DLC 04 anticipation thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Paradox doesn't seem to have much issue with it for multiplayer. Is the Civ multiplayer base really that naturally disparate?

As far as I'm aware, with paradox games (i.e. Eu4 with has twenty million small dlc), you use whatever DLC the host has (even if you don't have it).

For Civ, all players need to have the same DLC.

This might be a technical decision (i.e. eu4 being more lightweight*, the host's computer can do most of the calculating, while for civ each individual computer does the calculating) or a business decision.

edit: *Just to make clear that I mean lightweight in terms of computer power needs, not trying to start a flamewar over comparative strategic depth
 
Also true. In fact, I disliked the concept of multiple leaders at first, but have warmed up to it with time.
civs>leaders still tho :crazyeye:

I loved them so much in IV that I was astonished that V didn't carry on with them. Naturally I was very happy to see their return in VI :woohoo:

Longtime lurker, first time poster blah blah. Been playing since Civ I.

I'm eagerly awaiting Persia as a civ, and for what it's worth, the vernal equinox (March 21 or thereabouts) is the Persian new year.

Welcome as a poster Bactrian :)

I tend to agree that it reduces the chances of Cyrus. We also had Darius in the last iteration of the game, which tends to lower his chances.

And then there's Xerxes standing over there with his Big Personality. He may not have super high chances either, but it isn't nothing.

I suppose Cambyses II has a big personality as well.

I guess it's an open race.

Big personalities have swayed the day thus far in VI...
 
Considering that it will take additional weeks to sort out the Mac/Linux problems, it makes late March seem a lot less likely for DLC04 and associated patch.
 
Considering that it will take additional weeks to sort out the Mac/Linux problems, it makes late March seem a lot less likely for DLC04 and associated patch.

Roughly what percentage of Civ players are Mac users? I doubt they'll hold back if they think they do need to release another dlc soon to sooth some ruffled feathers, given most of us are on PCs.
 
Roughly what percentage of Civ players are Mac users? I doubt they'll hold back if they think they do need to release another dlc soon to sooth some ruffled feathers, given most of us are on PCs.
Yeah I doubt they'd delay on that accord. They essentially expect a series of patches and the games to be out of sync for a while - Aspy basically hasn't released a cross-platform patch because of that.
 
I tend to agree that it reduces the chances of Cyrus. We also had Darius in the last iteration of the game, which tends to lower his chances.

And then there's Xerxes standing over there with his Big Personality. He may not have super high chances either, but it isn't nothing.

I suppose Cambyses II has a big personality as well.

I guess it's an open race.

What's the betting table?
 
Why does everybody assume it's an Achaemenid Emperor?

Sassanid Persia/Eranshahr rivaled The Roman Empire, They aren't far off from Achaemenids on Imperial status and you could have great leaders like Khosrow, Yazdgerd and Shapur I who outright defeated and captured a Roman Emperor.



There're so many opportunities with Persia/Iran.
 
Why does everybody assume it's an Achaemenid Emperor?

Sassanid Persia/Eranshahr rivaled The Roman Empire, They aren't far off from Achaemenids on Imperial status and you could have great leaders like Khosrow, Yazdgerd and Shapur I who outright defeated and captured a Roman Emperor.



There're so many opportunities with Persia/Iran.
Because if it comes together with a Macedonian civ, achaemenid Persia would be fitting. Also if they want to make a Persian War scenario or something like that. But maybe it's an Alexander scenario and we get Darius III in it, who would probably not lead the base civ. I'd welcome a Sasanid Emperor, especially Shapur I. It's change from the leaders/civ we had so far and represents one of the most interesting empires of antiquity. But here's the thing, I think we could also do with a medieval or renaissance focused civ, and Persia could fill that role as well. Safavid Persia would be a welcome first that leads to someone else than European civs getting a boost in renaissance. They could go for religion, culture or military, while older incarnations of Persia could go for practically everything.
 
Because if it comes together with a Macedonian civ, achaemenid Persia would be fitting. Also if they want to make a Persian War scenario or something like that. But maybe it's an Alexander scenario and we get Darius III in it, who would probably not lead the base civ. I'd welcome a Sasanid Emperor, especially Shapur I. It's change from the leaders/civ we had so far and represents one of the most interesting empires of antiquity. But here's the thing, I think we could also do with a medieval or renaissance focused civ, and Persia could fill that role as well. Safavid Persia would be a welcome first that leads to someone else than European civs getting a boost in renaissance. They could go for religion, culture or military, while older incarnations of Persia could go for practically everything.

I think it's completely possible for them to do an Alexander scenario with Darius III and Mind you since there was a civil war in the empire back then if my memory is not failing me, we can have several Persian Factions instead of one massive empire and they all could use assets from Persian base CIV that can be Sassanid Empire/Eranshar.
 
Even though it's unlikely, I hope that we're not actually going to get Macedonia and Persia, and that it turns out all this discussion was for nothing.

Yes, I'm that kind of person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xur
I get the feeling that it's the first major expansion that is going to add more civs in Asia, Africa and South America as well as alternative leaders. So Macedonia and Persia as DLC 4 makes sense as a pack before then, probably with some kind of scenario.
 
I get the feeling that it's the first major expansion that is going to add more civs in Asia, Africa and South America as well as alternative leaders. So Macedonia and Persia as DLC 4 makes sense as a pack before then, probably with some kind of scenario.

I doubt it is an expansion so soon. Firaxis still has work to do on vanilla. Plus the introduction of more Civs/Leaders. If they launch an expansion it technically would fall under the 4 DLC promise through the pre-order setup... meaning the expansion would have to be free to some. I wouldn't expect an expansion for at least one more full year from the time of launch and that is a generous and early estimate. Wishful thinking though.
 
I would like to see a package of wonders. Would it be too much to ask for the Mausoleum, the Statue of Zeus and the Temple of Atermis in the DLC of Madedonia?
I'd like to see again the Circumnavigation of the globe, started by Magellan, (Fernão de Magalhães)
Now, with the new poles.
 
I suggested this first for Persia's civ ability, but it would also fit Alexander's Leader Ability:
Has no own ability, but (partially) gets the ability of every civ of which he holds the majority of cities of. Some abilities are easy to quantize and make stronger and weaker, some aren't. But I still like the idea that you can get new abilities from conquering your neighbors and integrating their abilities into your empire. Probably incredibly hard to balance though.

What do you guys think about likely abilities for Macedonia / Persia? With the as of yet unknown Persian leader, there is lots of room for speculation.

It's a fun idea, but as you say it would be a nightmare to balance. Maybe a less OP version of it would be to let them retain the bonuses from unique improvements and districts in cities they conquer rather than replacing them with the generic version immediately? It would encourage warmongering but also discourage razing cities at the same time.
 
I'd like to see again the Circumnavigation of the globe, started by Magellan, (Fernão de Magalhães)
Now, with the new poles.

Now that you can circumnavigate the globe in most maps, I'd like to see the bonus movement point returned to the first person to do that rather than given to you by building any wonder no matter what it is called.
 
It's a fun idea, but as you say it would be a nightmare to balance. Maybe a less OP version of it would be to let them retain the bonuses from unique improvements and districts in cities they conquer rather than replacing them with the generic version immediately? It would encourage warmongering but also discourage razing cities at the same time.
Making Macedonia or Persia an assimilationist "Kirby" civ would be difficult to balance. Like Kirby in Smash Bros, I agree that Macedonia or Persia should have weaker bonuses than the original civ such as retaining unique districts/buildings/improvements.
 
I doubt it is an expansion so soon. Firaxis still has work to do on vanilla. Plus the introduction of more Civs/Leaders. If they launch an expansion it technically would fall under the 4 DLC promise through the pre-order setup... meaning the expansion would have to be free to some. I wouldn't expect an expansion for at least one more full year from the time of launch and that is a generous and early estimate. Wishful thinking though.

He meant after the DLC.
 
I am sitting here wondering, if Fireaxis is reading this laughing at all our assumptions that its Persia/Alexander and watch it be something totally opposite
 
I am sitting here wondering, if Fireaxis is reading this laughing at all our assumptions that its Persia/Alexander and watch it be something totally opposite
what if it's Alexander/Persia :crazyeye:
In all seriousness though, I'd be surprised if it's not Persia and Macedonia, because they are, after all, in game files already
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom