[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[bite]

Am I missing something here? Where did we have at least a vague knowledge of where the next five civilizations are going to be?

Just asking because I really really want Italy to be a civ.

Just following the pattern of the Unattached features that mapped very well to the already announced three civs (map in spoiler)

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Spoiler :

So something I have been pondering over the last little while. I was asked during the past Map update to map out the unattached features. Well nothing popped out to me before but now there may be a pattern.

The Maya - all of these now chart to The Maya civ
Gran Colombia - all of these now chart to Gran Colombia civ
Ethiopia - all of these probably will chart to the Ethiopia civ
??? 1 - This cluster all feel like they should have gone to surrounding civs but maybe Byzantium?
??? 2 - The least grouped cluster, not sure if this shows anything
??? 3 - Another lose group, could be Burma, could be Vietnam
??? 4 - The most densely grouped collective, making me think that while Vietnam is my first SEA option, it might just be the Philippines
??? 5 - Not sure here, maybe Melanesian civ, but that feel like a reach
??? 6 - Most of these just feel like they are there for completion sake, but maybe the Swahili
??? 7 - Some of these feel like they should be in the Zulu list, but it could be something more

Your map isn't loading for me on Firefox at the moment, but if your group 3 is the same as on your previous map, I have concerns about the Red River. Wouldn't Firaxis use the Chinese or Vietnamese name for it (Dong River, I think) if it were that river in particular? There are at least two other significant Red Rivers in the world, one in the US and one in Canada, which I think could be what that name actually applies to.

And if that's the case, Vietnam doesn't actually have any features in that region. They're all in upper Mayanmar or Malaysia.

 

[bite]

Your map isn't loading for me on Firefox at the moment, but if your group 3 is the same as on your previous map, I have concerns about the Red River. Wouldn't Firaxis use the Chinese or Vietnamese name for it (Dong River, I think) if it were that river in particular? There are at least two other significant Red Rivers in the world, one in the US and one in Canada, which I think could be what that name actually applies to.

And if that's the case, Vietnam doesn't actually have any features in that region. They're all in upper Mayanmar or Malaysia.

This might work better

 

[luigilime]

This might work better

honestly i find it quite hard to see a relationship between possible new civs and the filler natural features in this map, the maya location, the gran colombian and ethiopian one i believe are purely a coincidence.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

This might work better

I loaded it in Chrome. I see you excised the mountains on the peninsula from group 3. But my point still stands regarding the Red River. I think you have the wrong Red River. That one should be the Dong. The Red River in the US is in prime Comanche territory and the one in Canada (and the Dakotas in the US) is more Sioux.

I don't think your unassigned features in group 3 point to Vietnam, but rather Burma.

 

[Killer Rabbit]

I've got to be honest, at first I thought it was a little silly, given that Rome is in the game, but I've really come around to the idea of a modern Italy Civ. (Maybe it's because I spent a bunch of time in modern-day Italy!)

A Renaissance themed civ perhaps with some sort of city-state like ability, maybe like Austria's in Civ 5, could be really cool. I really hope it happens in this pack. And given the constant clamoring for it from the community (along with Vietnam), I think it's actually pretty likely. I think it's been shown that FXS listen to the fans in this regard.

And--I would absolutely be down for a New Frontiers II if they decide to go that route. Extended development cycles are the way to go these days. Hard to imagine starting a base game Civ VII now that VI is so fleshed out.

 

[bite]

I loaded it in Chrome. I see you excised the mountains on the peninsula from group 3. But my point still stands regarding the Red River. I think you have the wrong Red River. That one should be the Dong. The Red River in the US is in prime Comanche territory and the one in Canada (and the Dakotas in the US) is more Sioux.

I don't think your unassigned features in group 3 point to Vietnam, but rather Burma.

You could be right there

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Spoiler :

So something I have been pondering over the last little while. I was asked during the past Map update to map out the unattached features. Well nothing popped out to me before but now there may be a pattern.

The Maya - all of these now chart to The Maya civ
Gran Colombia - all of these now chart to Gran Colombia civ
Ethiopia - all of these probably will chart to the Ethiopia civ
??? 1 - This cluster all feel like they should have gone to surrounding civs but maybe Byzantium?
??? 2 - The least grouped cluster, not sure if this shows anything
??? 3 - Another lose group, could be Burma, could be Vietnam
??? 4 - The most densely grouped collective, making me think that while Vietnam is my first SEA option, it might just be the Philippines
??? 5 - Not sure here, maybe Melanesian civ, but that feel like a reach
??? 6 - Most of these just feel like they are there for completion sake, but maybe the Swahili
??? 7 - Some of these feel like they should be in the Zulu list, but it could be something more

intriguing, it does look like there’s a pattern.

 

[AntSou]

honestly i find it quite hard to see a relationship between possible new civs and the filler natural features in this map, the maya location, the gran colombian and ethiopian one i believe are purely a coincidence.

I don't understand how you can just dismiss it in such absolute terms. It might be a coincidence. But the relationship is pretty evident for the Maya and Ethiopia, so there's a good chance the same is true for the Philippines. We'll know in hindsight whether it was coincidence or not.

What bite's map can't show us are the potential Civs for regions which already have natural features: e.g. Italy, North America.

 

[bite]

This is not something I wanted discord over, just an interesting pattern I noticed that may or may not have some baring on the future

 

[AsH2]

Just following the pattern of the Unattached features that mapped very well to the already announced three civs (map in spoiler)

But some of those features may stick to new TSL map rather than new civ, right?

 

[luigilime]

I don't understand how you can just dismiss it in such absolute terms. It might be a coincidence. But the relationship is pretty evident for the Maya and Ethiopia, so there's a good chance the same is true for the Philippines. We'll know in hindsight whether it was coincidence or not.

What bite's map can't show us are the potential Civs for regions which already have natural features: e.g. Italy, North America.

because these features were meant to be filler, so of course they are in regions without civs, but that doesn't mean anything, the coincidence we see is a convergence of firaxis' policy of territorial representation used to choose the civs to put in the various expansions and the company's action to choose filler feature names that of course come from regions that are not connected to the civs that are present in the game.

the philippines are improbable in my opinion since it was divided into many different cultures and languages and were unified only by the spanish, i'm actually kind of skeptical about vietnam to be honest, but it's popularity is way to big to be put aside.

i think we're getting in that stage of speculation where we're so overthinking everything that we are seeing mirages in the middle of the desert.
that's why i discard this theory

 

[VermelhoRed]

I don't think those features have much significance, other than they were occupying places in the map that have had no previous civs. The Byzantines, Burma and Filipines are strong possibilities, and a Central Asian civ is also a candidate, but I really doubt they would add a civ on Melanesia, African Great Lakes or the Southwest Africa. Even if they wanted to add more African Civs, they'd likely choose from other regions.

 

[agonistes]

napoleon isn’t unworthy, but he is boring

So who, than, isn’t boring... and why not?

Its like you guys are throwing darts and saying, ‘well, this person is new, so let’s call yhem interesting.’

Anyone who led a nation is 1) human and 2) led a nation - so they are interesting. But so interesting that by comparison Napoleon is boring?

I think you guys stopped being intellectually honest about 40 pages back.

 

[bbbt]

Burma could be interesting but unlikely. Vietnam has 2x the gaming revenue of the Philippines, but Philippines has a much wider diaspora. Probably Vietnam from that pov.

I'd only want Renaissance Italy if it came with multiple leaders. I'd prefer that to Portugal, but I'd prefer Portugal over Ren Italy with one leader.

There's no Mediterranean or 'Cradle of Civilization' style TSL map in Civ yet, no? That seems like a possibility, maybe in the patch after Assyria.

 

[UWHabs]

I don't think those features have much significance, other than they were occupying places in the map that have had no previous civs. The Byzantines, Burma and Filipines are strong possibilities, and a Central Asian civ is also a candidate, but I really doubt they would add a civ on Melanesia, African Great Lakes or the Southwest Africa. Even if they wanted to add more African Civs, they'd likely choose from other regions.

There's also the chance that perhaps they had 10-15 civs on their "shortlist" for this pass, so while doing all the geography updates, they mapped them all out, but then in the end decide not to run with them.

As for potentially which African civs to pick, we've seen with a few options in this iteration that they haven't shied away from taking a smaller/lesser known civ from an area rather than perhaps a more famous one otherwise, so I certainly wouldn't count out some options like Burma or a SW African civ. They certainly like adding civs that have never been seen before in the series, so in that sense, nothing would surprise me.

They also have obviously shown a desire to include civs from modern nations, like the Canada/Brasil/Australia, so to me, it feels almost a guarantee that that means they'll include someone like a Vietnam or Philippines in this version.

Of course, just because they had a certain breakdown before doesn't mean that will happen again. I mean, they've never released a full expansion piece-meal before and they are here, so maybe all the rules are out the window.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

The main thing that's keeping me from making predictions is that we don't know how ambitious Firaxis is feeling.

If they feel ambitious and likely that they are going to make even more content after NFP, then NFP probably has fewer series regular civs so that some will be available to drive sales of the next Pass. But if they are playing conservatively, then all the remaining series regulars are likely to be in NFP with fewer brand new civs.

 

[bbbt]

The main thing that's keeping me from making predictions is that we don't know how ambitious Firaxis is feeling.

If they feel ambitious and likely that they are going to make even more content after NFP, then NFP probably has fewer series regular civs so that some will be available to drive sales of the next Pass. But if they are playing conservatively, then all the remaining series regulars are likely to be in NFP with fewer brand new civs.

I'd be very surprised if there's additional content after NFP, unless they aren't doing a 'spin off' (ala colonization/Beyond Earth) at all. Or of course if this sells widely beyond expectations.

 

[VermelhoRed]

Well, Southwest Africa is like, the Kalahari desert and the Khoi-San peoples... which would be like the Inuits except instead of snow/ice bonuses, they'd be another civ with desert bonuses. I could even imagine they adding some African Great Lakes civs, maybe, but Southwest Africa, no.

 

[Navelgazer]

Come July we’re going to effectively have three French leaders, so I’m not worried about getting Napoleon anytime soon, but I agree that he’s a too-obvious choice in a way that white-washes how problematic he is. Stalin is a good comparison. He himself is far from boring but his implementation has never been interesting, which is another issue.

Robespierre is synonymous with the Reign of Terror, so that’s probably out. Really, Richelieu or de Gaulle would probably be best, but again, it won’t come up.

If Florentine Italy is a civ (which is a big “if”) then I think it’s hard to imagine anyone but Lorenzo di’Medici as their leader. In fact, that’s the aspect that makes me most excited about them - I picture a very strong Financial Civ with a Patronage LUA around gold-buying Great People.