I believe that now Africa the only civ that is missing to be decently represented is Morocco.
with morocco it would feel complete to me.
swahili and benin could be other options but they can be very well represented also by city states.
As I've noted there are many possible ways to represent Babylon, and neither tall nor being science-focused is a particularly obvious one. Babylon in Civ IV, the first entry to strongly differentiate civs by traits, was focused on growth (gardens), administration (cheap courthouses which lowered corruption) and militarism. It didn't have bonuses of any kind to science. Hammurabi's favoured civic was Bureaucracy - that's much closer to the cultural/loyalty/policy focused suggestion I made. Civ V is the only entry in which Babylon has had anything to do with science.
I'd at least give them a library replacement, Tablet House, which could yield more science than a regular library but also hold great works of writing. It's not like Babylon didn't contribute any, but I agree more cultural/admininistration abilities certainly under Hammurabi would be needed.
Here’s an idea for colombia that I thought up a long time ago and posted on reddit. the early screenshots seem to suggest that the ranch is implemented in some capacity too.
I think it’s possible that Gran Colombia will be something like this.
I don't agree, simply because that's never been the case in the past. Every past appearance by Sumeria in Civ has been in a game that also contains Babylon (necessarily, since as one of the original 12 Babylon has been in every Civ game except Civ VI). Civ V had both Babylon and Assyria, the latter acting effectively as Sumeria's replacement. Stretching the definition of 'Mesopotamia' a little to encompass the Near East as a whole, Civ III had both Babylon and Sumeria alongside the Hittites. Nothing about Civ VI argues against having both in that game as well, since by this point it's a feature of the series to have at least three ancient Mesopotamian/Near Eastern civs in every entry, two of which are Babylon and Persia and the third of which has so far been either Sumeria or Assyria.
...
I think you're neglecting the relevance of the game's tradition - certain things have become expectations for the series as a whole. I'd also doubt that any of the suggestions you make save perhaps the Timurids are plausible based on what we know about the geographic breakdown of the announced civs and those of past expansions - I can't imagine we're getting two African civs, and Civ has never particularly distinguished between North and Sub-Saharan Africa. Europe seems most satisfactorily represented by Portugal, which is commonly requested and has more often been in past games, or Italy - which is hugely popular with modders and the community. We've seen with additions like Georgia and Gran Colombia that Firaxis is now making questionable (in terms of overall relevance as civs) additions not just as a sop to large markets (such as Brazil, Canada and Australia) but also desires expressed either through this forum or as popular mods (I believe they credited the addition of Kongo - while worthy in its own right - to popularity with modders). I'm not sure I've ever previously seen requests for Oman, so I doubt it's even on their radar although the Swahili are a relatively common request (and one I've made myself) - but, again, ruled out by being essentially African (not to mention that with Ethiopia, Nubia, Egypt and the Zulu, adding a new civ in Kenya or Tanzania would be heavily crowding eastern Africa on TSL maps while most of the rest of the continent is largely empty).
I think it's a bit myopic to presume that VI needs to adhere to some sort of "tradition," especially when it has clearly been bucking some civ traditions. We now have the HRE represented under Germany, and Carthage blobbed into the broader Phoenician culture. If the game actually cared about "tradition," we wouldn't have Canada or Scotland or Australia or Georgia or Hungary because those "weren't empires." You can continue trying to fit VI into a traditionalist box, but you will continually be disappointed. I prefer to try and infer why these changes were made and what the developers are trying to different this time around, because then I'm not constantly blindsided by switch-ups and complaining about why the game didn't fit my idealistic, conservative idea of the series as an unchanging monolith.
Also, I never said we were getting Morocco or Oman/Swahili in this season pass, although they could easily include either of them since they kind of count as Middle Eastern/Mediterranean North African Islam states as opposed to a Subsaharan state like Ethiopia (and, again we did get Mali and the Ottomans in the same expack). And Oman is definitely on their radar, given that both Zanzibar and Muscat are City-States, plus Kilwa is a new wonder for the franchise. I don't expect Oman either, but I am pointing out that it still satisfies a lot more of the game's self-apparent design goals than Babylon.
And, just to emphasize where we aren't agreeing, you are a fan loyalist who wants a lot of staples, and that's fine. I don't care about ticking off obligations so much as focusing on what makes for good game design, specifically how coherent and robust the current game is. So we prioritize very different things.
I think you're neglecting the relevance of the game's tradition - certain things have become expectations for the series as a whole. I'd also doubt that any of the suggestions you make save perhaps the Timurids are plausible based on what we know about the geographic breakdown of the announced civs and those of past expansions - I can't imagine we're getting two African civs, and Civ has never particularly distinguished between North and Sub-Saharan Africa. Europe seems most satisfactorily represented by Portugal, which is commonly requested and has more often been in past games, or Italy - which is hugely popular with modders and the community. We've seen with additions like Georgia and Gran Colombia that Firaxis is now making questionable (in terms of overall relevance as civs) additions not just as a sop to large markets (such as Brazil, Canada and Australia) but also desires expressed either through this forum or as popular mods (I believe they credited the addition of Kongo - while worthy in its own right - to popularity with modders). I'm not sure I've ever previously seen requests for Oman, so I doubt it's even on their radar although the Swahili are a relatively common request (and one I've made myself) - but, again, ruled out by being essentially African (not to mention that with Ethiopia, Nubia, Egypt and the Zulu, adding a new civ in Kenya or Tanzania would be heavily crowding eastern Africa on TSL maps while most of the rest of the continent is largely empty).
I think it's a bit myopic to presume that VI needs to adhere to some sort of "tradition," especially when it has clearly been bucking some civ traditions. We now have the HRE represented under Germany, and Carthage blobbed into the broader Phoenician culture. If the game actually cared about "tradition," we wouldn't have Canada or Scotland or Australia or Georgia or Hungary because those "weren't empires." You can continue trying to fit VI into a traditionalist box, but you will continually be disappointed. I prefer to try and infer why these changes were made and what the developers are trying to different this time around, because then I'm not constantly blindsided by switch-ups and complaining about why the game didn't fit my idealistic, conservative idea of the series as an unchanging monolith.
Also, I never said we were getting Morocco or Oman/Swahili in this season pass, although they could easily include either of them since they kind of count as Middle Eastern/Mediterranean North African Islam states as opposed to a Subsaharan state like Ethiopia (and, again we did get Mali and the Ottomans in the same expack). And Oman is definitely on their radar, given that both Zanzibar and Muscat are City-States, plus Kilwa is a new wonder for the franchise. I don't expect Oman either, but I am pointing out that it still satisfies a lot more of the game's self-apparent design goals than Babylon.
And, just to emphasize where we aren't agreeing, you are a fan loyalist who wants a lot of staples, and that's fine. I don't care about ticking off obligations so much as focusing on what makes for good game design, specifically how coherent and robust the current game is. So we prioritize very different things.[/QUOTE]
i will note, having carthage being blobbed into phonecia was a move i actually supported because dido’s rule wasn’t defined by carthage having any unique identity
I would like to have Morocco as a sort of culture-naval civ. They have a fairly diverse amount of source material and could fit almost any playstyle, at the end of the day.
I would like to have Morocco as a sort of culture-naval civ. They have a fairly diverse amount of source material and could fit almost any playstyle, at the end of the day.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
