Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Eagle Pursuit, May 11, 2020.
Maybe in a future game, was more my thinking.
In theory I can see them hanging on to one or two of the big hitters, in case they want to do another pass like this.
At the same time, though, I feel like a pass of this nature - where you could choose to buy the Civs individually (or, in the case of two, as a pair), and even if you do pay for the whole thing up front, you're getting these drip-fed over a whole year rather than all at once - means we are more likely to see returning Civs or fan-favourite suggestions than newer, more obscure ones. I think it's significant that Gran Colombia has been included with the Maya. I'm not saying that people wouldn't want to buy Gran Colombia as a standalone, but the Maya have been this hugely-requested missing Civ for a couple of years now.
I do think each of the 6 DLC packs needs to contain at least one Civ that is popular/well-known enough that people will want to buy it as a standalone. I expect Pack 3 to contain one returning and one new Civ, and for Pack 5 to also contain a new Civ together with a leader for an existing Civ, but 4 and 6 will probably be popular returning Civs still missing from the game.
Maybe Sargon could lead Sumer in the future. I'd rather have Gudea or Ur-Nammu myself. And for the love of Enlil, Firaxis, let them speak Sumerian!
for me the big barometer as to if there is more content after this is the absence of Babylon
Zaarin, just curious, are you a professor of history?
What about Lugalbanda the Shepherd? Honestly, I would pay dear money for a full bronze-age ancient civ game.
That could be a way of combining both aspects of Assyria and Babylon into one.
But also extremely unlikely as we have Akkad as a GS city-state and I would expect Akkad to be a Babylonian city.
Which that's the one reason why I think Babylon is less likely than Assyria as well. Either bonus of Akkad or Babylon could have gone to a Assur/Nineveh city-state.
At the moment just someone with a keen interest in history, especially the Bronze/Iron Age Near East, but that's my long-term plan, yeah.
He definitely has a background in history, for which i respect him a lot. His contributions are very valued in the community (just like anyone else).
Bummer. Maybe 6pm?
First Looks for Persia and Macedon were shown on a Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively, and Khmer and Indonesia First Looks appeared on a Monday and Tuesday. They might do the same this time around.
Point being, don't dismiss Wednesdays or Mondays.
I'm always surprised that people remember this stuff.
I don't. I found out while maniacally searching for clues for a possible release date a couple months ago.
This is a long one, so it's in spoilers. After stalking this thread since Firaxis announced the Frontier Pass, I've been looking at other people's reasoning and coming up with my own to try and figure out the Civs and Leaders who might be added with it. Here's what I've come up with:
So we know we have the Maya, Gran Columbia, and Ethiopia. As has been pointed out, the last two expansions had this pattern (I think I've got it right): 2 American Civs (one North/Central, one South), 2 European Civs, 1 African Civ, 2 Asian Civs (One middle East, one far East), and 1 Oceanic. We already know the first three.
Portugal seems extremely likely as the one of the European Civs, with a chance to play with trade mechanics.
Italy and the Byzantine Empire are the leading contenders for that other European spot. I'd prefer Italy, and I suspect Firaxis would too, to bring in more fresh blood.
Babylon and Vietnam both seem like very reasonable picks for the Asian Civs, with Vietnam potentially having a female leader.
Oceania is difficult, though. I don't think any Australian natives are likely, and the Maoria, Indonesia, and Australia itself are already in the game. I think this becomes a wild card spot.
So, with it as a wild card, they can actively hunt for big personalities. As has been mentioned on this thread, Geronimo and the Apache would fit both a big personality, and fill an empty map spot.
But Firaxis likely wants at least three female leaders, with I think makes the Byzantine a stronger contender for the final spot, as Theodora is an easy pick, if a more unpopular one.
So we have the Maya, Gran Colombia, Ethiopia, Portugal, Italy, Babylon, Vietnam, and the Byzantine.
Simon Bolivar is the only choice for Gran Colombia, as he's the driving reason behind their inclusion. The Maya are a good choice for a female leader with Lady Six Sky, and Vietnam is a there too. Though ultimately their successes were short lived, the Trưng Sisters would be interesting, as would Lady Triệu.
Haile Sellasie would likely be the pick for Ethiopia, because big personalities. He's an interesting, well documented figure who would fit in nicely in Civs cast of characters, even if there are some really interesting alternatives.
We are left with Portugal, Babylon, and Italy.
Give me John II for Portugal. He fits in with a trading flavor.
Babylon will almost certainly be Nebby or Hammurabi. I'm leaning towards Hammurabi, because Nebby was the leader in Civ V.
Italy will probably be represented by the leader of an Italian state during the Renaissance, both because that would be the best choice for a cultural powerhouse Italy, and because it means the capital doesn't have to be Rome. Lorenzo de' Medici seems like a good choice, with a capital at Florence.
So we ultimately have:
Maya - Six Sky
Gran Colombia - Bolivar
Ethiopia - Selassie
Vietnam - Trưng Sisters or Lady Triệu.
Babylon - Hammurabi
Portugal - John II
Italy - Lorenzo de' Medici
Byzantine - Theodora
There will also be one new leader. I still really like Kublai Khan as a multi Civ leader, so I'll go with him, but there's so many choices that trying to guess the alternate leader is a fool's errand.
Bear in mind, this is just what the Frontier Pass could realistically look like. It's not necessarily what I want. I'd certainly pass on Sellasie for Ethiopia again, and I'd love the Haida or Apache in the place of the Byzantine, and if we do get the Byzantine, I'd certainly prefer someone other than Theodora.
EDIT: The person below me mentioned the Hittities. They'd be great, too, as an alternative to one of the Civs I'm speculating on.
Additionally, I don't know much about a lot of these leaders, so they may be awful picks.
EDIT: I did "Colombia" with a "U" instead of the second "O"
Since we don't have a first look video to comment today, I'll just expouse my wishes for the civ choices:
1- Portugal has an enormous historical impact, and is seen as a must in most people's comments. However, I think they have a big flaw and that is the gameplay. So far we have had many civs with naval trade bonuses or naval colonisation bonuses that occupy the niche Portugal would have. Thus I think that despite its historic value, I might actually prefer something like the Gauls over Portugal. On the other hand, they have done some amazing stuff with, for example, Mali. There were already other civs with desert-related bonuses in Nubia and Australia, but they nonetheless managed to make an amazing and unique Mali civ with desert bonuses. I wonder if they can do the same for Portugal.
2- Seems like my bae Constantine is not an option. Thus I'm moving my chips all the way to Medieval Byzantium. Give the power couple a rest now! Give us a Komnenos or Palaeologus!
3- I'd love a medieval Italy done like they did Greece on vanilla, with two leaders representing two cultural centres. Since no new civ is coming with two leaders, I think I prefer Italy not to be represented at all in this generation. Do it right or don't do it! Instead Venice, Florence and etc. could be city states, I'd be fine with that.
4- Some people are pointing out that no expansion has had more than two new American civs, but I really want one more, so I'll be hoping!
5- I really feel on my bones that we're getting Vietnam this time. EDIT: I hope that, unlike many people here have been stanning, they don't do a dual "Trung Sisters" leader. Instead they should have Trung Trac as the leader and maybe Trung Nhi as an unique advisor or something...
6- Babylon is incredibly desired but I personally hope they give them a rest this generation, and put the spotlight on some other ancient middle eastern civ like the Hittites or Assyrians.
Late to the 'party' but still...
This is so much better than the 3rd expansion that I feared would be announced.
new game modes - probably the only thing that can get me back into civ VI this year
packs requiring R&F and/or GS - finally some more civs that focus on the mechanics introduced in those expansions
roadmap! was helpful in for other games, is a giant leap forward for a civ game
allows me to buy the packs individually and I'm not forced to spend money on game modes/content im not interested in.
new content for normal games, but as it seems no new mechanics - the best they could do after GS's and R&F's more-sparkly-mechanics-on-top-galore
What I'm not so sure about is the inclusion of "fictional" wonders, like the Fountain of Youth, El Dorado and the Bermuda Triangle. Yes, they were important for history, but still...
I'd be extremely happy with this (which means it's probably going to be at least partially wrong, sadly!)
Theodora from Civ 5 was my avatar on here for ages; she was such a fun leader and I would actually really love to see her again. I have a sneaking suspicion they will go with Justinian because he's been name-dropped several times on the marketing Twitter account, especially recently. But I'd love to be wrong.
Oh, are there no new mechanics? That's actually refreshing.
Oh, don't quote me on that. That's just what I gathered from watching the announcement and two other videos: no mechanics for the normal game, but only for the new game modes.
That's how I understand it. You'll be able to ignore any and or all of the stuff in the game modes if you like, and just play with the new Civs. It's a great idea.
seems like there will be no first look today,new tweet is clearly a filler
Separate names with a comma.