I would rather competitive AI rather than another expansion TBH, i've never once saw the AI win a Culture victory in all my games at Immortal and Deity.
See above. 98% of the owners of the game don't play at Deity. This forum is not at all representative of the people that buy the game and pay the bills for Firaxis.
Someone posted the Steam achievement stats before. I'm not making it up: Something like 2% have the "Win at Deity" achievement. And of that 2%, how many of them (like me, for example) used the "1 turn score victory as Rome on Deity" to cheese that cheevo.
I think we'll be getting DLC, not an expansion. That would give us "moar Civs" as well as some wonders. I hope I'm wrong about this, but I'm just not sure there's enough for a full expansion.
They could get around the "expansion requirement" for new civs by bundling them as a pack and including the RNF and GS mechanics (but not civs or wonders or unnecessary city-states).
I guess we're all going to have to agree to disagree here then. I can't see them giving away whole game mechanics in a DLC and I can't see people not being pretty disappointed when the hype for a third full expansion is at a fever pitch.
I'd sooner believe we're getting no new paid content before I thought we're getting regular DLC
I think that a third expansion is still what makes the most sense and really all we're doing is trying to rationalise the apparent delay by considering alternatives.
If we are still getting a Q1 2020 expansion, I can't really believe they would wait past next week to announce it. But there's been no hint or teaser this week. So I think that leaves us either with a Q2 2020 expansion, or a series of smaller DLC packs: maybe one early next year and another a few months after that.
I don't think they would need to release Civ dlc that relied on the expansion mechanics. The Maori are one of the most creative civs in GS and use nothing but vanilla mechanics.
But honestly if they were just going to do Civ/wonder packs I feel like they'd have released some by now. Those don't take a year.
A final bonus scenario - ie tactical legacy pack/conquest of the new world deluxe - is something I would expect to cap off the game. Just not yet (hopefully!).
I could swear I had posted this already, but apparently I forgot to press the Post Reply key...
---
They still have to release the currently unmoddable content. Lack of more content would be disappointing, but the only thing players wouldn't forgive Firaxis for is if they ignored modders. 'Modability' goes hand in hand with Civ. Especially with Humankind on the horizon, the most important thing they can do to keep players engaged for another 5 years is make sure the people who are willing to release unpaid content can do so, allowing people to remain engaged with the series before a potential CIV7 is released.
In any case, I find the idea of a CIV7 a bit silly at this point. Whereas I would pre-order a new expansion or buy it on release, I wouldn't touch a new title for another 2 years. That's what happened with 6 and 5 before it and I don't think I'm alone in that. A new expansion would further encourage CIV5 players to move to CIV6, whereas a completely new title would encourage them to skip CIV6 altogether.
I don't see the value of working on a CIV7 when the CIV5 community is still so big.
Indeed. Making a few new civs probably doesn't take as long as designing a bunch of new mechanics plus creating and balancing several new buildings and districts and units and wonders. They would have had several DLC released by now.
Ah, Civfanatics, you never let me down. A Firaxis employee could post on Twitter, "I bought a cat this Sunday" and we would be like, "A cat? Cats were revered in Egypt! This must be a clue that we're getting an alt leader for Egypt. And Sunday . . . Sun . . . the sun god! The new alt leader for Egypt will be a worshiper of Amun-Ra!"
Ah, Civfanatics, you never let me down. A Firaxis employee could post on Twitter, "I bought a cat this Sunday" and we would be like, "A cat? Cats were revered in Egypt! This must be a clue that we're getting an alt leader for Egypt. And Sunday . . . Sun . . . the sun god! The new alt leader for Egypt will be a worshiper of Amun-Ra!"
I'm still low key proud of the moment when someone on this forum correctly predicted that Venice would be added in Brave New World by colour-matching the purple of the mysterious Civ seen in a minimap to the exact same purple used for Venice's coat of arms, as featured in the Wikipedia article
Look at the way the Game Rules have been set up for the expansions. Rise and Fall and Gathering Storm are (essentially) conversion mods on top of the base game.
It would NOT be out of the question for them to have a DLC Pack called "Traders: Risk and Rewards" that includes Portugal, Maya, and Italy, better trade route mechanics, and a health rework for the housing mechanics as a "Less than a Full expansion" that could be played ON TOP OF Gathering Storm. So you'd enable GS _and_ TRR when playing. The Pack cost cost $9.99.
If that did well, they could then pump out "themed rule packs". Isabella of Spain + colonial mechanics + colonial revolts for $6.99
If they went THAT route they could milk Civ6 for years via the Paradox model.
I'm still low key proud of the moment when someone on this forum correctly predicted that Venice would be added in Brave New World by colour-matching the purple of the mysterious Civ seen in a minimap to the exact same purple used for Venice's coat of arms, as featured in the Wikipedia article
That was amazing. Strange though; we had been discussing Venice as a possibility from almost the moment that expansion was announced, but it was such a dark horse. I sometimes wonder if some subtle leaker guided the discussion towards it.
I feel the same way about the person who pointed out that the castle in the RNF trailer resembled some obscure Georgian architecture.
That was amazing. Strange though; we had been discussing Venice as a possibility from almost the moment that expansion was announced. I sometimes wonder if some subtle leaker guided the discussion towards it.
Same - if Greece turns into one Civ with leaders representing independent city States, I'd expect the same for Italy.
In fact,if they were going to do a individual Civ DLC - a Renaissance-focused Italy Civ bundled with say 3 different leaders from say Venice, Genoa, and Florence...
I don't know. I think it is strange that they've given up on specifically promoting the console ports. You would think that if that were the latest and greatest product, they would keep pushing it until Christmas.
@AntSou I did sit there and spin through it for a few minutes.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
