[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Zaarin]

Is there any reason to believe that NFP will be the end all for new civs? If it comes down to a choice Portugal and a NA civ, could the dropped civ be a seperate DLC or (seems unlikely) expansion?

Considering how poorly designed most NFP content has been compared to earlier content, I'd say it very much looks like the devs are scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point. I think it's safe to assume that NFP will be the end of Civ6's development cycle save a few follow-up patches.

 

[sweetbrown89]

For simplicity of reference, I will repost the chart I made -- since this *is* the "prediction" thread and I love pattern analysis. Open it in full screen to magnify it.

Bold are Civs with split Leaders
Italics are City-States
Green are branched Civs
Red are Civ niches replaced by new Civs
Blue are returning Civs
Gray are the Civs still missing clear niche representation (Native North Americans)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Gray are the Civs still missing clear niche representation (Native North Americans)

Part of me wonders if the Mapuche are designated to be the other Native civ, but instead of making it North America they chose one in South America. Not that I like it as I think both continents should end with more civs than Civ 5.
North America is currently the only continent that has the same number of civs from the previous game.

 

[Zaarin]

Part of me wonders if the Mapuche are designated to be the other Native civ, but instead of making it North America they chose one in South America. Not that I like it as I think both continents should end with more civs than Civ 5.
North America is currently the only continent that has the same number of civs from the previous game.

I've thought of that as well, but I'd find that very disappointing. It's great that South America can get new indigenous civs, but it's very disappointing to have fewer indigenous North American civs than Civ5 had.

 

[Birch617]

Yeah Same i thinks its wonderfull that there is a focus on South America, but i think they need to add more civs in other places as well.
This is list i saw of possible Civs from different parts of North America that are different among themselves (still i do think that we could have more from the grouping not just one Great Plains, but this i think could do to fill different areas)

• Northeast - Haudenosaunee
  
  
• Southeast - Cherokee
  
  
• Great Plains - Sioux
  
  
• Southwest - Navajo
  
  
• Great Basin - Shoshone
  
  
• California - Tongva
  
  
• Northwestern Plateau - Chinook
  
  
• Northwestern Coast - Haida
  
  
• Western Subarctic - Dene

• Arctic - Inuit
  

 

[sweetbrown89]

Part of me wonders if the Mapuche are designated to be the other Native civ, but instead of making it North America they chose one in South America. Not that I like it as I think both continents should end with more civs than Civ 5.
North America is currently the only continent that has the same number of civs from the previous game.

So far, they seem to be based on locale, so at the biggest stretch, maaaaaaaaaybe Gran Colombia, but that's obviously a biiiig stretch

Mapuche & Georgia are kinda just...out in the middle of nowhere

 

[Lord Lakely]

I've thought of that as well, but I'd find that very disappointing. It's great that South America can get new indigenous civs, but it's very disappointing to have fewer indigenous North American civs than Civ5 had.

Well, blame all the politicing and arse-kissing that caused us to get amazing and fascinating Civilizations such as Canada and Australia.

Ironically, I actually like playing both Canada and Australia - but i'd rather not have them over an actually historical/historically relevant culture, such as hmm... the Assyrians, the Hittites, the Portugese, the Tlingit, the Haudenosaunee, the Tuscans, the Berbers, the Nepalese, the Filipino, the Flemish, the Cumans, the Tupi, the Estonians, The Isle of Wight, etc.

 

[8housesofelixir]

Considering how poorly designed most NFP content has been compared to earlier content, I'd say it very much looks like the devs are scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point.

"Scraping the bottom of the barrel" is a really good recapitulation of what we have at this point - the Unit-zooming Gran Colombians, the Exponential-faith-income Ethiopians, the Free-cavalry-printing Byzantines, as well as the Doesn't-sound-Babylonian-at-all Babylonians. Moreover, in next week, we are going to have the Forest-and-swamp-living Vietnamese, Western hairstyle Kublai Khan, and the Let-everyone-become-Bull-Moose-Teddy District.

I agree that these civs are fun to play (not to say the gamemodes, super fun for me) and I don't regret buying NFP at all, but some of the designs are really missing out good opportunities here. Guess it is really a bunch of small DLCs after all.

 

[sweetbrown89]

Well, blame all the politicing and arse-kissing that caused us to get amazing and fascinating Civilizations such as Canada and Australia.

Ironically, I actually like playing both Canada and Australia - but i'd rather not have them over an actually historical/historically relevant culture, such as hmm... the Assyrians, the Hittites, the Portugese, the Tlingit, the Haudenosaunee, the Tuscans, the Berbers, the Nepalese, the Filipino, the Flemish, the Cumans, the Tupi, the Estonians, The Isle of Wight, etc.

As much as I agree, well...Canada & Australia just seem rather important to the western market, especially with the huge TSL gap of Australia. Canada just seems an obvious one were anyone to look at NA. Just...saying.

Here's hoping they continue adding more nuanced Civs that are less Anglospheric in Civ VII...

 

[Zaarin]

Canada & Australia just seem rather important to the western market

That's kind of what he was saying, though: they were added for their market appeal, not for their historical significance. I hope Civ7 involves less market pandering, but I'm not optimistic on that front.

 

[sweetbrown89]

That's kind of what he was saying, though: they were added for their market appeal, not for their historical significance. I hope Civ7 involves less market pandering, but I'm not optimistic on that front.

Well, I mean...they're still historically significant in more contemporary eras, which isn't a bad place to have some more Civs.

The only really weird thing about a western company and a western market making an expansion called "New Frontier" is not having an explicitly Wild West North American civilization. Even were it to be...a caricature.

 

[Guandao]

odd choice considering afaik she was never a ruler.

I guess this at least would mean that we don’t have to have the Haudenosaunee as our last civ. Hopefully we’ll get the Tlingit, Navajo or Hawaii

(Edit: never mind, we’ll probsbly still get the Haudenosaunee led by Jigonhsasee since that would make 3, although Hawaii led by Liliuokalani would be possible and cool)

I favor Ka'ahumanu for a female Hawaiian leader over Liliuokalani in my opinion.

 

[Zaarin]

Well, I mean...they're still historically significant in more contemporary eras, which isn't a bad place to have some more Civs.

Highly debatable.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Ironically, I actually like playing both Canada and Australia - but i'd rather not have them over an actually historical/historically relevant culture, such as hmm... the Assyrians, the Hittites, the Portugese, the Tlingit, the Haudenosaunee, the Tuscans, the Berbers, the Nepalese, the Filipino, the Flemish, the Cumans, the Tupi, the Estonians, The Isle of Wight, etc.

Well some of them are a stretch.

As much as I agree, well...Canada & Australia just seem rather important to the western market, especially with the huge TSL gap of Australia. Canada just seems an obvious one were anyone to look at NA. Just...saying.

Here's hoping they continue adding more nuanced Civs that are less Anglospheric in Civ VII...

I agree with this. However at the same time the Cree could have been the spiritual representative in both geographical location and trading/alliance/peaceful gameplay of both Modern and Colonial Canada.

The only really weird thing about a western company and a western market making an expansion called "New Frontier" is not having an explicitly Wild West North American civilization. Even were it to be...a caricature.

That being said we are also missing the nation that started the Age of Exploration.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

"Scraping the bottom of the barrel" is a really good recapitulation of what we have at this point - the Unit-zooming Gran Colombians, the Exponential-faith-income Ethiopians, the Free-cavalry-printing Byzantines, as well as the Doesn't-sound-Babylonian-at-all Babylonians. Moreover, in next week, we are going to have the Forest-and-swamp-living Vietnamese, Western hairstyle Kublai Khan, and the Let-everyone-become-Bull-Moose-Teddy District.

I agree that these civs are fun to play (not to say the gamemodes, super fun for me) and I don't regret buying NFP at all, but some of the designs are really missing out good opportunities here. Guess it is really a bunch of small DLCs after all.

i wouldn’t be opposed to more content but it’s clear that the design woes of NFP are due to its choice not to rely on previous expansions.

If they did a proper 3rd expansion, coming altogether or separated, i’m sure they could get good content for one more year.

Well, I mean...they're still historically significant in more contemporary eras, which isn't a bad place to have some more Civs.

The only really weird thing about a western company and a western market making an expansion called "New Frontier" is not having an explicitly Wild West North American civilization. Even were it to be...a caricature.

i mean, Australia isn’t even the most politically relavent nation in the south pacific and canada isn’t particularly politically powerful in a global scale either.

 

[Zaarin]

Well some of them are a stretch.

I don't know. As low a priority as Flanders, Estonia, or the Isle of Wight are, they'd still be more exciting than Canada, Australia, South Africa, or other postcolonial nation-states. The Principality of Lichtenstein or the Most Serene Republic of San Marino would be more exciting. Another hundred alternate leaders for Greece would be more exciting.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

i mean, Australia isn’t even the most politically relavent nation in the south pacific and canada isn’t particularly politically powerful in a global scale either.

Australia is considered the regional power in Oceania today though. Not sure what other country can beat it.
Unless you are including Indonesia.

I don't know. As low a priority as Flanders, Estonia, or the Isle of Wight are, they'd still be more exciting than Canada, Australia, South Africa, or other postcolonial nation-states. The Principality of Lichtenstein or the Most Serene Republic of San Marino would be more exciting. Another hundred alternate leaders for Greece would be more exciting.

You would choose Lichtenstein or San Marino over Argentina?

 

[Zaarin]

You would choose Lichtenstein or San Marino over Argentina?

In a heartbeat.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

In a heartbeat.

Well know you made Argentina cry, and not over Evita.

 

[Zaarin]

Well know you made Argentina cry, and not over Evita.

If it makes them feel any better, I'd find San Marino more exciting than any nation-state, even the US, so don't cry for me, The Cheatentina. I mean, Argentina.