[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Twisted_HBG]

• The "Persona Packs" seem like a complete and utter waste of development time in my opinion. I'd be fine with it if they merely changed up the leader's agendas and abilities, but why did they need new leader models too?! Am I not correct in understanding that leader models are the most expensive part of each civilisation to produce? Why couldn't we have gotten 2 entirely new leaders for existing civs instead? My hopes for a "Classic Leaders" pack seem to be extinguished.

I assume it's not a whole new model, merely a new outfit. Kind of similar to French/English Eleanor. That way they don't have to make new animations or voice lines, which means it's a lot less work.

 

[RohirrimElf]

Just to clarify things. Would we be able to play the first of the 6 dlc’s on may 21th?
And what do you guys think will happen in terms of announcements leading up to it.
New civ this weak on wednesday/thursday. And another one next week (tuesday) with possibly a hour dev stream on wednesday.

 

[Kibikus]

Looking at some of the tweets and interviews by the devs, it seems like they're going to be working on game balance during this period, such as improving the diplomatic victory, etc., which I'm very happy about.

But once again, I'm not a fan of the stretching out of the whole process. There's already a ton of community feedback with regards to balance, bug fixes, gameplay improvements, etc., out there. Why plan to drip it out every 2 months? To me this means that they're not going to patch everything they can and are aware of as soon as possible, and are going to leave some issues for 2, 4, 6 months later, just because they need to fill these balance patches with something. Are we going to have to wait until February 2021 for some crucial fixes for issues which are already known today, like for example we had to wait 2 and a half years for them to fix units losing modifiers when you upgrade them.

 

[klail]

I really hope they add a zombie apocalypse as a mode. One where zombies are another NPC faction like barbarians and you have to fight them off.

They could probably re-use a lot of the art assets from the disease scenario as well.

 

[Vahnstad]

My very rough thoughts on how the leaders/Civs might take shape across the remaining 4 packs...

So, putting together the infamous post from AssemblingTyphoon together with the speculation we've been chewing over here (for months now!), we can reasonably expect: Babylon (outside chance of Assyria instead but let's stick with Babylon for now), Portugal, Byzantium. We should probably expect at least another Asian Civ, so I would say Vietnam is the most likely possibility, though there are other contenders.

This uses up 4 of the remaining 5 slots. The last slot is probably going to be one of: a Native American Civ, Italy/Venice, Austria, or another Asian or African Civ (listed in vague probability order).

It appears (though currently unconfirmed) that the packs are organised along regional lines. Additionally, we know the following things about the packs:

- Pack 3 is the only other one with two new Civs, so if our theory about the regional splitting is right, this is the only other reason to be represented by 2 new Civs
- Pack 4 is the only other one to add new City-States, and of the new Civ contenders, only Portugal needs to remove a City-State from the base game
- Pack 5 will contain 1 leader that requires R&F, so the betting is it's an alt-leader for an R&F Civ, as well as a new Civ and leader

So here's my speculation, presented in the expectation of being proven wrong over the coming weeks and months:

Pack 3 - BYZANTIUM and BABYLON (Middle East/Central Asia)
I'd argue that Byzantium could go in the Middle East/central Asia category as well as Europe, as could Babylon.

Pack 4 - PORTUGAL (Europe)
This seems to make the most sense given the City-State observation above (credit to @AntSou for spotting this).

Pack 5 - VIETNAM and KUBLAI KHAN (new leader for Mongolia and possibly China - Asia) (again credit to the several posters who thought of this before I did)
I love the idea of another dual-Civ leader, but I actually think he'll just for Mongolia as otherwise R&F wouldn't be required.

Pack 6 - A NATIVE AMERICAN CIV OF YOUR CHOICE (North America)
I am shamelessly abdicating responsibility for this because frankly I don't know enough about Native American history to suggest a contender, though I hear Iroquois and Sioux the most. I think a plains Civ could be a nice choice.

I am one of the biggest Italy stans on here and I would love to see them, but I'm not quite sure if they fit here. Three Mediterranean cultures in one "expansion" might be something of a stretch, and I can't see how the Frontier Pack is going to omit Portugal or Byzantium but I would dearly, dearly love to see Italy, Venice, Genoa, Milan, Florence... heck, something to represent the enormous impact that renaissance Italy has had on Western culture and history.

I think pack 1 include the entire America's. Babylon needs a city state being replaced as well. They mention new city states, not just one. Italy is free of city states. I think those city states might boost great person points, like Venice (great merchant), Genoa (great admiral), ...

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

New civ this weak on wednesday/thursday. And another one next week (tuesday) with possibly a hour dev stream on wednesday.

I'm expecting a Maya first look tomorrow.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think pack 1 include the entire America's. Babylon needs a city state being replaced as well. They mention new city states, not just one. Italy is free of city states. I think those city states might boost great person points, like Venice (great merchant), Genoa (great admiral), ...

I hope that's not it for the Americas. North America needs another tribe.
Bologna is a city-state right now, so Italy is represented by one. If we get more that dashes my hopes of a playable Italy, so I hope that isn't the case.

 

[CivLuvah]

Yay! Glad we were reading the tea leaves fairly well!

Anyone see a price? Looks like the content of a full expansion in 6 chunks. Hoping it will be about the price of Gathering Storm.

Hey! Someone rehired the dancing bananas!

Here is the infamous "leak" re. Expansion 3: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/all-quiet-on-the-civ-front.633171/page-32#post-15222899

Mentioned were Maya, Byzantium, Portugal, Assyria/Babylon, a Native American Civ, Ethiopia (plus presumably 2 more not named).

Byzantium, Babylon and Portugal are hugely likely.

My top picks for the other two would probably be Vietnam and (*crosses everything*) Italy but I can see that last slot going to another Asian or African Civ, or to Gran Colombia if they are adding another Native American Civ as well as a post-colonial one.

Of course an Apocalypse mode would release along with the Maya.
It doesn't matter, I'm just excited.

Let one be a Portugal and Italy Pack.
Or let the 2 leader one be Italy. Just give me Italy.

I really, really hope the two-leaders-one-civ will be Italy. Please be it!

I'd definitely have prefered a 'normal' expansion with a bunch of extra game mechanics, given to us all at once rather than over the course of a year where we buy in to something without knowing if it's worth it. But I'll give Firaxis the benefit of the doubt.

It sounds like these new 'game modes' can be added into the base game experience too, which means that we still kinda are getting new mechanics, it's just that they're all optional and not thematically coherent or taken advantage of by new civs.

I remain hopeful, but I'd have vastly preferred another expansion.

Honestly, I'd prefer this way of releasing DLC. Just imagine it being somewhat of an expansion but the components get gradually released over the course of a year. Besides:

From PC Gamer:

The New Frontier Pass will go for $40, and the DLC packs will also available for purchase individually if you'd rather pick and choose. It's a bit cheaper to buy the pass than it is to pick up each pack individually, though—DLCs with two leaders will go for $9 each while those with one leader will be $5, so $42 in total—and springing for the pass will also get you Teddy Roosevelt and Catherine De Medici Persona Packs, providing a new leader model and background, new gameplay bonuses, and updated agendas for the American and French leaders. The persona packs will released in July, along with the Ethiopia DLC

I think this price scheme is way better than *ahem*the other publishers' DLC scheme*ahem*. You know you're getting new content in bite-sized chunks for the price of one expansion.

maybe something completely bonkers like an alien invasion one?

I hear 'dem alien space bats in the distance.

 

[RohirrimElf]

I'm expecting a Maya first look tomorrow.

I really would like to hear his/her voice without dev interruption. Just 2 emoticons with 3-4 lines of speach would be so nice.

 

[AntSou]

A couple of things which I wish as modular rules:
(game modes are described as "additional content such as new units, buildings, or improvements and can be turned on or off during game setup to apply significant and dramatic changes to the rules of the game).

- A basic pandemic system implemented from the Black Dead scenario with some adjustments. Def plague doctors, hence 'play a bit looser with historical realism'. Adjustable intensity;
- Ocean Cities and perhaps basic terraforming shenanigans in the Future Era;
- Ideologies/Factions. Upon unlocking Ideology or building three plants you get to create a Government Type by mix and matching from several options, give it a symbol from a pool, and naming it whatever you want. Subsequent Civs may only choose from any of the given options. Bonus slot to founder of the Government Type. New slots + bonuses unlocked once Globalisation is researched.

Great thing about Ideology is that it can be implemented via existing mechanics. If you read through the Ideology(Civ 5) article on civfandom, you'll see you can implement something similar to ideologies from Civ 5 by just using what's already available in Civ 6.

 

[riddleofsteel]

Wow. I certainly didn't expect this to be the fulfillment of all that waiting and nebulous shuffling. Interesting that it's stretched out over the course of a year, considering how long the silence has been. Maybe due to the development of a puzzling xcom standalone.

 

[Xandinho]

I am curious to know what "numerous great people" mean. New category of great people or will they implement new ones to existing types? I would like to see great prophets being recruited throughout the game.

 

[riddleofsteel]

https://twitter.com/flactine1997/status/1259881736776740866

Intersting, we're getting two new concepts for Units : Lifetime and Renown.

Maybe that's from a scenario? For some reason, the spearman artwork looks different. I could be wrong.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I really, really hope the two-leaders-one-civ will be Italy. Please be it!

I think it's been confirmed that Rise and Fall is needed for that pack, so it is probably going to be a new Civ + leader for Rise and Fall Civ.
I've changed my mind to Vietnam + Kublai Khan for that one.
I still want Italy, but I doubt there will be official dual leaders if it comes up.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I am curious to know what "numerous great people" mean. New category of great people or will they implement new ones to existing types? I would like to see great prophets being recruited throughout the game.

Hoping it's more people. They may have finally listened to me after months of complaining about how weird the Great People system is when it comes to recruiting. One way to solve it is to double the existing pool (6 per era). If that's true, makes my Great People Mod less work!

 

[VermelhoRed]

I really, really hope the two-leaders-one-civ will be Italy. Please be it!

The two-leaders-one-civ pack requires Rise and Fall, which makes it extremely likely that it'll be one new civ with one leader, and one new leader for a R&F civ. Given the R&F roster, Mongolia really stands out as the one most likely to have a new leader.

 

[Vahnstad]

A couple of things which I wish as modular rules:
(game modes are described as "additional content such as new units, buildings, or improvements and can be turned on or off during game setup to apply significant and dramatic changes to the rules of the game).

- A basic pandemic system implemented from the Black Dead scenario with some adjustments. Def plague doctors, hence 'play a bit looser with historical realism'. Adjustable intensity;
- Ocean Cities and perhaps basic terraforming shenanigans in the Future Era;
- Ideologies/Factions. Upon unlocking Ideology or building three plants you get to create a Government Type by mix and matching from several options, give it a symbol from a pool, and naming it whatever you want. Subsequent Civs may only choose from any of the given options. Bonus slot to founder of the Government Type. New slots + bonuses unlocked once Globalisation is researched.

Great thing about Ideology is that it can be implemented via existing mechanics. If you read through the Ideology(Civ 5) article on civfandom, you'll see you can implement something similar to ideologies from Civ 5 by just using what's already available in Civ 6.

I would love to see that as well, and i'm hoping for a third exp pack.

 

[AntSou]

I am curious to know what "numerous great people" mean. New category of great people or will they implement new ones to existing types? I would like to see great prophets being recruited throughout the game.

My theory is that Great People will work like City-States, Luxuries and Wonders, that is, drawn from an existing pool so that every play-through is different.

 

[Arithmion]

Hoping it's more people. They may have finally listened to me after months of complaining about how weird the Great People system is when it comes to recruiting. One way to solve it is to double the existing pool (6 per era). If that's true, makes my Great People Mod less work!

If the new district is not specific to one civ, I would guess that it's another category, with the district project generating those great person points.

 

[criZp]

Looking at some of the tweets and interviews by the devs, it seems like they're going to be working on game balance during this period, such as improving the diplomatic victory, etc., which I'm very happy about.

But once again, I'm not a fan of the stretching out of the whole process. There's already a ton of community feedback with regards to balance, bug fixes, gameplay improvements, etc., out there. Why plan to drip it out every 2 months? To me this means that they're not going to patch everything they can and are aware of as soon as possible, and are going to leave some issues for 2, 4, 6 months later, just because they need to fill these balance patches with something. Are we going to have to wait until February 2021 for some crucial fixes for issues which are already known today, like for example we had to wait 2 and a half years for them to fix units losing modifiers when you upgrade them.

Since they haven't been releasing any updates in the last 8 months, I kind of expect that there will be a pretty decent patch coming before that second dlc in july. I agree that there is absolutely no reason to hold back balance fixes and QoL-improvements if those are ready, that would be moronic.