[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Zaarin]

He would be actually very acceptable as a leader for the Netherlands, for the English I don't know.

Can't tell you how he's thought of in the UK, but William III has a very positive reputation in the US.

 

[acluewithout]

-snip-

I imagine making Loyalty or Climate Change optional at this point would be a real headache, but I think there’s a good case for doing that. As @Victoria said like a million years ago, Disaster Level “0” should really mean Zero Disasters.

I think the “mode” approach bodes well for Corporations / Economy style mechanics (even something like global happiness / corruption), because FXS will be less worried mechanics like that will Bork the game and have more scope to be experimental with those mechanics, because it’s all just “optional” at the end of the day.

I think we could also see more scope for Alt History, including steam punk and diesel punk, again because if anyone finds that too ahistorical they can just opt out.

Not sure about ideology which is what I really wanted to see.

I think another big question is base game content v game modes. For example, does this approach mean we’re not getting a Trebuchet or Medieval Melee? Because, man, that Seige and Melee GAP from Classical to Renaissance is a killer when you’re trying to take Walled Cities. But what about other gaps? The Future Tech tree is really empty. Governors and Dedications are good, but so few and they getting pretty boring as a result. And end game generally is still lacklustre. If new content is limited to modes, will this sort of stuff ever get addressed? Or is that where all the free updates come in?

Overall, this seems like a good direction of travel. But it’s still a bit of a mystery where the game ends up.

At the end of the day, I’m moderately excited about everything that FXS are planning. But what I really want addressed is the base game and the various areas where it’s just not well fleshed out. I’m not totally clear this slow roll Third Expansion will do that - there’s a risk we just get more mechanics that aren’t well fleshed out - but it’s quite possible that this approach is exactly what’s needed to flesh out Civ VI.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I'm not convinced they would delay the release of staple Civs on the possibility they might need them for a second season pass. It's the first time they are attempting this model. Don't think they'd like to gamble.

If this turns out to be really successful, who knows, maybe we get an extra season. But I don't believe that's something that's already set in stone.

There's plenty of stuff for a second season, if needed, in any case. Babylon or Assyria (whichever doesn't get added in New Frontier), Venice or Italy, Austria, Morocco, Angola, Siam, Nepal, Argentina, a Celtic or Germanic tribe, plenty of alt leaders. So much stuff.

I think they will take the same attitude they did with the first two expansion packs. As long as they think they can sell at least a couple civs after season 1, they will prioritize strong civ concepts over classic civs with weaker concepts. If that means Byzantium or Babylon or Portugal are saved for a final blowout DLC pack of mechanically-meh-but-staple civs, then season 1 will not prioritize getting every staple civ in the game.

Look at it from a marketing perspective. Babylon would sell well alone as a single civ DLC pack; it's popular enough that players will buy it sight unseen. However, it's not the strongest mechanical/cultural concept for a civ in a game that already has Sumeria as the Ur-Mesopotamian civ and there are more conceptually rich regions of the world they can pull from. So if "the Babylon civ" sags conceptually, why would you release it mid-cycle and risk eroding player goodwill in the quality of the product? If Babylon happens to suck in season 1, then players are much less likely to buy into season 2. But you already know Babylon will sell itself on familiarity alone where even the best-designed Timurids or Burma might not, so you have every incentive to release you're weakest-but-most-bankable civs last.

I do think it is very likely we will ultimately see Byzantium, Portugal, and maybe Babylon. But I also see these as conceptually the weakest staples that were rightly pushed off to be very late-cycle content. I think the devs will continue trying to pack in as much of their best new ideas in and leave players anticipating those final few staples. I definitely see Babylon as my barometer that if I ever see it in VI, that means the devs have exhausted all of their other ideas and are wrapping things up.

 

[Zaarin]

I definitely see Babylon as my barometer that if I ever see it in VI, that means the devs have exhausted all of their other ideas and are wrapping things up.

I recommend a new barometer.

 

[Sherlock]

According to the steam announcement, Pack 5 requires Rise and Fall

Well, I'm out. I'm not paying thirty bucks for a DLC so I can buy more DLC.

 

[AtlantisAuthor]

So we have specific details regarding the first two "premium" updates of the New Frontier Pass (which I am obviously very happy to see materialize after this community waited and speculated for so long). But what sort of FREE updates are we talking about(because I'm assuming they are not included in the list/time line Firaxis posted)? Will those be QoL-related, tweak mechanics or features, or might they offer something more substantial such as more Leaders, Civs, units, etc.?

One reason I'm asking this is because I played a single-player match a few days ago and couldn't help but notice certain glaring holes in the unit types in particular...and the New Frontier Pass mentions SOME units but doesn't appear to be adding much on that front. Take the Stealth technology, for starters; that's a Cold War-era bomber with obviously no stealth capabilities whatsoever. Jumping straight from Musketmen to Infantry and skipping Riflemen entirely is another enormous omission. I can't say for certain but I suspect that one way or the other, we're going to see the unit types fully fleshed out in a similar fashion to how BNW did so for Civ V.

As for the unnamed new Civs, it's intriguing they specifically mentioned new Persona Packs for Roosevelt (America) and Catherine (France). Might these (as well as the compatibility asterisks next to certain DLC Civs/Leaders; why does one new Leader apparently require Rise and Fall but not Gathering Storm?) offer hints at who might be in the pipeline? Perhaps Washington/Lincoln or Napoleon (let's face it, he's one of the literal FACES of the Civ franchise up till Civ VI) be on the way? Could Babylon/Nebuchadnezzar make it in, casting off their current City-State status?

If I had my druthers, I'd want this to simply be a straight-up expansion so I could immediately play and experiment with everything. That said, I'm very happy to be getting new content at all and look forward to playing New Frontier.

 

[Disgustipated]

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.

I'm late to the party, had to work today. Even though my place of business is closed, I've been working since April 1st. Good to be working, even though I would be making more money on unemployment. It's going to be hard to find time to play this "expansion". Not sure what else to call it. I know I would have more time to play if I didn't spend so much time reading the news. But there's a lot going on in the world, and I like to stay informed.

Very excited nonetheless. I haven't been into civ6 much lately. I never finished my Ottomans game I started a couple weeks ago, and started another game of Fallout New Vegas instead, still my favorite game. I definitely need some new things to spice up my civ6 games. I've thoroughly played the hell out of this game. 2,989 hours.

Maya definitely looking forward to. Colombia will be pretty cool as well. Apocalypse mode looks a little silly, not sure I'll play that too often, but certainly once.

 

[AntSou]

Well, I'm out. I'm not paying thirty bucks for a DLC so I can buy more DLC.

One leader in the pack requires R&F, probably because it's a leader for a Civ added in R&F.

 

[Zaarin]

As for the unnamed new Civs, it's intriguing they specifically mentioned new Persona Packs for Roosevelt (America) and Catherine (France). Might these (as well as the compatibility asterisks next to certain DLC Civs/Leaders) offer hints at who might be in the pipeline? Perhaps Washington/Lincoln or Napoleon (let's face it, he's one of the literal FACES of the Civ franchise up till Civ VI)?

With France and America getting alt-personalities, I wouldn't bank on their getting alt-leaders.

Could Babylon/Nebuchadnezzar make it in, casting off their current City-State status?

I'm still hopeful of seeing either Babylon or Assyria. Nebuchadrezzar is a popular choice for Babylon, but Babylon has about a thousand years of options to choose from. (I'm open-minded about Babylon, but if we get Assyria Tiglath-Pileser III has my strong preference.)

started another game of Fallout New Vegas instead

I'm playing Obsidian's other masterpiece KotOR2 right now; another visit to the Mojave is definitely in my near future.

 

[acluewithout]

I'd want this to simply be a straight-up expansion so I could immediately play and experiment with everything.

I think New Frontiers is a Third Expansion. The difference is the expansion is being rolled out over 12 months, the new mechanics won’t have a unifying theme, and all or most new mechanics will be optional / modular.

The approach is good, with the trade off being you have to wait longer for everything but stuff has longer to be developed.

As I’ve said, I think the great unknowns are what mechanics get expanded / added (the danger being FXS focus on more off the wall stuff rather than core stuff the Gs,e still needs IMO) and whether we also get stuff that doesn’t fit into discrete modes like filling military unit gaps.

 

[AntSou]

So...

Tuesday 12th: First look Maya
Thursday 14th: First look Gran Colombia
Tuesday 19th: First look Catherine/Teddy alt personality.

Pretty pleaaaase!

(I'm assuming they want to show Teddy and Catherine soon since that's one of the selling points for the Season Pass)

 

[bengalryan9]

So...

Tuesday 12th: First look Maya
Thursday 14th: First look Gran Colombia
Tuesday 19th: First look Catherine/Teddy alt personality.

Pretty pleaaaase!

(I'm assuming they want to show Teddy and Catherine soon since that's one of the selling points for the Season Pass)

Didn't they say Teddy and Cathy came in the second pack? If they were ready to be shown, why wait?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Didn't they say Teddy and Cathy came in the second pack? If they were ready to be shown, why wait?

Ther Persona Pack comes at the same time as the second pack. It's not part of it.

 

[bengalryan9]

Ther Persona Pack comes at the same time as the second pack. It's not part of it.

That's basically what I meant. My point still stands - if you were ready to show them off, why wait until the second pack to release them?

 

[Laurana Kanan]

There was a little bit of discussion in the Screenshot thread, but I think out of everything shown thus far this intrigues me the most. They're both using the charges icon, which I assume is just a temp thing.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

That's basically what I meant. My point still stands - if you were ready to show them off, why wait until the second pack to release them?

They aren't really ready to show them off. They gave us a very unspecific description of them.

 

[bengalryan9]

They aren't really ready to show them off. They gave us a very unspecific description of them.

I know, but the post I originally replied to was predicting that we'd get a "First Look" video for them next week. You're making the same point I was.

 

[sonicmyst]

I think we are wrong in thinking of the empty space in HOF. If alt-Teddy and alt-CdM are counted, we will have 11 additional slots in HOF instead of 8.

So many possibilities to look forward to if this new approach sells well.

 

[GenyaArikado]

I don't know, man. Of all the things I think the game could use (or things I can't even imagine) new versions of existing leaders is pretty dang far down the list. Is this really needed?

It's either that or nothing. They're probably just reworking a bit the models

may be more famous in the West but may perhaps not be on the tongues of Mongolian children quite as much as Mandukhai, judging by Jack Weatherford's book on Mongol queens).

Thats generally a big part of picking a leader tho, although i wouldn't mind.

I think people are considering a false choice.

E.g. sure Louis XIV would be nice rather than a reskinned Catherine, but I don't think that's a realistic alternative. A full Louis XIV would just take a slot out of the usual 9.

This way we get alts on top of the usual Civs/leaders.

Thissssssss

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I think we are wrong in thinking of the empty space in HOF. If alt-Teddy and alt-CdM are counted, we will have 11 additional slots in HOF instead of 8.

So many possibilities to look forward to if this new approach sells well.

Oops sorry I meant HOF not leader selection screen.

Also, to be pedantic, there are nine slots (eight civs plus an alt leader), not eight. But point being is we will still add 11 portraits, meaning the HOF theory is pretty much irrelevant. The devs will add as many leaders as they want.