Future Update - Speculation Thread

[Kimiimaro]

In a way it's a shame the Ottomans were in GS if they do go down the paired civs route as they would have been the best civ to put with Byzantium...

Give them Byzantines Herakleios (to give us break with Theodora and Justinian) and pair him with Khosrow II who would serve as a Sassanid alt-leader to Persia. A great combination

B) Boudicca is as close to the face of civ's celts as you can get.

Vercingetorix is quite widely known Celtic leader. He may not have been included in Civ before, but he is known as the war leader of the Gaul who fought Julius Caesar at Alesia. I could picture him as a fine leader of Gaul.

 

[Kimiimaro]

but I wouldn't object to seeing a Welsh civ under someone like Rhodri ap Merfyn, Llywelyn Fawr, or Gruffydd ap Llywelyn.

Now picture Sean Bean trying to read the names.

 

[Zaarin]

Khosrow II who would serve as a Sassanid alt-leader to Persia.

Shapur II would make a great culture-focused Sassanid shah.

Now picture Sean Bean trying to read the names.

"Hail to you, Gruff-Id Ape Lie-wee-lin..." You're right. Listening to the guy who says "Kin Shi Wong" try Welsh frightens me. I still haven't figured out what he's even trying to say with "Jayavarman." I'm perhaps being a little harsh. I have no idea what British education is like, but I'd hope an Englishman would know how to pronounce Llywelyn. I could very well be mistaken in my hopes.

 

[Haig]

My predictions for four DLCs:

Portugal+Ethiopia

Byzantine+Italy/Venice/italian city-states

Maya+Comanche/Sioux/nat.american civ

Assyria+Vietnam

Each adLc with a new or redesigned mechanic, new wonder and a new scenario.

Possible mechanics: random events, new disasters, ideologies and espionage (Beach omce said he would like to do more with them), resource monopolies and companies.

I would be totally fine with these as well.

 

[Patine]

Lately I've been taking the 'picking leaders who have a big personality' selection with a grain of salt (skeptic).
I mean we didn't get Louis XIV for France, or even Napoleon again.

I also think Henri IV (Bon Roi Henri) is highly overlooked as an interesting and unique French leader.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Shapur II would make a great culture-focused Sassanid shah.

Sassanids offer quite many good choices. I also wouldn't mind seeing Khosrow I, the greatest rival of ever-praised Justinian. And while I like Persia as a Zoroastrian Civ, I would not entirely condemn a certain Afsharid ruler - Nadir Shah. Especially if he'd be paired with Mughal civ

I still haven't figured out what he's even trying to say with "Jayavarman."

My guess is Taovaraman

 

[Zaarin]

Assyria+Vietnam

...Could you explain the logic of this pairing?

 

[Xefjord]

I don't really have much productive to add, but I just wanted to say that I appreciate all of you and the wonderful discussions I have been able to partake in during this time of Quarantine while waiting for the next potential DLC. It really cheers up my day and I have learned a lot

 

[Kimiimaro]

I also think Henri IV (Bon Roi Henri) is highly overlooked as an interesting and unique French leader.

When it comes to overlooked leaders, I'd welcome Napoleon's nephew, personally (though I would not mind Napoleon himself either). Napoleon III. Not exactly the most accomplished leader in terms of foreign matters (save for winning the Crimean War, grabbing part of Sardinia-Piedmont during Risorgimento and enlarging the size of the French colonial empire), but oh, was he successful in domestic projects, like in rebuilding Paris, modernising many other cities of France, promoting industrialisation, building railroads and creating great economic growth. Plus, I'd love to see his crazy moustache animated.

 

[Zaarin]

When it comes to overlooked leaders, I'd welcome Napoleon's nephew, personally (though I would not mind Napoleon himself either). Napoleon III. Not exactly the most accomplished leader in terms of foreign matters (save for winning the Crimean War, grabbing part of Sardinia-Piedmont during Risorgimento and enlarging the size of the French colonial empire), but oh, was he successful in domestic projects, like in rebuilding Paris, modernising many other cities of France, promoting industrialisation, building railroads and creating great economic growth. Plus, I'd love to see his crazy moustache animated.

Louis-Napoleon is one of the few exceptions to my "no 19th century or later rulers please" preference.

 

[Xandinho]

A bunch of previous civ DLC were also published in pairs Alexander/Cyrus, Gitarja/Jayavaraman... Given that people are talking about less presumed DLC from the depots than a single civ per patch does this seem likely again? Maybe 4 sets of 2 if we were lucky? I can see some of the favoured suggestions from these forums working as pairs

Ethiopia+Some flavour of Italy for a rivals themed pack (runner seems to have a lot of people thinking Ethiopia)
Maya+Portugal for a new world themed pack (maya seems like the most glaring omission thus far in most peopes' eyes)
An Alt leader themed pack could add Byzantines and someone new (everyone wants byzantines)
If plaid does refer to someone celtic then some duo of Gaul, Ireland, Iceni (for Boudicca) or Wales could make a 'breaking up the blob' pack?

Okay, it's a good mental exercise to try to speculate. If it’s DLCs we’re going to get, I don’t believe they’ll be DLCs only for civs, but maybe there are wonder packs, scenarios and alternative leaders, I’ll try to think of something:

* Far East themed DLC, which may include Vietnam and an alternative Chinese leader, there may be a wonder to keep up with.
* African themed DLC that may include Ethiopia with an alternative Egyptian leader, there is also the possibility of an ancient-era DLC that includes Babylon/Assyria and an Egyptian leader.
* Perhaps a wonder themed DLC that includes the Statue of Zeus, Notre Dame and some other wonders that were in previous editions.
* I don't see the Mayas being paired with any other civ, not even Portugal or another civ native from North America, so I suspect that they come in an isolated DLC with some scenario.
* A thematic DLC with Italy and Byzantines may be possible.

 

[Patine]

Louis-Napoleon is one of the few exceptions to my "no 19th century or later rulers please" preference.

What are your thought, personally, on Henri IV?

 

[Codeword Iroquois]

B) Boudicca is as close to the face of civ's celts as you can get. Plus she hells improve the game's female leader representation. (Trouble is, what civ do you have her lead if not a celtic blob... Iceni aren't well known, Britons causes problems with England and Scotland existing, Welsh would be a big stretch.)

Picts, or Cornish, maybe.

 

[AvianBritish]

I would love to see the return of the Celts, but please be mainland Europe and not British/Iceni. As a Britain I want to see more of the world then just these islands; and we've already got Britian, England(+France) and Scotland covered. And although it's not much; the Irish are still represented through Armagh and it's monistaries that the vikings ransacked and pilliaged.

Not saying I don't want an Irish/Gaelic Civ to be introduced at some point; I think they could be fun and bring some cool and intresting music, leaders and other uniques! But I want to see the rest of the world be represented first before another (former) British Commonwealth country.

 

[Casworon]

Possible mechanics: random events, new disasters, ideologies and espionage (Beach omce said he would like to do more with them), resource monopolies and companies.

Everything here I would be very happy with.

I absolutely love this game and think it's mechanics are great. It just needs more challenge. More ways to throw spinners in your plans to pull you out of autopilot.

What usually does this in game are AI invasions (which very rarely happen after the early game) and Natural disasters.

Plagues could come here. Maybe even barbarian invasions. I'm sure there are more that could be added. I'm sure human civilization must of had more challenges than plagues, Natural disasters and warfare. Even though I can't think of any more off the top of my head.

One thing which could definitely increase the challenge late game is just the AI using much more espionage. Even your allies targeting you too mess you up. Stealing great works, disabling spaceports. I think it's right the game doesn't have the AI automatically hate you for being close to winning, messing up game long alliances.

But in real life even allies spy on each other. Espionage is the perfect area to bring late game challenge back into the game. Maybe fleshing out the mechanics to make espionage stronger or more rewarding in some way when targeted against someone close to one of the victory conditions. Using game mechanics to nudge people towards doing what they should be doing at the end game and getting the AI more involved.

 

[Zaarin]

What are your thought, personally, on Henri IV?

I like him a lot, but he's chronologically too close to CdM for Civ6 IMO. I'd welcome him in Civ7.

Picts, or Cornish, maybe.

Though the evidence is leaning towards yes, we don't even know for certain the Picts were Celts. We don't know much about them at all. Even Brittany would make more sense as a Celtic civ than Cornwall (in fact, I'm a fan of the idea of a Breton civ--I'm all for Balkanizing Medieval France--give use Normandy, too, while you're at it).

 

[Patine]

I would love to see the return of the Celts, but please be mainland Europe and not British/Iceni. As a Britain I want to see more of the world then just these islands; and we've already got Britian, England(+France) and Scotland covered. And although it's not much; the Irish are still represented through Armagh and it's monistaries that the vikings ransacked and pilliaged.

Not saying I don't want an Irish/Gaelic Civ to be introduced at some point; I think they could be fun and bring some cool and intresting music, leaders and other uniques! But I want to see the rest of the world be represented first before another (former) British Commonwealth country.

The mainland Celts about whom virtually EVERYTHING of meaning we know about them are from hostile and biased, often scathing and condescending, Roman accounts? Those mainland Celts?

 

[Patine]

I like him a lot, but he's chronologically too close to CdM for Civ6 IMO. I'd welcome him in Civ7.


Though the evidence is leaning towards yes, we don't even know for certain the Picts were Celts. We don't know much about them at all. Even Brittany would make more sense as a Celtic civ than Cornwall (in fact, I'm a fan of the idea of a Breton civ--I'm all for Balkanizing Medieval France--give use Normandy, too, while you're at it).

The Cornish and Bretons are virtually the same people, just divided by which neighbouring kingdom forced them into vassalage and, eventually, full annexation, and a narrow strait of water.

 

[Xefjord]

I would be more in favor of a Breton civ or even an Irish civ than I would a Gauls civ based on my limited knowledge of the Gauls. I only play TSL maps and it seems the Gauls mostly inhabited France and southern Germany. We already have two frances, a netherlands, and germany that all occupy the areas around the alps and the only available land would be switzerlandish or austria, but then we don't get switzerland/austria either it seems. I can understand the historical importance of this civ and it would definitely add more older civs to the lineup, but from a TSL perspective, Ireland/Brittany seems to be more open real estate (Although I would just prefer Ireland most of all) and I would rather have Austria/Switzerland over the Gauls. But that is just my personal opinion.

 

[Zaarin]

The mainland Celts about whom virtually EVERYTHING of meaning we know about them are from hostile and biased, often scathing and condescending, Roman accounts? Those mainland Celts?

We know a lot from archaeology and the Greeks, as well. Sure, the Greeks weren't warm and benevolent, but they were at least not blatant propagandists. Also, not everything the Romans said was a lie; Roman sources can be used with discernment.

The Cornish and Bretons are virtually the same people, just divided by which neighbouring kingdom forced them into vassalage and, eventually, full annexation, and a narrow strait of water.

The Bretons were autonomous until the 16th century; the same is not true of Cornwall.

I would be more in favor of a Breton civ or even an Irish civ than I would a Gauls civ based on my limited knowledge of the Gauls. I only play TSL maps and it seems the Gauls mostly inhabited France and southern Germany. We already have two frances, a netherlands, and germany that all occupy the areas around the alps and the only available land would be switzerlandish or austria, but then we don't get switzerland/austria either it seems. I can understand the historical importance of this civ and it would definitely add more older civs to the lineup, but from a TSL perspective, Ireland/Brittany seems to be more open real estate

Uh...the Gauls and Bretons inhabited the same territory (except the Gauls inhabited a little more of it). On Firaxis' tiny TSL map, Nantes or Rennes would share its outer circle with Paris, just like Gergovia would. (IMO TSL should never be more than a secondary consideration for including a civ and should never be a reason for excluding one.)