Future Update - Speculation Thread

[Kwami]

Maddening. Action on the Steam DB for Civ. News about a new XCOM game. Updates on HK. Updates on a tonne of Paradox Games. Updates on a new Historical 4X (OW).

But no actual news on Civ VI Expansion or DLC.

Just maddening.

So, why not enjoy those other things for now? Civ VI will still be here when you get bored with the rest.

 

[acluewithout]

So, why not enjoy those other things for now? Civ VI will still be here when you get bored with the rest.

 

[Galvatron]

Trust me, you'll know when there's concrete news. This thread will be locked and there will be at least one new topic on whatever hint/teaser has appeared.

Don't underestimate my ignorance.

 

[LMT]

Maori is one of the best civs in the game because of fun and unusual game design, not because it is a tribal ethnic group Yes, I do care about the Maya civ. But first of all, I really want to see some "out of the box" mechanics like the Mali one. Or Kongo. No matter if it's Cornwall, the Yotwingians or Chukchi.

I hope we get some civs that are truly unique in terms of how to play them and/or their abilities. Maori, Canada, Eleanor all are really different and I enjoy playing all of them because of that. It's a reason I loved Venice in Civ 5.

Maybe a nomadic civ where up to the industrial era, cities don't last long, but when they are present, come with a couple of districts already in place. And when they are about to disband, a new settler automatically pops out. Maybe some Native American civ?

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I think the Maori and to a slightly lesser extent the Mali are well designed Civs in terms of balancing a unique gameplay gimmick with a viable strategy.

I think the Kongo's abilities are a bit too parasitic with other mechanics for their gimmicks to actually be considered "well designed", even if the effects they get are themselves powerful. I personally wouldn't want to see more civs that are both narrow in their application and locked out of major aspects of the game. Consider Civ5 Venice. The One City aspect and trade bonuses they do get are certainly interesting, but I don't consider them well designed due to how many constraints are placed upon them.

In the case of the Maori, they have an unconventional start which is offset with strong bonuses as compensation AND they have effects afterward that still manage to subvert several conventional city building. So you still get the advantages of having an over the top gimmick without being completely locked into that initial gameplay hook. For this reason, I would prefer unconventional gameplay use the Maori as something of a template rather than the Kongo



I just think it is highly unlikely that they would release large scale mechanics like that in a piecemeal DLC. It just doesn't seem economical to have cool new mechanics to work with, but only one maybe to civilizations that get to take advantage of that. They could decide to reworking existing civ options in order to make use of those mechanics, but if that is the case I don't see the point of making it part of the DLC versus a general update.

That's why I'm leaning so heavily on precedent because besides the possibility of this being a third round of content release, I haven't seen any indication that this will be much different from previous releases. I am basically trying to set up any expectations I have based on the lowest common denominator.

I didn't rate Mali, Maori, and Kongo in terms of "well designed", which is, of course, disputable. I mentioned them as an example of "out of the box" mechanics.
What I expect from civilization design is a distinct and unique game experience. Venice design, you have mentioned, fulfills this function pretty well. If it's balanced, or if you like or not this kind of approach? That is another story.

 

[Tech Osen]

I think the Maori and to a slightly lesser extent the Mali are well designed Civs in terms of balancing a unique gameplay gimmick with a viable strategy.

Depends on how you define well designed. Judging by the AI civ elimination thread they are among the very worst.

 

[Uberfrog]

Depends on how you define well designed. Judging by the AI civ elimination thread they are among the very worst.

I wouldn’t really use this as a guide. The AI necessarily struggles with leaders who shake up the game in ways the human audience finds most interesting, while obviously tending to do better with the civs who are on the more overpowered end of the spectrum...

 

[Tech Osen]

I wouldn’t really use this as a guide. The AI necessarily struggles with leaders who shake up the game in ways the human audience finds most interesting, while obviously tending to do better with the civs who are on the more overpowered end of the spectrum...

Of course. I love the Maori. But in a game that already gets criticism for a shaky AI I wouldn't call it good design to put in more and more civs that the AI can't handle. It damages the overall experience for the single player game.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

AI as a reference to judge balance and civilization design is a terrible idea. The way how you play with certain civ and the way how you play against certain AI are completely different stories. We shouldn't confuse it. Your civ game experience depends on how you play it. The problem with playing against Civs is an AI issue. And that's an issue. AI is terrible in placing cities, unit management, building improvements, wonders, and districts.

 

[RohirrimElf]

AI as a reference to judge balance and civilization design is a terrible idea. The way how you play with certain civ and the way how you play against certain AI are completely different stories. We shouldn't confuse it. Your civ game experience depends on how you play it. The problem with playing against Civs is an AI issue. And that's an issue. AI is terrible in placing cities, unit management, building improvements, wonders, and districts.

I disagree about the placement of cities. Overall i think the civ AI is sub par on many areas. Or just plain problematic. But city placement is meating my standards for a civ game. I think both the expansion rate and placement is good enough. Yes, i often would have placed a city a bit more optimal. And if i looked at how settlers would move over the map i would cringe. Like connecting 1-2 more resources or next to a river. But overall the AI is doing alright on this area.

If an AI can’t handle its own mechanics i just take it out of roulation and only play it myself. The Maori is exciting enough for me even if the AI can’t handle it. It can create some chaos. There is not really a shortage in the number of heroes. So can’t be bothered to much. Some leaders tend to be top contenders and some always seems to be lacking. But this will never be balanced right.

 

[leandrombraz]

If Firaxis add a plague mechanic to the main game, I wonder if their personal experience in the current pandemic will affect their design somehow. Like for example, it might get a mechanic for social distancing, like a project that delay the plague and reduce population loss.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

If Firaxis add a plague mechanic to the main game, I wonder if their personal experience in the current pandemic will affect their design somehow. Like for example, it might get a mechanic for social distancing, like a project that delay the plague and reduce population loss.

Yeah, I was thinking a "Flatten the Curve" civic that would give you a gold, tourism, and production penalty, but reduce disease pressure and population loss from epidemics.

 

[Patine]

Who says Cornwall would have to be purely Celtic? One of the most famous parts of the Cornish identity (other than bad weather and salt mines) is piracy. One could do a civ with a focus on naval raiding, maybe with a unique wrecker unit that would specialize in the destruction of ships along the Cornish shores. I only brought it up with celtic premises in mind is because they were the site of a (For ancient Britain) major nation: Dumnonia.

Wouldn't a dedicated "pirate-based," civ make more sense, and be more relatable to most, in the Caribbean, Illyria, or Northwest Africa?

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

Yeah, I was thinking a "Flatten the Curve" civic that would give you a gold, tourism, and production penalty, but reduce disease pressure and population loss from epidemics

unless all that talk about being announced at the original boston marathon date stuff has been cancelled , i cannot see how quickly they can implement those "new" cards and ideas , considering all the QA work etc.

 

[pokiehl]

unless all that talk about being announced at the original boston marathon date stuff has been cancelled , i cannot see how quickly they can implement those "new" cards and ideas , considering all the QA work etc.

I don't think there was any "talk" about that announcement. It was baseless speculation from here.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Wouldn't a dedicated "pirate-based," civ make more sense, and be more relatable to most, in the Caribbean, Illyria, or Northwest Africa?

As cool as it sounds, at this point we already have Norway who acts like a "pirate Civ" so I don't think we need one now.
Though I wouldn't mind a new pirate city-state like Nassau or Port Royal. When they make Portugal that could be a good replacement, suzerain unique bonus wise, for Lisbon.

 

[MAHRana]

How long you guys think it’ll be between announcement and release (assuming an announcement on the horizon)?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

How long you guys think it’ll be between announcement and release (assuming an announcement on the horizon)?

The previous expansions were 12 weeks. But we don't necessarily know if this is an expansion or what.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

Friaxis almost never allows titles to compete for hype/news and with their surprise announcement to the spin-off Xcom title I wouldn't expect to see anything on the Civ front until it releases Apr 24.

 

[DefiantMars]

I didn't rate Mali, Maori, and Kongo in terms of "well designed", which is, of course, disputable. I mentioned them as an example of "out of the box" mechanics.
What I expect from civilization design is a distinct and unique game experience. Venice design, you have mentioned, fulfills this function pretty well. If it's balanced, or if you like or not this kind of approach? That is another story.

One thing that I've learned is that "Interesting Design" doesn't always mean "Good Design". That's what I'm trying to say here and why I brought up the quality of those odd-ball civilizations. I simply don't think the Kongo are a good benchmark for civ designs. The raw power of their bonuses can quite potent, but they are reliant on mechanics with considerable issues and they're unable to utilize a core gameplay feature that than just being discouraged from it. I get the Religion is by its nature opt-in, but imagine if we had civs that couldn't access tourism mechanics or spaceport projects so they could never achieve a Science or Culture victory.

I would not like to see more civilizations like that. I would rather have more Maori-like designs.

If Firaxis add a plague mechanic to the main game, I wonder if their personal experience in the current pandemic will affect their design somehow. Like for example, it might get a mechanic for social distancing, like a project that delay the plague and reduce population loss.

I'm still against plagues as a mainline game feature for purely mechanical reasons. They're not predictable like most of the natural disasters in the game. There is no immediate benefit to them as a trade-off. And it further discourages Tall play. I haven't seen many suggestions for Plagues that deal with these issues without also being incredibly complicated.