Al Andalus. A more culture focused version of the Arabs.

New mechanic(s) introduced in the first expansion:

Stronger diplomatic features / world congress, of course.

New civs introduced in the second expansion:

Netherlands: Polders, channels, terraforming and lots of commerce bonuses
Portugal: Explore the seas and wage naval warfare!
Hawaii: Explore the seas and wage massive far flung colonization waves!
Mayans: Religious and monumental powerhouse, not unlike Egypt
Pueblo: Adapt to harsh climates and defend yourself from unwanted invaders and conversions
Vietnam: Turtle up and build up your culture
Ashanti: Tech up and assimilate other vassals!

New leaders of the 2nd expansion:

Kublai Khan of the mongols. A more cultural, trade focused version of the mongols
Meiji of the Japanese. A more industrial version of the Japanese.
Hasheput of the Egyptians. A more awesome and religious version of the Egyptians.
Bismark of the Germans. An industrial version of the Germans
Louis XVI of the French. An even more cultural version of the French.
Roosevelt of the USA. A more industrial version of the Americans.
Akbar of the Indians. A mugal version of the indian civilization
Augustus of the Romans. An industrial version of the Romans
Suleiman of the Ottomans. A more cultural version of the Ottomans
Shāh Ismāil of the Persians. An islamic version of the Persians.

Mechanics introduced in the second expansion:

Colonialism mechanics, nationalism and the break-up of big empires in the latter eras.

So, how would you design your Civ 6 expansions?

 

[awesome]

Your new civs sound good, except the Puebloans aren't going to happen, so I'm going to replace them with Irouois, with Aliquippa as leader, and a cultural playstyle. Maybe wampum can be a unique resource.
I'm also not expecting Hawaii, so I'm going to replace them with Babylon, even though they'll probably end up being dlc by then. They'd play as an expansionist builder civilization. Special mention goes to the Hittites, but I don't know exactly how I'd want them to play.
I also don't really want multiple leaders for civilizations at all, but I definitely don't want two Catherines or two Roosevelts.
As for new mechanics, I'd definitely like to see tech trading make a return.

 

[MistyRonin]

Allow diplomatic tile swifting (peace treaties, buying territory tiles from other civs like when the US bought Alaska).

Civil wars like in Civ 2? When a good amount of a civs cities are not happy they split and created a new civ (it used civilizations that were not present in that game). That would represent "separatism".

When one single city is raging, it should become Barbarian controlled and generate barbarians.

 

[God of Kings]

Allow diplomatic tile swifting (peace treaties, buying territory tiles from other civs like when the US bought Alaska).

Civil wars like in Civ 2? When a good amount of a civs cities are not happy they split and created a new civ (it used civilizations that were not present in that game). That would represent "separatism".

When one single city is raging, it should become Barbarian controlled and generate barbarians.

If one city decided to separate peacefully, then it could end up becoming a city-state.

 

[MistyRonin]

If one city decided to separate peacefully, then it could end up becoming a city-state.

Good point.

Actually, that would make a lot of sense, specially having in mind that some civs are prone to invade city-states. It would be more organic, as the city-state amount would fluctuate, as in real history.

 

[Ikael]

Welp, I didn't realized that this tread existed before opening my own.

Moderator Action: That thread is now merged into this thread

Anyway, here are my ideas for possible future Civ 6 expansions!

New civs to be added (up to 7 total) and a short description of how they would play.
New leaders for already existing civs (up to 9)
New mechanics introduced

And now, that being said, here's my proposal for the next Civ 6 expansions!

New civs for the 1st expansion:

Mongols: A warmonger civ with a unique nomadic mechanic
Persians: A scientific and religious civ with a penchant for wide empire building
Ottomans: Wondrous & militaristic
Incas: Adaptation to rought terrains and mountain ranges is go!
Khmer: The ultimate uber-tall civ
Mali: Commercial and expansionistic African civ
Indonesia: Seabound civ with a multi-cultural push

Leaders for the 1st expansion:

Isabella of Spain. A more exploration focused version of Spain
Catherine of Russia. A more culture focused version of Russia
George Washington of the USA. A more founding-fathery version of the USA
Nahualtcoyolt of the Aztec. A more cultural, tall version of the Aztecs.
Ashoka of the India. A more agressive and religious version of the Indians.
Empress Ma of the Chinese. A more commercial version of the Chinese.
Julius Caesar of the Romans. A more militaristic, empire building version of the Romans.
Napoleon of the French. A militaristic version of the French
Frederik the great of the Germans. A more scientific version of the Germans.
Abderraman of Al Andalus. A more culture focused version of the Arabs.

New mechanic(s) introduced in the first expansion:

Stronger diplomatic features / world congress, of course.

New civs introduced in the second expansion:

Netherlands: Polders, channels, terraforming and lots of commerce bonuses
Portugal: Explore the seas and wage naval warfare!
Hawaii: Explore the seas and wage massive far flung colonization waves!
Mayans: Religious and monumental powerhouse, not unlike Egypt
Pueblo: Adapt to harsh climates and defend yourself from unwanted invaders and conversions
Vietnam: Turtle up and build up your culture
Ashanti: Tech up and assimilate other vassals!

New leaders of the 2nd expansion:

Kublai Khan of the mongols. A more cultural, trade focused version of the mongols
Meiji of the Japanese. A more industrial version of the Japanese.
Hasheput of the Egyptians. A more awesome and religious version of the Egyptians.
Bismark of the Germans. An industrial version of the Germans
Louis XVI of the French. An even more cultural version of the French.
Roosevelt of the USA. A more industrial version of the Americans.
Akbar of the Indians. A mugal version of the indian civilization
Augustus of the Romans. An industrial version of the Romans
Suleiman of the Ottomans. A more cultural version of the Ottomans
Shāh Ismāil of the Persians. An islamic version of the Persians.

Mechanics introduced in the second expansion:

Colonialism mechanics, nationalism and the break-up of big empires in the latter eras.

So, how would you design your Civ 6 expansions?

 

[MistyRonin]

Isabella of Spain. A more exploration focused version of Spain

Allow me a correction:

It's Isabella I of Castile or Isabella the Catholic. She never ruled anything but the Kingdom of Castile. Her husbie Ferdinand II of Aragon or Ferdinand the Catholic ruled the Crown of Aragon and its Mediterranean kingdoms.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile

The first king to rule "Spain" (as in the shared king of the different Spanish medieval countries and their domains), was the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, Isabella and Ferdinand's grandson.

Although the first king of the Kingdom of Spain was Philip V in the early 18th century.

- - -

I see Kublai Khan best fitted as leader of China, the Mongol civilization doesn't really bring much to the game, it would be Scythia 2.0. After all, he founded the Yuan dinasty in China.

I personally rather have different leaders to give flavour to the existant civs than having a bunch of improvised civs from who we know few.

 

[Kerfuffle]

I see Kublai Khan best fitted as leader of China, the Mongol civilization doesn't really bring much to the game, it would be Scythia 2.0. After all, he founded the Yuan dinasty in China.

Mrm, I think there are ways to avoid overlap with Scythia: If designing a Mongol Civ under Kublai Khan, you can easily make it about monopolizing trade or the spread of great people/acquisition of them through conquest, whilst still hearkening back to their steppe nomadic roots. Even if you were to repeat the use of the Keshik, you can give them a focus on stacking with/fighting near great people or the capital since they were primarily the imperial guard and not just soldiers - It also helps to mitigate that overlap between Scythia's horse archer. If not Kublai Khan, other leader candidates could also focus on the use of espionage actions/gossip, as well and bonuses towards sieges. Another interesting angle would be somehow representing how they exploited their reputation to further spread fear, and using that fear to their advantage.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Allow me a correction:

It's Isabella I of Castile or Isabella the Catholic. She never ruled anything but the Kingdom of Castile. Her husbie Ferdinand II of Aragon or Ferdinand the Catholic ruled the Crown of Aragon and its Mediterranean kingdoms.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile

The first king to rule "Spain" (as in the shared king of the different Spanish medieval countries and their domains), was the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, Isabella and Ferdinand's grandson.

Although the first king of the Kingdom of Spain was Philip V in the early 18th century.

- - -

I see Kublai Khan best fitted as leader of China, the Mongol civilization doesn't really bring much to the game, it would be Scythia 2.0. After all, he founded the Yuan dinasty in China.

I personally rather have different leaders to give flavour to the existant civs than having a bunch of improvised civs from who we know few.

To not be Scythia 2.0

1-Medieval instead of Ancient/classical warmonger
2-Kublai as leader, bonus to integrating and using conquered peoples*/managing a large empire

*I though an excellent unique ability would be allowing conquered cities to build/keep their original Unique Unit/District/Building

 

[God of Kings]

Roosevelt of the USA. A more industrial version of the Americans.

Roosevelt (Teddy to me more specific) is already in Civ VI. Do you mean FDR?

 

[Ikael]

Allow me a correction:

It's Isabella I of Castile or Isabella the Catholic. She never ruled anything but the Kingdom of Castile. Her husbie Ferdinand II of Aragon or Ferdinand the Catholic ruled the Crown of Aragon and its Mediterranean kingdoms.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_I_of_Castile

The first king to rule "Spain" (as in the shared king of the different Spanish medieval countries and their domains), was the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, Isabella and Ferdinand's grandson.

Although the first king of the Kingdom of Spain was Philip V in the early 18th century.

Sorry, but I disgragree. Isabella and Ferdinand were the founders of Spain, which was how theirselves named their dynastic union, albeit you can debate whetever said union was durable, since their lineage got extint (even if their crown and titles did persisted trought time).

I see Kublai Khan best fitted as leader of China, the Mongol civilization doesn't really bring much to the game, it would be Scythia 2.0. After all, he founded the Yuan dinasty in China.

I personally rather have different leaders to give flavour to the existant civs than having a bunch of improvised civs from who we know few.

I think that if there's a leader primed to be able to rule not one, but two different civilizations, that would be Kublai Khan (China and the Mongols). It would be cool, I guess.

But yeah, we have one Scythia in the game already. If they want to make an interesting, disttnct representation of the mongols they would need to introduce some kind of nomadic or scenario mechanics, I think.

Roosevelt (Teddy to me more specific) is already in Civ VI. Do you mean FDR?

My bad, yes, I meant FDR. One of the most fascinating US presidents, I believe.

 

[UnknownHuman]

I see Kublai Khan best fitted as leader of China, the Mongol civilization doesn't really bring much to the game, it would be Scythia 2.0. After all, he founded the Yuan dinasty in China.

I think there are some niches the Huns and the Mongols can still fill.
The Huns could easily be the one based around nomadic mechanics and have a barbarian enrolment mechanic.
The Mongols can have a integration of conquered civilization mechanic (as someone else pointed out keep unique buildings/unique units and/or gain science/culture and/or great people points per conquered city), rule over a large empire (Rome will probably fill that niche but probably through production when the Mongols can have bonuses toward trades and roads), alongside with an intelligence gathering mechanic and/or smoother siege mechanics.
Those two being different from Scythia which is basically rush cavalry and early pantheon.

 

[ifasola]

Cold War/No Man’s Land (my idea for an expansion for Civ 6)
I know sometimes I get so much more advance than other Civs where I just run right over them and they are so technology weak where sometimes the game becomes less fun. No one want a swordsman to beat a tank so the best way to help balance the game to me is to add back Partisan units. Whenever you conquer a city in the industrial era it will produce partisan depending on size, religious and culture differences, each turn the city is in disorder or being razed gives a chance that more partisan unit will spawn within the city radius even more. Partisan units would be available starting in the industrial era acting as weaker Rifleman with the ability to ignore ZoC they will help slow down a would be unstoppable force. They would upgraded in the modern era called a "Guerrilla" to me this would give a level of resistant to give the game a more real world experience of modern conquest.
I think that a great idea it will allow weaker civ a chance to defend themselves over an overpowered civ just like Vietnam had guerrilla against the French and later the U.S. and even what we see in the middle east now. Of course the guerrilla wouldn’t powerful enough to stop a powerful army but they will slow them down and make the war much more costly and give the weak civ time to get international help.
Also add to the spy options where a civ can fund terrorist organizations in which gold would go to terrorist or freedom fighting groups but if caught suffer warmonger points.
We can even add UN freedom fighting mission in which Civs can give gold or units in order to work with freedom fighting group to help save a weaker civ without going to war with another powerful civ.
I would like to see the Pact idea come back in which 3 or more Civ are allied together in which they can share limited amount of technology and maps in order to fight against aggressive Civs.
The pact will also boost trade benefits among all members.

Moderator Action: Merged with existing thread.

 

[SK78]

Hi, I am a big fan of the Civilization games, I have watched all released content on Civilization VI and I would want to suggest a the of one of the expansions that would come in future. Here it is, an economic's based expansion that will future economic victory, a new type of victory, you will have the option to found your own currency like you can found your religion, it will have it's own benefits that you will choose from, that will benefit you or the other civilizations that are going to use your currency. By dominating the trade routs and the stock flow of goods in the markets, in the other civilizations you will make them use your currency. Also you could add a banking system in this expansion that will add more to the gameplay, with this system you will be able to give or ask other civs for loans, that they or you have to return in some amount of turns with interest. You can make the money in the game more flexible and interesting to play with and add another victory time, that could be a really interesting one. Also you could make the economy of an underground economy that the civs will have. And when the later eras come with the computers, you could start to add some internet based currency that will challenge the player and the AI to fight over, for domination over it. For e.g. the domination of economic victory will be to make your currency dominant in all civs. And you could add some bonuses for the city states that will use your currency, some economic bonuses for you and for them. You could add a economic civic and so on. It is a great idea and if you are not putting it in this one (Civilization VI), consider it for the next installment in the series. Keep up the good work.