[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[bbbt]

I think the phenomenon was large enough that the devs were aware of it and would consider putting a nod to it somewhere in VI, if they haven't already. At the very least, it does seem like we stand a good chance of getting Vietnam.

Additionally there's been a lot of forum talk about the Trung sisters as leaders that I'm sure the devs are aware of.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Additionally there's been a lot of forum talk about the Trung sisters as leaders that I'm sure the devs are aware of.

I’d be very curious and skeptical of how that would work. There’s not exactly a lot to go in either.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I’d be very curious and skeptical of how that would work. There’s not exactly a lot to go in either.

Some articles paint them both as crowned queens while others say it was only the eldest, Trung Trac. I think the latter would work just fine and tie in the sister to her ability.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Ottomans make sense for a civ that can only found one city and have to conquer their others. Perhaps Mehmed II leads and the only city is Edirne? Or you bring back Osman?

Hûdavendigar, which was the poetic name for the city of Bursa. (and also their capital at the start of EU4), or just Istanbul is fine. I'd say Mehmet II is the best choice (for an established). Captured cities are automatically renamed from the Ottoman City list (which is larger than that of any civ - around 60 names, including translations will do), and the first captured capital counts as their original one for the purpose of Domination victory. That would make a solid set of flavors, add in some adaptations of their civ 6 abilities (Ottomans is one of the better designed civs in the game imo) and we're set for a delightfully assymetrical Civ VII Civilization.

 

[Prima Italia]

Evidence? It stands to reason that Rome is pretty popular, but a statement like probably by far the most popular civ requires something to base it upon.

Steam Achievements. A higher percentage of Civ VI players have completed a game as Rome than any other civ. The numbers are all there.

It's also the second time in this thread that you're casually inserting subjective opinion as objective reality.

No, it is not. You are conflating your ignorence as me stating fact.

 

[krmarci]

It does not necessarily mean that Rome is the "most popular" civ. It only means that more players were able to win a game as Rome than as other civs. It could be partly influenced by its popularity, but the data is distorted by the difficulty of a victory as Rome.

 

[Browd]

Yes. Frequency of a one-time "win as Rome" achievement tells you more about how easy it is to win a game as Rome than it does about Rome's popularity (and tells you nothing about whether players repeatedly return to playing Rome, as opposed to trying out new civs). Also, Rome was an original vanilla civ, which means many more players have had the opportunity (and a longer time period in which) to win as Rome than, e.g., a DLC or expansion civ.

 

[AntSou]

Steam Achievements. A higher percentage of Civ VI players have completed a game as Rome than any other civ. The numbers are all there.

Uh yes, thanks to someone else pointing it out. "Probably by far" were your words, not "according to this data it seems that". Guessing correctly is still guessing.

Also, Rome was an original vanilla civ, which means many more players have had the opportunity (and a longer time period in which) to win as Rome than, e.g., a DLC or expansion civ.

Sure but we're comparing the likelihood of alt leaders for the main Civs going by their popularity.

As for difficulty, even if it accounts for a full 2-3% that would still leave Rome at around 8-9%.

Achievements aren't reliable but we're just fans speculating so it's good enough.

 

[Neirai]

Some articles paint them both as crowned queens while others say it was only the eldest, Trung Trac. I think the latter would work just fine and tie in the sister to her ability.

A popular design concept I've seen is having Trung Trac as the leader while Trung Nhi is a unique governor. If it were up to me, I would start with Nhi unlocked.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

A popular design concept I've seen is having Trung Trac as the leader while Trung Nhi is a unique governor. If it were up to me, I would start with Nhi unlocked.

If it were up to me it would be double leader graphic

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Uh yes, thanks to someone else pointing it out. "Probably by far" were your words, not "according to this data it seems that". Guessing correctly is still guessing.



Sure but we're comparing the likelihood of alt leaders for the main Civs going by their popularity.

As for difficulty, even if it accounts for a full 2-3% that would still leave Rome at around 8-9%.

Achievements aren't reliable but we're just fans speculating so it's good enough.

I've been speculating that there's a possibility of Rome getting a Byzantine alt leader, and it still could be the case. There isn't anything stopping them from releasing Justinian or Theodora that could lead both Rome and the Byzantines.

A popular design concept I've seen is having Trung Trac as the leader while Trung Nhi is a unique governor. If it were up to me, I would start with Nhi unlocked.

I don't think any of the new Civs will have any expansion mechanics but she could start as another unique Great General unlocked from the beginning.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I've been speculating that there's a possibility of Rome getting a Byzantine alt leader, and it still could be the case. There isn't anything stopping them from releasing Justinian or Theodora that could lead both Rome and the Byzantines.

They created a whole civ for just Alexander the Great and the gap between the Romans and Byzantines is probably much more significant than between Greece and Macedonia. The Byzantine Empire was maybe the most important medieval european state in terms of political and military influence.

Byzantine Empire was maybe the first state in the world to develop sophisticated military theory and probably had a much more sophisticated take on warfare compared to the Roman Empre to make up for its limited resources and the fact it often fought more powerful enemies while the Roman Empire at its height was only threatened by civil wars.

 

[CivLuvah]

Steam Achievements. A higher percentage of Civ VI players have completed a game as Rome than any other civ. The numbers are all there.

But the margin between the percentage of Rome (the "most played civ" in 11%) and the next two in the list (Germany and China, 10% and 9% respectively) is incredibly slim. How can you validly say that a higher percentage play as Rome if the margin is that small?

No, it is not. You are conflating your ignorence as me stating fact.

*ahem* ignorance

If you tell a Chinese person that Rome is the most important they'll probably say that China is the most important, and they'll most likely say they're stating it as fact as well.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

They created a whole civ for just Alexander the Great and the gap between the Romans and Byzantines is probably much more significant than between Greece and Macedonia. The Byzantine Empire was maybe the most important medieval european state in terms of political and military influence.

I mean it's always possible, but maybe not probable.
Either way I think the Byzantines will be their own Civ but there is always the possibility that a leader, like Justinian, could possibly lead Rome in addition, since he successfully reconquered Rome and the lands around it and codified the Roman laws. If the leader ability is good and fit's into Rome's playstyle I'm for it.
Though I agree it would be harder to implement for the later rulers.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

It is the later Byzantine Empire that is most interesting because it is less like ancient Rome and its achivements are more impressive due to more limited resources and much more capable enemies.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It is the later Byzantine Empire that is most interesting because it is less like ancient Rome and its achivements are more impressive due to more limited resources and much more capable enemies.

So far Firaxis only have shown the early years with Justinian and Theodora as rulers. I'm okay with that but I also wouldn't mind Basil II either with his Varangian Guard.
With the recent tweets talking about Justinian, I'm not so sure that will happen.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I mean it's always possible, but maybe not probable.
Either way I think the Byzantines will be their own Civ but there is always the possibility that a leader, like Justinian, could possibly lead Rome in addition, since he successfully reconquered Rome and the lands around it and codified the Roman laws. If the leader ability is good and fit's into Rome's playstyle I'm for it.
Though I agree it would be harder to implement for the later rulers.

It is the later Byzantine Empire that is most interesting because it is less like ancient Rome and its achivements are more impressive due to more limited resources and much more capable enemies.

Just had a minor realization. Eleanor leads an industrial-heavy England. England doesn't feel "Angevin" at all, but for whatever Eleanor brings to the table. Yet the devs were fine with a very culturally different period of England being blobbed into England proper.

I know people really care about getting the flavor of Byzantium right, but...I think there is a reasonable case to be made that the devs would be just as fine with a Byzantine leader for Rome as they were putting Eleanor in the game.

I've already said I wouldn't miss Byzantium as a separate civ and would prefer Bulgaria. Some small part of me would be really pleased to see no Byzantium in NF since it seems like it won't be the alt leader in expack 5.

The happiest medium for me, personally, would be to make a Byzantine leader for Rome, but beefier. Give the leader two uniques to really drive home some Byzantine flavor. Then maybe give Trajan a rework by giving him a new unique (which he kind of has already with the monument). I really don't see the point of wasting a roster slot on Byzantium when the Roman uniques see a very good foundation for them, and if any civ deserves to have leaders have a bit of feature creep I think Rome deserves it.

They created a whole civ for just Alexander the Great and the gap between the Romans and Byzantines is probably much more significant than between Greece and Macedonia. The Byzantine Empire was maybe the most important medieval european state in terms of political and military influence.

I always see Alexander and Cyrus as effectively being dual leaders for two very culturally/geographically related civs. I don't really think of him as very Greek so much as representing the western influence on the general "Persian" region. Which is why I would also think it would be rad to get the Timurids to complete the trifecta of cults of personality.

Byzantine Empire was maybe the first state in the world to develop sophisticated military theory and probably had a much more sophisticated take on warfare compared to the Roman Empre to make up for its limited resources and the fact it often fought more powerful enemies while the Roman Empire at its height was only threatened by civil wars.

Okay, military success and innovation is fine and dandy, but most empires were militaristic and we already have many domination civs in the game. I find this the most boring argument for including a civ, because it either completely forgets that the devs have to make the game fun, or elsewise indicates an extremely narrow idea of what fun can be.

 

[XX36789]

Rome is probably most-won-as because people are most likely to try it first. The game is called 'civilization' and ancient Rome is the most popular ancient civilization.

 

[God of Kings]

Another reason why Rome is the most won civ is because you can win as Rome on Turn 1 with only score victory enabled and game length set to one turn.

All you do is to settle your settler on the spot and you win. It counts for the achievement.

If you play on Deity, you will get the Deity achievement.

The only way for you to lose in that is that you have to forget to settle the settler.

Firaxis knows this trick, but they don't bother to patch it.

Not everyone plays Civ for fun. Some play to win and some of those want to find the easiest way to win.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Another reason why Rome is the most won civ is because you can win as Rome on Turn 1 with only score victory enabled and game length set to one turn.

All you do is to settle your settler on the spot and you win. It counts for the achievement.

If you play on Deity, you will get the Deity achievement.

The only way for you to lose in that is that you have to forget to settle the settler.

Firaxis knows this trick, but they don't bother to patch it.

Not everyone plays Civ for fun. Some play to win and some of those want to find the easiest way to win.

Ha. Wow, that's just dumb.