I would be pretty happy with any and all of these.
My most wanted are Ethiopia and the Maya, and alternate leaders for China, Egypt, Rome and Persia.
Future Update - Speculation Thread
- Thread starter bite
- Start date
- Status
I would be pretty happy with any and all of these.
My most wanted are Ethiopia and the Maya, and alternate leaders for China, Egypt, Rome and Persia.
Xefjord
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2015
- Messages
- 310
Me simple tiger.
I see Vietnam, I click like.
China is one of the civs that I think would benefit from an alternate leader the most too. Since China has broken up and gotten back together so many times over history, it wouldn't feel out of place at all for a TSL map to have 3 or 5 China's. Meanwhile it feels a little weird for there to be two 2 frances and one china lol
I see Vietnam, I click like.
China is one of the civs that I think would benefit from an alternate leader the most too. Since China has broken up and gotten back together so many times over history, it wouldn't feel out of place at all for a TSL map to have 3 or 5 China's. Meanwhile it feels a little weird for there to be two 2 frances and one china lol
Alexander's Hetaroi
Deity
Now that you mention it maybe Byzantium and an Alt Leader for Rome could work too.
Unless Vietnam would come with another SEA Civ, which would seems less likely, putting it together with an Alt. Leader for China, who many want, seems like the best option.
Okay, my proposal
Maya, Portugal, Ethiopia, Byzantium, Assyria, Vietnam, whatever native american civ, and either whatever incarnation of Italy or whatever incarnation of Moors/Maghreb.
Maya is a must have, Ethiopia is the only "obligatory" Subsaharan civ (no Zulu are not obligatory), Portugal is major missing European country with massive historical importance and very unique exploration vibe, Byzantium has just enough crazy fans like me who want it forever.
Assyria instead of Babylon, because
*It's still Mesopotamia
*Incredibly important, massive civilization
*Which is underrepresented in series, unlike Babylon
*Sumer has more similar vibe to Babylon that Assyria (Ziggurat, city list etc)
*It is the only clear "warmonger, agressive expansion" style civ on this list
*It's awesome
Vietnam because it's damn popular and would widen South East Asian roster.
Whatever Native Americans are necessary because I don't like tribes getting into the game as civs but American collective guilt needs catharsis.
Whatever incarnation of Italy OR whatever incarnation of Moors/Maghreb. I'd say just "Italy" but while I'm 100% on board with giving Italy "Greek treatment" of making them united civ composed of amalgamation of medieval/renaissance city states - it's still a little gimmick and I'm not sure if Firaxis would like it. And the capital overlap with Rome would either require some weird capital or gimmicky solutions such us "if Rome in game then make Florence capital of Italy" or whatever. And Moors are my second choice because I am crazy medieval_islamic_phile, al-Andalus was amazing, and introducing medieval civilisations of Islamic Spain and Maghreb would be the second best thing this year after a certain vaccine.
As for alternate leaders - alternate Chinese leader is the most probable one imo. This is the civ with the biggest asymmetry between historical "size" and amount of 1 leader per game next to India AND Qi Shi Huangdi is not new to the series so that'd be an opportunity to introduce some fresh face AND it has (obviously) massive Chinese players market. Not to mention a metric ton of great leaders to choose from.
Maya, Portugal, Ethiopia, Byzantium, Assyria, Vietnam, whatever native american civ, and either whatever incarnation of Italy or whatever incarnation of Moors/Maghreb.
Maya is a must have, Ethiopia is the only "obligatory" Subsaharan civ (no Zulu are not obligatory), Portugal is major missing European country with massive historical importance and very unique exploration vibe, Byzantium has just enough crazy fans like me who want it forever.
Assyria instead of Babylon, because
*It's still Mesopotamia
*Incredibly important, massive civilization
*Which is underrepresented in series, unlike Babylon
*Sumer has more similar vibe to Babylon that Assyria (Ziggurat, city list etc)
*It is the only clear "warmonger, agressive expansion" style civ on this list
*It's awesome
Vietnam because it's damn popular and would widen South East Asian roster.
Whatever Native Americans are necessary because I don't like tribes getting into the game as civs but American collective guilt needs catharsis.
Whatever incarnation of Italy OR whatever incarnation of Moors/Maghreb. I'd say just "Italy" but while I'm 100% on board with giving Italy "Greek treatment" of making them united civ composed of amalgamation of medieval/renaissance city states - it's still a little gimmick and I'm not sure if Firaxis would like it. And the capital overlap with Rome would either require some weird capital or gimmicky solutions such us "if Rome in game then make Florence capital of Italy" or whatever. And Moors are my second choice because I am crazy medieval_islamic_phile, al-Andalus was amazing, and introducing medieval civilisations of Islamic Spain and Maghreb would be the second best thing this year after a certain vaccine.
As for alternate leaders - alternate Chinese leader is the most probable one imo. This is the civ with the biggest asymmetry between historical "size" and amount of 1 leader per game next to India AND Qi Shi Huangdi is not new to the series so that'd be an opportunity to introduce some fresh face AND it has (obviously) massive Chinese players market. Not to mention a metric ton of great leaders to choose from.
Eh, could, but I'd rather keep muh' amazing chants, just like they had them in the previous two games.
Plus, an independent Byzantium would give me hopes of not seeing Justinian/Theodora again, with them being replaced by a later leader. Say... a Komnenos
Moderator Action: Deleted three posts that were off topic and inappropriate. Please stay on topic.
Alexander's Hetaroi
Deity
I meant possibly an independent Byzantium with another leader for Rome would be possible.Eh, could, but I'd rather keep muh' amazing chants, just like they had them in the previous two games.
Plus, an independent Byzantium would give me hopes of not seeing Justinian/Theodora again, with them being replaced by a later leader. Say... a Komnenos
Then again I wouldn't mind if Justinian/Theodora lead both Rome and Byzantium with their capital being Constantinople and shared by both Civs.
Eleanor already changed the way al leaders worked so why not change it up even more by giving us a leader that could lead a new Civ and old one?
Oh, my bad here XD
But as I said, I'd rather not have Justinian/Theodora myself. The pair's getting a bit tired after three games in a row
I'd rather have a civ game with the budget focused on a wider variety of civs with unique design and artistic flavors/units/techs(?)/etc. than the budget focused on an elaborate high production leader screen complete with voice acting and orchestral music (which are impressive nonetheless). Why battle between having Assyria and Babylon who are each historical entities in their own right, all the while usually overlooking Benin and al-Andalus, when there's no inherent reason to settle? Is there some value in limiting the scope that I'm missing? I'm not talking about an EU4 style 1:1 representation of every polity, but the fact of the matter is that distinct civilizations like Harappa, the Minoans, Armenia, the Olmecs...have never been included in one game of the 'Civilization' franchise.
Askia Muhammad
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2019
- Messages
- 128
insinuating Ethiopia is the only relevant subsaharan civilization is quite Eurocentric. There are plenty of other choices that also were more impactful in history.
Backero
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
- Messages
- 30
Recent leader are very unlikely as there is high chances to be controversial. Recent history events may still not be unilaterally seen. For such representative game right now it would be very bad move to include Mao, Stalin, Trump, even Churchill. For example Lech Walesa is controversial even in Poland and (besides being a meme) is treaten as traitor after some later proofs (this may be even part of the current propaganda, but still not a good shot as a new leader for Civ). Joseph Pilsudzki would be much better, but I'm not sure how about his popularity in foreigns is.
luigilime
Prince
a possibility could be that there are going to be 4 small dlcs, one per continent: Asia, Europe, Africa, and the Americas.
in Asia i would put Vietnam and Babylon, even though i would have liked to see Siam aswell,
in Europe i would put Portugal and Italy, also Byzantium, it depends on how big these dlcs are going to be, since i'd thought that italy should have two leaders.
in Africa i would put Morocco and Ethiopia,
in the Americas i would put Maya and a Native north american tribe, i personally liked the iroquois, but other tribes are available.
I really don't know how big firaxis want these dlcs to be, because there are still a lot of civs left out, i hope we'll have clarity soon
in Asia i would put Vietnam and Babylon, even though i would have liked to see Siam aswell,
in Europe i would put Portugal and Italy, also Byzantium, it depends on how big these dlcs are going to be, since i'd thought that italy should have two leaders.
in Africa i would put Morocco and Ethiopia,
in the Americas i would put Maya and a Native north american tribe, i personally liked the iroquois, but other tribes are available.
I really don't know how big firaxis want these dlcs to be, because there are still a lot of civs left out, i hope we'll have clarity soon
Isengardtom
Warlord
if anything I would love to see both Assyria and Babylon
I wouldn’t mind if The devs adds several more leader packs than the usual set.
Civ 6 allows for enough diversity with the mechanics to allow some unique play styles.
I wouldn’t mind if The devs adds several more leader packs than the usual set.
Civ 6 allows for enough diversity with the mechanics to allow some unique play styles.
AvianBritish
King
With Sennacherib as the leader of Assyria, you could give him an ability that represents Babylon (and it can be in his city list) as during his reign, Assyria and Babylon were essentually married under one empire from what I've read. (Although do correct me if I am wrong)
I would also love to have an ancient 2 tile aquaduct or something similar for his infustructure to represent the one that fed his "Hanging Gardens" of Nineveh.
To my mind the glaring gaps are now more temporal than geographical:
The ancient era is extremely underrepresented with only Gilgamesh and Dido. An alternate Egyptian leader and Assyria or Babylon would fill out this period nicely.
Then we have another gap between Trajan (2nd century AD) and Seondeok (7th century), which would happily accommodate a Byzantine or Sassanid leader, and of course the classical Maya and Aksumite Ethiopia.
The ancient era is extremely underrepresented with only Gilgamesh and Dido. An alternate Egyptian leader and Assyria or Babylon would fill out this period nicely.
Then we have another gap between Trajan (2nd century AD) and Seondeok (7th century), which would happily accommodate a Byzantine or Sassanid leader, and of course the classical Maya and Aksumite Ethiopia.
I meant "obligatory" as in "expected to come back every game" as for me Ethiopia is the only one which should always return - due to the very diversity of Subsaharan civilizations, meaning there are a lot of Subsaharan civs to explore and rorate their roster between games.
dagriggstar
King
I don't necessarily think they should be dropped altogether, but I do think the graphical representation of each civ in diplomacy should be a diplomat as was the case in civ 2. With a diplomat you can do things like change the leader across each era, or having an actual choice of leaders for each civilization.
At minimum, if we must have leader and civ abilities they should be differentiated somehow. To demonstrate my point, below are a list of leader and civ bonuses, can anyone without looking pick out which abilities are leader bonuses and which are civ bonuses ?
Domestic trade routes gain +1 food per mountain tile in the origin city
Founded or conquered cities start with a trading post and a road to the capital if within trading route distance
Qhapaq Nan improvement
Redcoat
Without even going to suggestions/improvements forum
Negotiating your borders with other powers (I would guess going into a map mode where each tiles desirability to each civ is displayed, then having a border placed)
Any science/culture tree alternatives
Any alternative system to policies/governments as they currently are
Any change to the wonder system (For example, I would prefer civs accumulate culture over time and spend culture points on creating wonders)
Resources that spread across the world as the world ages (For example, the spread of bananas or horses)
The point of civ 7 is going to be to significantly change civ from civ 6. Basically, any change that would require AI reprogramming to understand. I think there is a mod where you can sort of capture (for example) sheep and move it back to your territory to work, but the AI can't use the ability at all, so it's (to me) kind of pointless.
- Status
Similar threads
