[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[TeddyMain]

I'd definitely want a volcano-immune Hawaii and, though it was a good while ago, I read some interesting stuff about Lili'uokalani and think she would make for an interesting leader.

Definitely would love a Hawaiian civ that would have some bonuses to volcanoes, and definitely some ocean-based bonuses.

Although personally, I'd much take Kamehameha I over Lili'uokalani.

 

[Codeword Iroquois]

So, if they did a final pass, which is seeming unlikely, likely choices seem to be:
Italy for a European DLC, Maybe paired with Ireland, or Switzerland, a Kalmar themed Denmark, or Bulgaria (Or Goths, as I would hope)
Morocco for Africa, maybe paired with an Egyptian alt-leader (Ramesses probably, but preferably some more overlooked leader for the series),
Assyria, probably under Ashurbanipal, from the Middle East,
Hawaii and the Iroquois for a "native" pass (that's the best name I can tie them with off the top of my head)
Siam, Burma, or Afghanistan for Asia,
Maybe Madagascar or Kilwa for Sub-Saharan Africa, to wrap the game with options that I've seen thrown around quite frequently.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

So, if they did a final pass, which is seeming unlikely, likely choices seem to be:
Italy for a European DLC, Maybe paired with Ireland, or Switzerland, a Kalmar themed Denmark, or Bulgaria (Or Goths, as I would hope)
Morocco for Africa, maybe paired with an Egyptian alt-leader (Ramesses probably, but preferably some more overlooked leader for the series),
Assyria, probably under Ashurbanipal, from the Middle East,
Hawaii and the Iroquois for a "native" pass (that's the best name I can tie them with off the top of my head)
Siam, Burma, or Afghanistan for Asia,
Maybe Madagascar or Kilwa for Sub-Saharan Africa, to wrap the game with options that I've seen thrown around quite frequently.

I think the Inuit stand a bigger chance than Hawaii, honestly. That is not to say that Hawaii would not be a cool or welcome addition.

I think the Goths are unlikely at this point, and even if they were included I don't think they would be paired with Italy. More likely with Numidia or Bulgaria.

I also think Ireland and Switzerland just aren't happening. They weren't really empires or anything resembling empires, work perfectly fine as city-states.

The rest are...possible. I think Burma is more likely than Siam, and really Oman/Kilwa/Madagascar are kind of a toss-up.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I think the Inuit stand a bigger chance than Hawaii, honestly. That is not to say that Hawaii would not be a cool or welcome addition.

Who would lead the Inuit, though?

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Who would lead the Inuit, though?

Ekeuhnick. Legendary on the level of Gilgamesh or Kupe, but would still be appropriate.

(also, I'm not commenting about how well the Inuit would fit a civ mold. Merely that they are insanely popular and might be shoehorned in anyway)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Bolivar and Temujin got the promotion from GP to leader so no reason she couldn't.

Bolivar and Genghis however didn't have specific Great Works with music audio though which might make her more unlikely than promoting a Great General.

So, if they did a final pass, which is seeming unlikely, likely choices seem to be:
Italy for a European DLC, Maybe paired with Ireland, or Switzerland, a Kalmar themed Denmark, or Bulgaria (Or Goths, as I would hope)
Morocco for Africa, maybe paired with an Egyptian alt-leader (Ramesses probably, but preferably some more overlooked leader for the series),
Assyria, probably under Ashurbanipal, from the Middle East,
Hawaii and the Iroquois for a "native" pass (that's the best name I can tie them with off the top of my head)
Siam, Burma, or Afghanistan for Asia,
Maybe Madagascar or Kilwa for Sub-Saharan Africa, to wrap the game with options that I've seen thrown around quite frequently.

I'd expect maybe Haiti to go along with the Iroquois/Native American civ over Hawaii. They are another post-colonial civ but they are primarily francophone, a nation whose citizens are mostly African descent, and from the Caribbean who doesn't have a civ.

 

[sweetbrown89]

portugal is so disappointing...

really wish we’d at least get a civ from an underrepresented region

or an indigenous civ (either of oceania or North America)

or SOMETHING

but instead we get the halfway point between the Netherlands, Spain and Brazil, thematically...

with exception to Vietnam, this pack was a massive waste of money lol

It always came down to Portugal or something new. They really got me good: probably would only have purchased Maya & Gran Colombia and Byzantium & Gaul if we had known the list.

Disappointing, but not unexpected. Oh well. No reason to stick around, now. But at least there’s Humankind to satisfy a less Eurocentric history game! Kinda put the nail in the coffin for me, but of course there are plenty happy with the choice. Just seems too safe for a “New Frontier”.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Disappointing, but not unexpected. Oh well. No reason to stick around, now. But at least there’s Humankind to satisfy a less Eurocentric history game! Kinda put the nail in the coffin for me, but of course there are plenty happy with the choice. Just seems too safe for a “New Frontier”.

You mean the game that has both the Franks and Teutons in the Medieval Era in addition to Byzantines, English and Norseman in the Medieval?

I mean I guess they don't have Portugal, but who needs them when you have the Dutch, Polish, Spain and Venice in the Early Modern.

Okay I'll stop.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

You mean the game that has both the Franks and Teutons in the Medieval Era in addition to Byzantines, English and Norseman in the Medieval?

I mean I guess they don't have Portugal, but who needs them when you have the Dutch, Polish, Spain and Venice in the Early Modern.

Okay I'll stop.

You mean the game that has the Russians, Austro-Hungarians, British, French, Germans, and Italians in the Industrial Era.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

You mean the game that has the Russians, Austro-Hungarians, British, French, Germans, and Italians in the Industrial Era.

Well those are fine. The later you get in the game the more Eurocentric a historical game will be.

My real complaint was I don't see the need for both Franks and Teutons in the Medieval Era. I think the Franks could have represented Western Europe just fine with the Byzantines for Eastern Europe.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

My real complaint was I don't see the need for both Franks and Teutons in the Medieval Era. I think the Franks could have represented Western Europe just fine with the Byzantines for Eastern Europe.

That makes sense.

 

[Birch617]

I think its cool the Teuton and Franks presence in Humankind but i do hope for the future more Cultures outside of Europe

 

[Zegangani]

I noticed a Pattern in the Civ VI Change Depots on SteamDB: many of them contain the Base Game, XP1, XP2, DLC1 (Vikings), DLC2 (Poland) and DLC 5 (Nubia), but no other DLCs. I didn't dig deeper, so don't take this as reliable/proof.

Does this mean that we're getting, for the smaller DLCs, balance/polish for Norway, Poland and Nubia only? And not for Macedonia, Persia, Australia, Aztec, Indonesia and Khmer? The Devs said that it's going to be only 2/3 of the Civs/Leaders, but that's just 1/3 of the smaller DLCs Civs. So perhaps Most of the Base Game Civs and RnF Civs will get rebalanced/polished.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I noticed a Pattern in the Civ VI Change Depots on SteamDB: many of them contain the Base Game, XP1, XP2, DLC1 (Vikings), DLC2 (Poland) and DLC 5 (Nubia), but no other DLCs. I didn't dig deeper, so don't take this as reliable/proof.

Does this mean that we're getting, for the smaller DLCs, balance/polish for Norway, Poland and Nubia only? And not for Macedonia, Persia, Australia, Aztec, Indonesia and Khmer? The Devs said that it's going to be only 2/3 of the Civs/Leaders, but that's just 1/3 of the smaller DLCs Civs. So perhaps Most of the Base Game Civs and RnF Civs will get rebalanced/polished.

Norway is in the base game, not the Vikings DLC. It's the only DLC that didn't come with a civ, just city-states and natural wonders.
Of course that means they could still get reworked if you are correct.

 

[Zegangani]

Norway is in the base game, not the Vikings DLC. It's the only DLC that didn't come with a civ, just city-states and natural wonders.
Of course that means they could still get reworked if you are correct.

Yes, you're right. How could I forget that?!!
Maybe a Hope that the Scenarios will get some polish too (which would explain the Zombies)?

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I noticed a Pattern in the Civ VI Change Depots on SteamDB: many of them contain the Base Game, XP1, XP2, DLC1 (Vikings), DLC2 (Poland) and DLC 5 (Nubia), but no other DLCs. I didn't dig deeper, so don't take this as reliable/proof.

Does this mean that we're getting, for the smaller DLCs, balance/polish for Norway, Poland and Nubia only? And not for Macedonia, Persia, Australia, Aztec, Indonesia and Khmer? The Devs said that it's going to be only 2/3 of the Civs/Leaders, but that's just 1/3 of the smaller DLCs Civs. So perhaps Most of the Base Game Civs and RnF Civs will get rebalanced/polished.

I mean, depending on how many civs in the base game and expacks are receiving updates, that could still amount to 2/3 of all the pre-NFP civs. Leaving out 6 of 42 civs still leaves a lot of wiggle room.

If we look at those civs in particular, I can't really say either way. Australia is OP and I wouldn't expect it to get updates, but many have wanted some Khmer retooling. I think many consider Macedon a little OP/snowballing/gimmicky so that probably wouldn't need changes, and Indonesia and Aztecs seem pretty solid. But I think I've seen a few mention they wanted changes to Persia.

I can't really say either way, but if that's what's on the SteamDB, it could very well be what we're looking at. I also would speculate that the civs most likely to receive changes are everything in R&F except Korea (which could still be nerfed) and Georgia (which has received a lot of buffs including the NFP mode), and most of the base game besides Sumeria. I suspect GS wouldn't have many updated civs because many are already asymmetric and gimmicky.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Yes, you're right. How could I forget that?!!
Maybe a Hope that the Scenarios will get some polish too (which would explain the Zombies)?

Maybe similar to how Poland's scenario already had Janissaries as a unit maybe Basil II in the Viking's Scenario might get Dromons and Tagmas instead of quadriremes and knights.

 

[Zegangani]

I mean, depending on how many civs in the base game and expacks are receiving updates, that could still amount to 2/3 of all the pre-NFP civs. Leaving out 6 of 42 civs still leaves a lot of wiggle room.

If we look at those civs in particular, I can't really say either way. Australia is OP and I wouldn't expect it to get updates, but many have wanted some Khmer retooling. I think many consider Macedon a little OP/snowballing/gimmicky so that probably wouldn't need changes, and Indonesia and Aztecs seem pretty solid. But I think I've seen a few mention they wanted changes to Persia.

I can't really say either way, but if that's what's on the SteamDB, it could very well be what we're looking at. I also would speculate that the civs most likely to receive changes are everything in R&F except Korea (which could still be nerfed) and Georgia (which has received a lot of buffs including the NFP mode), and most of the base game besides Sumeria. I suspect GS wouldn't have many updated civs because many are already asymmetric and gimmicky.

That's true.
Khmer and Persia are the Civs that many Players anticipated a balance/polish for them. But Aztecs could also need some polish, though.
And For RnF, I really wish that the Science Power House Korea will get some nerf. I can't either play with it nor against it because it's too Science heavy.

There is still some Time till April, so they might just have added the things they are finished with to the SteamDB Depots.

 

[SMcM]

I'm sure the layout of the chart would change if they updated the information and civs from the NFP now that we have Babylon, Gaul and Vietnam.

Well sure, but my point is the logic behind that was never sound, Siam should never have been viewed as simply the Civ 5 variant of Khmer.

Saw that. I made a screenshot in case it gets nuked

https://imgur.com/a/acubiUU

I don't suppose Joao III is too surprising a choice- him, Joao II and Manuel cover the period of Portuguese history in which representations of Portugal seem most likely to focus on typically. We've had Joao II previously, I don't know enough to comment on whether Manuel or Joao III would be a better choice.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I don't suppose Joao III is too surprising a choice- him, Joao II and Manuel cover the period of Portuguese history in which representations of Portugal seem most likely to focus on typically. We've had Joao II previously, I don't know enough to comment on whether Manuel or Joao III would be a better choice.

I think the surprising choice is that they didn't go for a female leader, considering we've always had 3 in every other DLC/Expansion cycle. However I'm not complaining because Joao III seems like a good choice.