[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Jeppetto]

I think the key point that is becoming fairly obvious through this discussion is that irl, culture and science are extremely closely linked, and if that were to be reflected in civ, all science civs would have strong culture games and vice versa, which would make the game fairly boring.

They have been going that way here and there. Pingala covers both Science and Culture rather than there being Educator and Curator Governor, Seondeok gets benefit to both Science and Culture, Culture being important for Science Victory, Alexander getting boost to both Technologies and Civics etc.

Likewise, Culture is still being presented in Ancient way as government and policies. Still waiting for that one day Influence gets to be official yield and Culture is more about subjective ideas (could re-introduce talent tree) while Influence being about regimes and policies, more practical and objective decrees. Yet, the combination is logical in early game. On the third hand, Culture did cover Faith at least in vanilla Civ V.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I think the key point that is becoming fairly obvious through this discussion is that irl, culture and science are extremely closely linked, and if that were to be reflected in civ, all science civs would have strong culture games and vice versa, which would make the game fairly boring.

The idea of "culture" certainly does evolve as technological convenience develops and the leisure class grows.

(side note: Astrology and Holy Sites should be moved to the Civics Tree. Religion is primarily a cultural phenomenon, and it continues to bother me that it was shoehorned as a science achievement; not to mention that the science tech tree opens a lot more districts than the civics tree.)

They have been going that way here and there. Pingala covers both Science and Culture rather than there being Educator and Curator Governor, Seondeok gets benefit to both Science and Culture, Culture being important for Science Victory, Alexander getting boost to both Technologies and Civics etc.

Likewise, Culture is still being presented in Ancient way as government and policies. Still waiting for that one day Influence gets to be official yield and Culture is more about subjective ideas (could re-introduce talent tree) while Influence being about regimes and policies, more practical and objective decrees. Yet, the combination is logical in early game. On the third hand, Culture did cover Faith at least in vanilla Civ V.

If anything, there was a time I wanted the idea of "influence" or "loyalty" to be split off from "faith," since faith seemed to imply political faith alongside religious faith. But I've accepted that the particular flavor of ideology doesn't really matter; any common cultural story and principles can fill the role of unifying people as a community. So I was quite happy to see rockstars included as yet another ideology for people to unite around.

Still wouldn't mind seeing some checks and balances introduced, though, where "faith" generation would be negatively impacted by consumption (amenities), or religious followers could have a "no religion" association as science production increased. "Culture" does still appear to be the vaguest concept mechanically, where although it appears to function as a measure of social success compared to science, I'm not sure if that success wants to be measured by artistic development or social organization; and, in the latter, case, whether the idea of "culture" begs to be an amalgamation of all other aspects of society (science, production, amenities, faith, gold) rather than an equivalent to any of them.

At any rate, I think Bulgaria would be an interesting civ to explore some overlap between culture, science, and faith production. Seems well-suited to be built out of vanilla mechanics.

 

[PhilBowles]

If anything, there was a time I wanted the idea of "influence" or "loyalty" to be split off from "faith," since faith seemed to imply political faith alongside religious faith. But I've accepted that the particular flavor of ideology doesn't really matter; any common cultural story and principles can fill the role of unifying people as a community. So I was quite happy to see rockstars included as yet another ideology for people to unite around.

Still wouldn't mind seeing some checks and balances introduced, though, where "faith" generation would be negatively impacted by consumption (amenities), or religious followers could have a "no religion" association as science production increased. "Culture" does still appear to be the vaguest concept mechanically, where although it appears to function as a measure of social success compared to science

Culture seems better-defined than faith at this point - faith started out following the Civ V concept of literal religious faith, but its use - purely for the mechanical reason of ensuring it's relevant in non-religious games - for naturalist, rock bands and Great People - makes no sense in that context: even if you interpret faith in rock stars as a cultural 'ideology' it makes no sense that both they and naturalists cost faith but produce culture: they should thematically relate to either one system or the other. And Great People certainly represent cultural achievements.

Culture - as a passively accumulated resource that isn't expended and so doesn't have the same need to arbitrarily tie in to game mechanics. It's consistently generated by things that produce and/or disseminate cultural knowledge and ideas, and social developments that result from that dissemination, as opposed to technological progress. There's obviously overlap but - for instance - Writing is treated in the game as science because it's a new form of technology, while Recorded History is a cultural achievement because it's a way of recording and disseminating knowledge already obtained.

As for the example given of Astrology, given its association with the Stonehenge Wonder I think this is intended essentially to be a 'Monumental Architecture' tech and should likely be renamed as such, in which case it does indeed reflect the technological innovation. Holy sites would be linked to that as, in the sense the game seems to use the term, they're gathering places associated with specialised religious buildings.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

At this point, Bulgaria would check off a lot more boxes than Byzantium would. It has more interesting potential for mechanics and unique infrastructure and units, in my mind, which we know that the devs look for

Bulgaria would also be a new civ, which would be in line with Civ 6’s message, which prefers lesser known kingdoms and empires which were nonetheless extremely powerful and extremely interesting

It also appears in the same region of the world, and despite being undoubtedly less influential, would fit the same victory and specialities (culture, science, faith, production). It would be in the line of selecting Hungary over Austria, for example.

And given the general wealth of hellenic leaders and civs and hellenic-influenced leaders and civs that we already have, I don’t know that from an aesthetic perspective (voice acting, character and building design) there’s as much unique space to explore for Byzantium.

I’m not the most well versed in Eastern European history, but I could imagine that the Kievan Rus could also fit a Byzantium-replacement Role fairly well.

I really don’t want New Frontier to become a pack that gives us Gran Colombia and then brings back returning civs that have cult followings like Byzantium.

I’d much rather see new and unique civs in regions of the world which are underrepresented, with new abilities, units and buildings that we haven’t seen, and leaders that are underappreciated.

Like the Tonga Empire, or Tlingit, or the Chola, or Oman

also, speaking of things that need to be added in new frontier, can the devs please add ways to combat religious victories if you yourself have been converted or if you don’t have a religion? It’s the only victory type that is impossible to prevent in some capacity for some players.

 

[PhilBowles]

I really don’t want New Frontier to become a pack that gives us Gran Colombia and then brings back returning civs that have cult followings like Byzantium.

I'm pretty sure that's the only reason New Frontier exists at all. We'll get new civs - either 3 or 4 I suspect as there are only about 5 civs that aren't in which are commonly requested and we've seen two of them - but I don't think this pass would exist at all if not to 'complete' the civ list in the minds of players expecting certain civs. The game has been essentially done since Gathering Storm, and the minor passes we've seen with patches suggest Firaxis doesn't think anything major remains to be done. Probably even after GS they had some plan for minor ongoing support such as adding the Temple of Zeus and maybe Babylon, but probably something along the lines of a Civ V DLC pack rather than a season pass. I don't think a New Frontier level of support post the second expansion was ever part of their original plan.

Also, this is their first experiment with a season pass - it makes sense for them to take the low-risk approach with it of offering things they know will be popular rather than experimenting with more obscure ideas. There are enough high-profile requested civs, such as Vietnam and Italy, that there's no reason for them to go any deeper with the new civ choices. All three of the announced civs have been safe, obvious options based on past Civ precedent and fan requests and I expect this trend to continue.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

At this point, Bulgaria would check off a lot more boxes than Byzantium would. It has more interesting potential for mechanics and unique infrastructure and units, in my mind, which we know that the devs look for

Bulgaria would also be a new civ, which would be in line with Civ 6’s message, which prefers lesser known kingdoms and empires which were nonetheless extremely powerful and extremely interesting

It also appears in the same region of the world, and despite being undoubtedly less influential, would fit the same victory and specialities (culture, science, faith, production). It would be in the line of selecting Hungary over Austria, for example.

And given the general wealth of hellenic leaders and civs and hellenic-influenced leaders and civs that we already have, I don’t know that from an aesthetic perspective (voice acting, character and building design) there’s as much unique space to explore for Byzantium.

I’m not the most well versed in Eastern European history, but I could imagine that the Kievan Rus could also fit a Byzantium-replacement Role fairly well.

I really don’t want New Frontier to become a pack that gives us Gran Colombia and then brings back returning civs that have cult followings like Byzantium.

I’d much rather see new and unique civs in regions of the world which are underrepresented, with new abilities, units and buildings that we haven’t seen, and leaders that are underappreciated.

Like the Tonga Empire, or Tlingit, or the Chola, or Oman

also, speaking of things that need to be added in new frontier, can the devs please add ways to combat religious victories if you yourself have been converted or if you don’t have a religion? It’s the only victory type that is impossible to prevent in some capacity for some players.

I certainly think that for the game to feel complete, Byzantium will likely have to be included in some form. I wouldn't care much as to whether it were a Roman alt leader or it's own civ if Bulgaria were prioritized for NFP and Byzantium released in subsequent content. Although I do think that for Italy to feel like it has a geographic niche in VI (which does seem fairly preoccupied with filling geographic niches), Rome would have to be decentralized with a Constantinople leader. It just so happens that doing that would also decentralize Byzantium and make a little more space for Bulgaria at the same time.

At any rate, while I expect Byzantium will ultimately be added, I hope it was pushed off for after NFP and as many new civs as possible packed in, now that Maya and Ethiopia have hooked about as many early adopters as feasible and it is better to take risks with the new release model earlier before it inevitably loses traction and the only sales come from series staples.

I would be ecstatic if we got Morocco/Berbers and some sort of west American civ. But I think the best surprises for me would be Bulgaria and/or Burma, since the absence of Byzantium or Vietnam would indicate to me a high likelihood of further content.

I'm pretty sure that's the only reason New Frontier exists at all. We'll get new civs - either 3 or 4 I suspect as there are only about 5 civs that aren't in which are commonly requested and we've seen two of them - but I don't think this pass would exist at all if not to 'complete' the civ list in the minds of players expecting certain civs. The game has been essentially done since Gathering Storm, and the minor passes we've seen with patches suggest Firaxis doesn't think anything major remains to be done. Probably even after GS they had some plan for minor ongoing support such as adding the Temple of Zeus and maybe Babylon, but probably something along the lines of a Civ V DLC pack rather than a season pass. I don't think a New Frontier level of support post the second expansion was ever part of their original plan.

Also, this is their first experiment with a season pass - it makes sense for them to take the low-risk approach with it of offering things they know will be popular rather than experimenting with more obscure ideas. There are enough high-profile requested civs, such as Vietnam and Italy, that there's no reason for them to go any deeper with the new civ choices. All three of the announced civs have been safe, obvious options based on past Civ precedent and fan requests and I expect this trend to continue.

I take the opposite opinion. I think season passes generally don't hold goodwill for very long. Usually no matter how much popular content is added, players are disappointed by the price-to-content point, and don't buy much of season 2, causing the model to be abandoned after two years. I'm already seeing a lot of complaining at the switch.

Point being, it makes more sense to anticipate the first season will be shaky or even the death knoll, put all the controversial additions in that after preorders are at their highest, and then hope that including the more popular staples in season two will at least make the last season semi-profitable on an individual DLC to DLC basis.

Now there is still substantial question as to whether the devs planned this much, or are hoping to do exactly what you said instead. Or if they are even planning/hoping for a second season. But if I were in their shoes and had more ideas than could fill a single season left, I would let goodwill sell the first season and nostalgia sell the second one. In which case I would include only two or three staples and push for as many new civs as possible, 5 or 6.

 

[agonistes]

At this point, Bulgaria would check off a lot more boxes than Byzantium would. It has more interesting potential for mechanics and unique infrastructure and units, in my mind, which we know that the devs look for

Bulgaria would also be a new civ, which would be in line with Civ 6’s message, which prefers lesser known kingdoms and empires which were nonetheless extremely powerful and extremely interesting

It also appears in the same region of the world, and despite being undoubtedly less influential, would fit the same victory and specialities (culture, science, faith, production). It would be in the line of selecting Hungary over Austria, for example.

And given the general wealth of hellenic leaders and civs and hellenic-influenced leaders and civs that we already have, I don’t know that from an aesthetic perspective (voice acting, character and building design) there’s as much unique space to explore for Byzantium.

I’m not the most well versed in Eastern European history, but I could imagine that the Kievan Rus could also fit a Byzantium-replacement Role fairly well.

I really don’t want New Frontier to become a pack that gives us Gran Colombia and then brings back returning civs that have cult followings like Byzantium.

I’d much rather see new and unique civs in regions of the world which are underrepresented, with new abilities, units and buildings that we haven’t seen, and leaders that are underappreciated.

Like the Tonga Empire, or Tlingit, or the Chola, or Oman

also, speaking of things that need to be added in new frontier, can the devs please add ways to combat religious victories if you yourself have been converted or if you don’t have a religion? It’s the only victory type that is impossible to prevent in some capacity for some players.

Religious victories are the easiest to prevent.

But they are also the most annoying to prevent.

 

[PhilBowles]

I take the opposite opinion. I think season passes generally don't hold goodwill for very long. Usually no matter how much popular content is added, players are disappointed by the price-to-content point, and don't buy much of season 2, causing the model to be abandoned after two years. I'm already seeing a lot of complaining at the switch.

Point being, it makes more sense to anticipate the first season will be shaky or even the death knoll, put all the controversial additions in that after preorders are at their highest, and then hope that including the more popular staples in season two will at least make the last season semi-profitable on an individual DLC to DLC basis.

That assumes a plan to have a season 2. If, as I suspect, this is a fairly ad hoc experiment with something they may want to do on a fuller basis with Civ VII, this is simply a final, quickly-produced batch of content because they have time to fill before Civ VII is scheduled and they're experimenting with a new distribution model - exactly enough time for a single season if they expect the game to have the same 6-year lifespan as Civ V.

There was a lot of pushback against DLC packs in Civ V with a preference for traditional expansions, which it's not clear they ever intended to make when the game was released. They have past reason to be cautious when trialling new forms of content distribution.

 

[Arianrhod]

I really don’t want New Frontier to become a pack that gives us Gran Colombia and then brings back returning civs that have cult followings like Byzantium.

I’d much rather see new and unique civs in regions of the world which are underrepresented, with new abilities, units and buildings that we haven’t seen, and leaders that are underappreciated.

I can appreciate new and unique civs/leaders, but Civ 6 has already done decently well on that front as things stand right now -- by my count, we've had 14 new civs in addition to bringing back the 3 worthwhile ones lost between 4 and 5. What it needs now is the "returning civs with cult followings", because their absence is going to make a greater long-term difference to the game's reception than a handful of additional new Civs that could just as easily debut in 7.

NFP can afford to be a little less conservative if there's a second pass planned, but I see no reason to assume that at this time. Without such a second season, the NFP should be devoted to "finishing" what people expect Civ 6 to have.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I can appreciate new and unique civs/leaders, but Civ 6 has already done decently well on that front as things stand right now -- by my count, we've had 14 new civs in addition to bringing back the 3 worthwhile ones lost between 4 and 5. What it needs now is the "returning civs with cult followings", because their absence is going to make a greater long-term difference to the game's reception than a handful of additional new Civs that could just as easily debut in 7.

NFP can afford to be a little less conservative if there's a second pass planned, but I see no reason to assume that at this time. Without such a second season, the NFP should be devoted to "finishing" what people expect Civ 6 to have.

I would posit that "complete" doesn't necessarily require any more staples be added. If Spain adequately represents Iberia and incorporates the Portuguese empire, the idea of Rome encapsulates Byzantium, and Sumeria is a stand in for Akkadia/Assyria/Babylon, then those could be just as optional as filling gaps in the map with new civs. We could theoretically (albeit unlikely) see a "finished" VI that has none of those civs.

 

[Tony Sing]

I’m sorry, how does China not make sense for science. They discovered gunpowder, (modern) paper, silk, printing, made advancements in shipbuilding and trade strategy. Etc.

India, Arabia and China arguably should be the strongest science civs in the game.

Also, East Asia having strengths in science isn’t a ‘stereotype’

Given what campuses actually function as in Civ, Seowons giving science makes a lot of sense, although giving them some fusion characteristic with culture would’ve made more sense.

What I actually mean is China on and after Song. After the peak of trading and culture, Song is hit hard by Jin and forced to be turtle in the South until the Mongols finished it off. At Song, actually the science development start slowed down and instead culture development begin blooming. At the time of Ming after defeat the Mongols, Chinese's view towards science changed a lot, they start to tread it as some kind of 'trick' for entertainment and most people are no longer willing to put any effort on it.

Sorry that mostly my first though on China is the period on and after Song

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

If there is one nation that make sense to be seen as a science nation, that would be USA, today Worlds technology leader, won most noble prizes and had intellectual protection bascially since its founding. Developed alot of the Technologies we have today and is still the World technology leader.

Here to get an idea: https://share.america.gov/who-leads-world-science-technology/

If Spain adequately represents Iberia and incorporates the Portuguese empire

The two empires was under one monarch for a while, I think around mid 1500s to mid 1600s.​

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I would posit that "complete" doesn't necessarily require any more staples be added. If Spain adequately represents Iberia and incorporates the Portuguese empire, the idea of Rome encapsulates Byzantium, and Sumeria is a stand in for Akkadia/Assyria/Babylon, then those could be just as optional as filling gaps in the map with new civs. We could theoretically (albeit unlikely) see a "finished" VI that has none of those civs.

The idea of the game being complete is subjective.
For me the game will be complete with Portugal, another Mesopotamian Civ, some form of the Byzantines, and another Native American tribe from the U.S.
Most others agree with this statement as well.
Civs like Vietnam and Italy would just be icing on the cake.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I don't think it is the civs that make the game complete but the mechanics the game have, having the same civs show up in every civ version is a bit boring to be honest so I rather see some new ones over some of the old ones.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

If there is one nation that make sense to be seen as a science nation, that would be USA, today Worlds technology leader, won most noble prizes and had intellectual protection bascially since its founding. Developed alot of the Technologies we have today and is still the World technology leader.

Here to get an idea: https://share.america.gov/who-leads-world-science-technology/

The two empires was under one monarch for a while, I think around mid 1500s to mid 1600s.​

I mean, England could also easily be a science civ as the originator of the agricultural and industrial revolutions. Instead we gave that and Germany production bonuses.

And yeah Spain under Philip II had already acquired the Portuguese empire. It's also a rather subjective matter which had the bigger legacy, as most American colonies were Spanish but Brazil is by far the most successful of the Latin states. Add the fact that the Spanish mechanics are also very archetypally Portuguese (and otherwise we see other "Portuguese" ideas in the design of the English and Dutch), and Portugal struggles to find new design space. While I think the addition of Grand Colombia certainly begs an attempt at including Portugal, I still would be able to make peace with a VI without Portugal.

The idea of the game being complete is subjective.
For me the game will be complete with Portugal, another Mesopotamian Civ, some form of the Byzantines, and another Native American tribe from the U.S.
Most others agree with this statement as well.
Civs like Vietnam and Italy would just be icing on the cake.

I agree it is subjective. I would also argue that your and others' specific idea of completedness is colored by an expectation that VI conform to a model defined by prior installments. While I don't completely dismiss the idea of VI just doing over what has been successful, I also find that notion...lacking imagination? Like, even after seeing all the potential VI has had to introduce new concepts, people still would rather regress to the rote and familiar?

I'd rather start from a more aspirational goal and then see how much it must make concessions and slide backwards into traditionalism. Instead of starting from a presumption of some sort of ever-snowballing, mandatory baseline that can only accommodate incremental growth. Especially in the case of a franchise like Civ where players are already slow to adopt new installments because of a lack of new features.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I mean, England could also easily be a science civ as the originator of the agricultural and industrial revolutions. Instead we gave that and Germany production bonuses.

Well, Englands bonus encourage them to go for science but it don't have much direct bonus to science. Germany is quite strange case as it is a quite modern Creation and probably have Little to do with the germanic people or not more so than other European countries during the Roman Era but in Civ V they gave them a barbarian capture bonus and hansa is more about trade than production, it do encourage building commerical hubs but it is like England that it encourage rather than give direct benefit.

Celts and the germanic tribes is probably better represented as their own civilizations rather than using some nationalism Connection to them with modern civilizations. The germanic tribes in particular could be interesting if they focus on a cityless playstyle or something like that and the celts was famous for their sophisticated metalworking and agriculture so bonuses to mines and farms maybe.

The viking focus of Scandinavian countries of Norway and Denmark is quite strange given how short that period was, I would maybe have that focus be its own civ called something like norse.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

And yeah Spain under Philip II had already acquired the Portuguese empire. It's also a rather subjective matter which had the bigger legacy, as most American colonies were Spanish but Brazil is by far the most successful of the Latin states. Add the fact that the Spanish mechanics are also very archetypally Portuguese (and otherwise we see other "Portuguese" ideas in the design of the English and Dutch), and Portugal struggles to find new design space. While I think the addition of Grand Colombia certainly begs an attempt at including Portugal, I still would be able to make peace with a VI without Portugal.

The Spanish mechanics are 3/4 religious. I don't see Portugal having any of those abilities. As for Treasure Fleets only one of the bonuses I could have seen go to Portugal with is extra gold for trade routes between continents, but that one ability doesn't leave out design space.

Some things that I have mentioned and seen is: unique Great Admirals, science for coastal water tiles (cartography science), more gold in a trade route for every water tile in the origin city (like Mali with desert tiles) , naval units gain experience points for exploration like recon units etc.
I actually picture them more like Phoenicia but for the Renaissance era. If we can have both Scythia and Mongolia and make them unique, I think Portugal is possible.

I agree it is subjective. I would also argue that your and others' specific idea of completedness is colored by an expectation that VI conform to a model defined by prior installments. While I don't completely dismiss the idea of VI just doing over what has been successful, I also find that notion...lacking imagination? Like, even after seeing all the potential VI has had to introduce new concepts, people still would rather regress to the rote and familiar?

If they try a new concept on an old civ I don't see the problem. We've seen that with the Ottomans and their unique governor, the Inca with working mountain tiles, and more recently the Maya not gaining fresh water for housing and actually having to build tall.
That to me means they aren't lacking imagination, even if they brought back a returning civ.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Some things that I have mentioned and seen is: unique Great Admirals, science for coastal water tiles (cartography science), more gold in a trade route for every water tile in the origin city (like Mali with desert tiles) , naval units gain experience points for exploration like recon units etc.
I actually picture them more like Phoenicia but for the Renaissance era. If we can have both Scythia and Mongolia and make them unique, I think Portugal is possible.

Maybe do something interesting, like you can only found one city per continent but you get some significant bonuses to make up for it.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Well, Englands bonus encourage them to go for science but it don't have much direct bonus to science. Germany is quite strange case as it is a quite modern Creation and probably have Little to do with the germanic people or not more so than other European countries during the Roman Era but in Civ V they gave them a barbarian capture bonus and hansa is more about trade than production, it do encourage building commerical hubs but it is like England that it encourage rather than give direct benefit.

Celts and the germanic tribes is probably better represented as their own civilizations rather than using some nationalism Connection to them with modern civilizations. The germanic tribes in particular could be interesting if they focus on a cityless playstyle or something like that and the celts was famous for their sophisticated metalworking and agriculture so bonuses to mines and farms maybe.

I am fine with VI's attempt to tie tribes to the heritage of modern states; it makes the game far more relatable and marketable than V was, adds some diversity and historical commentary.

I think it is unlikely we will get any sort of European tribe, given that VI seems to be primarily fixated on filling geographic gaps and western Europe is adequately filled. I think we only got tribes like Scythia and the Maori because they were the best thing to fill regions that had no imperial powers of note. I do suspect that the Goths are a dark horse candidate but even then they aren't really necessary.

The Spanish mechanics are 3/4 religious. I don't see Portugal having any of those abilities. As for Treasure Fleets only one of the bonuses I could have seen go to Portugal with is extra gold for trade routes between continents, but that one ability doesn't leave out design space.

Some things that I have mentioned and seen is: unique Great Admirals, science for coastal water tiles (cartography science), more gold in a trade route for every water tile in the origin city (like Mali with desert tiles) , naval units gain experience points for exploration like recon units etc.
I actually picture them more like Phoenicia but for the Renaissance era. If we can have both Scythia and Mongolia and make them unique, I think Portugal is possible.

Okay, I would accept these mechanics, actually. Perhaps not very inspired but then again neither is Colombia and it would be good for game balance.

If they try a new concept on an old civ I don't see the problem. We've seen that with the Ottomans and their unique governor, the Inca with working mountain tiles, and more recently the Maya not gaining fresh water for housing and actually having to build tall.
That to me means they aren't lacking imagination, even if they brought back a returning civ.

I was mostly talking lack of imagination on the part of the fanbase lol. It takes virtually no effort to imagine a game just comprising series staples.

I do think that many, if not all returning civs, have been heavily reworked mechanically. And in the case of Byzantium and Babylon, they would need to be heavily reworked because the designs in V kind of sucked. But I also don't personally feel any compelling need for them to be reworked in the event other civs facilitate even more creative ideas.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Maybe do something interesting, like you can only found one city per continent but you get some significant bonuses to make up for it.

How many continents are usually in a game though? I think that would be more limiting than the Maya, unless it would really be a big bonus.

I picture them as not necessarily wanting to control as much land though, but instead establish their cities on the coast to control the most ocean tiles for their trade routes. So I guess it could work.