DLC packs post Tides of Power

[stealth_nsk]

What are you guesses about next DLC packs?

The main hint here is that so far Civ7 tries to keep equal number of civilizations per age, i.e. Founder/Settler edition finished with exactly 13 civilizations per age. That way we could expect two more DLC packs before next expansion (or next wave of DLC packs) for 17 civs per age in the end. Which means we have 3 antiquity, 2 exploration and 3 modern civs in those packs.

We could be quite sure that next DLC pack is themed around Far East, with ancient era Japan, exploration era Japan and modern age Korea leaked in game files. This leaves 2 options:

1. The 4th civilization is exploration age Korea, so this pack fills Japan and Korea paths, like China or India. The problem with this is that that would be 2 exploration age civilizations (after 2 in Tides of Power), so there will be temporary significant imbalance (17 civs in exploration vs. 15 in other eras) and next DLC pack will have to contain 2 antiquity and 2 modern civs, without any exploration ones.

2. There will be some antiquity or modern era Far East civilization, instead of exploration Korea. But I'm a bit struggle to find one. Modern Far East is pretty much covered, unless you go far from Korea and Japan (to SE or Mongolia). And ancient has pretty limited choice of well-known names. Chukcha civilization maybe? Hard to tell.

To me, first option looks more probable. In any case, it looks like after initial Founder/Settler content was finished, new packs are very thematic, so we could see some interested themes.

So, what the next pack (after Far East) theme could be? I doubt it will be another focused on region, so probably some generic theme? If the goths will finally arrive, what theme could they share with 2 modern civilizations?

 

[UWHabs]

There's still a lot of the map to fill in. We need antiquity and modern South America for sure to balance out the Inca, and Africa always can use more options to fill in. And yeah, the Goths (or another more northern antiquity Europe) could be used so Rome/Greece aren't feeding into half the game directly anymore.

Otherwise, the pack could always be like a "Right to Rule" pack where there's really no real connection between the civs and leaders.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Likewise, while there could be a heavy tendency towards Japan/Korea, that doesn't mean all the civs would be from there. We've also seen a trend for creating asssociations for the orphaned Antiquity wonders.

 

[stealth_nsk]

There's still a lot of the map to fill in. We need antiquity and modern South America for sure to balance out the Inca, and Africa always can use more options to fill in. And yeah, the Goths (or another more northern antiquity Europe) could be used so Rome/Greece aren't feeding into half the game directly anymore.

Otherwise, the pack could always be like a "Right to Rule" pack where there's really no real connection between the civs and leaders.

Goths are perfect antiquity civ. They presumably came from Scandinavia, when lived in Eastern Europe, when conquered Spain and Italy. They cover huge chunk of the map by their existence, not to mention their wonder already there. And yes, the pack after "Far East" could easily be unthemed.

Likewise, while there could be a heavy tendency towards Japan/Korea, that doesn't mean all the civs would be from there. We've also seen a trend for creating asssociations for the orphaned Antiquity wonders.

Yes, it's a possibility that the next pack will not have a general theme, but, honestly, with 2 Japan and 1 Korean civs leaked, it's hard to believe.

 

[TeacherTee]

An "Oasisamerica" pack would be high on my wishlist, focusing on cultures of the Southwest United States and northern Mexico. Puebloan-->Apache-->Navajo makes sense as a progression, with the Aztec rounding them out. Montezuma I/II or Netzahualcoyotl as the leader option.

 

[Lebo44]

My bet: religion themed DLC.

1. Religion, in its current form is just a placeholder. It requires overhaul and introducing features like holy wars would bring some variety to the Exploration Age.
2. Few notable civs missing are strongly tied to religious themes. For example, Byzantium, the Aztecs, Teutons/Joannites, maybe Kievan Rus (Exploration era), maybe Babylon (Antiquity) as well. Not sure if there is any modern civ that could fit the theme though (maybe Poland?)

 

[stealth_nsk]

My bet: religion themed DLC.

1. Religion, in its current form is just a placeholder. It requires overhaul and introducing features like holy wars would bring some variety to the Exploration Age.
2. Few notable civs missing are strongly tied to religious themes. For example, Byzantium, the Aztecs (Exploration era), maybe Babylon (Antiquity) as well. Not sure if there is any modern civ that could fit the theme though.

It's great idea, actually. Pairing religion-themed DLC pack with religion overhaul patch in the same way as Tides of Power are paired with naval improvements is surely a possibility, especially if there will be something more about pantheons and religion legacy in modern. There could be even nodern civ, which interacts with religion legacy in additional ways (although that would require some adjustments for advanced starts).

The problem is that in any case religion DLC pack would need to focus on exploration civs, which doesn't seem to fit next two.

 

[Leucarum]

I think they need to shake up the DLC format to be honest. I had serious buyers remorse over the founders edition as the XPACs felt like terrible value for money. It does sound as if that was a relatively common critique too on these forums.

Crossroads reviewed very poorly, I can't see reviews for R2R on steam and I suspect Tides did well in no small part because it was free. It wouln't surprise me if Firaxis know they have to shake up their XPAC format

So getting to the point I wouldn't be surprised if what has gone before might not be the best guide for what comes next...

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think they need to shake up the DLC format to be honest. I had serious buyers remorse over the founders edition as the XPACs felt like terrible value for money. It does sound as if that was a relatively common critique too on these forums.

It's critique of DLC model in general, it never stopped people from buying them or companies from making them.

Crossroads reviewed very poorly, I can't see reviews for R2R on steam and I suspect Tides did well in no small part because it was free. It wouln't surprise me if Firaxis know they have to shake up their XPAC format

Reviews of individual DLCs are always weird - for example, Portugal DLC for Civ6 has 46% positive reviews, while base game seats at 84%. I don't think Civ7 DLC reviews show any specific dislike.

So getting to the point I wouldn't be surprised if what has gone before might not be the best guide for what comes next...

I wouldn't expect this format to change, I actually think 4 civilization packs are natural for game with multiple ages and were done with 4th age expansion in mind.

What I would expect is some "season pass" to include next 2 DLC packs (and, probably, Tides of Power for those who was unable to get them for free), so people don't have to buy DLC packs individually.

 

[Xandinho]

I wish they'd finally take a break from Asia and add more civs from underrepresented continents, such as Africa, South America, North America, and antiquity Europe. But with the Japan and Korea leaks, it seems we’ll continue seeing more Asian civilizations.

In any case, as someone who believes that if a civ can have at least one representative in each era, it definitely should, it will be nice for Japan and Korea to have their full historical paths. That will greatly improve immersion when playing with them. Since they will likely remain focused on Asia, it would be interesting if they released a sensible predecessor for Mongolia, such as the Xiongnu. Some Manchurian empire would also be very welcome, though that’s more of a personal wish.

However, if they finally remember that other continents besides Asia exist, I hope they release a proper predecessor for the Inca, because at this point it’s bizarre that their predecessors are still the Maya and the Mississippians. And if they decide to give some attention to Africa, a suitable predecessor for Songhai, such as Ghana, is an urgent addition, as well as a successor for Aksum.

 

[Leucarum]

It's critique of DLC model in general, it never stopped people from buying them or companies from making them.

They are still going to be made (unless Civ7 dies, and I don't think we are remotely close to that). I just don't know if we should expect them to follow the 4 Civs, 2 leaders and some wonders format... Or at least it's within the realm of possibility that they'll shift away from it once the "locked in" expansions are out.

It wouldn't be the first time Firaxis changed their DLC approach - just look at Civ6 over its lifecycle. It probably all depends on how the current XPACs sell.

I will say there's an ounce of hopium in there, as I just can't see myself buying any more Civ7 DLC if they stick with this model.

 

[Evolena]

What I would expect is some "season pass" to include next 2 DLC packs (and, probably, Tides of Power for those who was unable to get them for free), so people don't have to buy DLC packs individually.

I don't know, Collections are already 6/7-DLCs packs...

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

What I would expect is some "season pass" to include next 2 DLC packs (and, probably, Tides of Power for those who was unable to get them for free), so people don't have to buy DLC packs individually.

Yeah, I expect them to get back to the season pass format at some point, maybe late next year. The stuff that they're talking about doing the Feature Workshop closed beta testing on will likely be free content and will likely be rolled out over several patches. They will want to sell some DLCs along with those patches. You know, to create some kind of cash flow for the effort expended. It makes sense for those to be a season pass.

 

[stealth_nsk]

They are still going to be made (unless Civ7 dies, and I don't think we are remotely close to that). I just don't know if we should expect them to follow the 4 Civs, 2 leaders and some wonders format... Or at least it's within the realm of possibility that they'll shift away from it once the "locked in" expansions are out.

Those parts are already purchasable individually. What other changes would you expect?

I don't know, Collections are already 6/7-DLCs packs...

Yes, but they are still to small for many people. I probably extrapolate my personal preferences to large audience, but I really like to pay for a game once (even if the payment is big) or at least in really big chunks. Current DLC packs are too granular to me, buying something big and forgetting about payments for the next year is more fitting.

 

[UWHabs]

I wish they'd finally take a break from Asia and add more civs from underrepresented continents, such as Africa, South America, North America, and antiquity Europe. But with the Japan and Korea leaks, it seems we’ll continue seeing more Asian civilizations.

In any case, as someone who believes that if a civ can have at least one representative in each era, it definitely should, it will be nice for Japan and Korea to have their full historical paths. That will greatly improve immersion when playing with them. Since they will likely remain focused on Asia, it would be interesting if they released a sensible predecessor for Mongolia, such as the Xiongnu. Some Manchurian empire would also be very welcome, though that’s more of a personal wish.

However, if they finally remember that other continents besides Asia exist, I hope they release a proper predecessor for the Inca, because at this point it’s bizarre that their predecessors are still the Maya and the Mississippians. And if they decide to give some attention to Africa, a suitable predecessor for Songhai, such as Ghana, is an urgent addition, as well as a successor for Aksum.

Launch was light in Asian civs considering a lot of the vast history, but they have filled an awful lot of that through the DLC so far, yeah. I think once you add in those potential Japan/Korean civs, Asia overall will be a in a pretty decent place, that yes, a renewed focus on Africa and the Americas definitely makes a lot of sense going forward.

 

[Leucarum]

What other changes would you expect?

I wouldn't be surprised if they move over to a larger XPAC model with more new mechanics/buildings/units etc... Though that would take time so it's likely there'a another small XPAC on the way at least even if they do shift. I suspect the XPACs need more meat to sell.

This is predicated on the opinion that tides was only well recieved because it was free, and that the overall DLC model is likely underperforming. But rhat's an assumption on my part which could be wrong.

 

[kent77]

My bet: religion themed DLC.

1. Religion, in its current form is just a placeholder. It requires overhaul and introducing features like holy wars would bring some variety to the Exploration Age.
2. Few notable civs missing are strongly tied to religious themes. For example, Byzantium, the Aztecs, Teutons/Joannites, maybe Kievan Rus (Exploration era), maybe Babylon (Antiquity) as well. Not sure if there is any modern civ that could fit the theme though (maybe Poland?)

Yes, religion badly needs a rework, though I wonder if a full rework to include an active role for religion in the Modern Age would require a full expansion. Anyhow, seems like there are quite a few contemporary nations that are explicit theocracies or where religion has some constitutional role, e.g., Israel, Iran, Vatican City, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bhutan, modern Egypt, and Mauritania. (That's apart from countries with an official national church [e.g., UK] or taxpayer-funded religious institutions [e.g., Germany].) Getting some of those countries into the game could set us up well for a proper religion-themed expansion.

 

[uppi]

Wait, which leaks about Japan and Korea? Have I missed something?

For Antiquity civs, they often reused unassociated wonders already in the game. And they probably should also be already in the base game, not added in a DLC (which a purchaser of a new DLC might not have) For those we still have:
Colossus - Greece is already in, unlikely that we get a Rhodes civ
Hanging Gardens - Could be Babylon (arguable), but with Assyria in, probably not anytime soon.
Mausoleum of Theodoric - Goths
Nalanda - Could work for an alternate antiquity India (Gupta?) but probably unlikely
Petra - Nabateans could work
Pyramid of the Sun - Could work for a Mexican civ, but probably not a priority
Terracotta Army - Not quite Han, but close enough

It would be quite the surprise to me, if they included Mausoleum of Theodoric without planning to include Goths at some near point in the future.

 

[Xandinho]

I think the next releases should focus on continents so we can finally achieve a reasonable balance:

A DLC focused on the Far East Asia, which seems likely to happen.
A DLC focused on the Americas (two South American civs, one Mesoamerican, and one North American).
A DLC focused on Africa, with four civs that would fix the bizarre historical transitions that exist there.
A DLC focused on Europe, especially to correct some of the nonsensical transitions on that continent as well (I feel like this game is screaming for an HRE).

By doing this, I think the game would be in great shape to receive its first expansion.

Besides that, I hope they release some sort of adjustment pack for the Modern Age. I don’t really expect a major overhaul in a DLC, but at least something provisional that makes the victory conditions less linear. For me, the game works well up until the Exploration Age, but once it reaches the Modern Age, it falls apart.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Wait, which leaks about Japan and Korea? Have I missed something?

There were references in the game code to Joseon, Heian, and Sengoku civs. And lets not forget the Maori and Whina Cooper are still outstanding.