Nah, wild boars will be added as a bonus resource, and the new Civ will be Gauls, with Obelix unique unit. Replaces warrior, can be only built once in the entire game. Strength of GDR. +5 strength for each wild boar owned by the Gauls
I think we've finally done it, people. We have reached Peak Tinfoil.
I had a (not quite so) crazy thought, related to mechanics. I noticed when all the GS leaders were announced that, with the exception of Mali, there was very little going on in terms of leaders/Civs having faith or religion-related bonuses. Thinking about some of the Civs that many of us are still expecting to see, I would expect quite a few of them to have some kind of religious/faith slant to them.
As a reminder, these are the candidates 'guessed' by AssemblingTyphoon:
Maya, Byzantium, Portugal, Assyria/Babylon, a Native American Civ, Ethiopia
Byzantium and Ethiopia would definitely have a strong faith focus.
Maya, if they were anything like their Civ V incarnation with the unique Shrine that gave science as well as faith, could do as well. I was also thinking they might have something related to natural disasters giving faith, tying into the whole 2012/Mayan calendar thing.
And while Portugal would probably be trade/exploration-focused, they too were Catholic missionaries so it's not out of the realm of possibility they could have something faith-related as well (as long as it didn't step too much on Spain's toes, of course).
'A Native American Civ' is suitably vague that doesn't give us much to work on, although we don't really have one with a strong faith slant in the game as of yet.
So... what if the big theme of the possible third expansion isn't health, or plagues/diseases, or economic victory (not, of course, to say some of those might not also feature)... but a big religion revamp, featuring a Reformation mechanic, among other things?
I've liked more Beyond Earth's idea of victories having story, and always liked to imagine victories as some story concluding. As such, I like to think of Score Victory as Apocalypse, the world ended and the most advanced society's ruins would represent what humans were like to restored-human or alien-explorer archeologists, thus winning the game.
Thusly I present: Maya with civ bonus whose purpose would be to troll the other players' victory conditions to stall the game focused on winning Score Victory.
When it comes to Civs, is this first time in the series that we dont have native USA civ, Cree is more Canadian ... that could also be hint for 3rd exp, along side no Babylon, Maya, Portugal
Why doesn't anybody assume Celts for the upcoming expansion? We had Boudicca in Civ 5 and Civ 2 as well... And Celts seem nice with religion rework/rebalance
Why doesn't anybody assume Celts for the upcoming expansion? We had Boudicca in Civ 5 and Civ 2 as well... And Celts seem nice with religion rework/rebalance
Because I think the impression we get is that they are moving away from 'blob' Civs. We have Norway and Sweden now in place of Vikings, and Scotland are seen as occupying the traditional Celtic slot. That isn't to say that I couldn't see another Celtic civ appearing, but I doubt very much that it would be a catch-all Celts Civ as we've seen before. Perhaps a continental Celtic Civ, or even an Irish Civ.
It is, of course, worth noting that they managed to almost completely ignore Scotland's Celtic history with this incarnation of the Civ...
Why doesn't anybody assume Celts for the upcoming expansion? We had Boudicca in Civ 5 and Civ 2 as well... And Celts seem nice with religion rework/rebalance
Two reasons. One, Civ has moved further and further from "blob" civ representations (the Celts in V were an amalgam of multiple tribes like Iceni and Picts), so if we did see a Celtic civ it would ostensibly be a more narrow focus like Gaul rather than "Celt" in general. Two, the thought is that the addition of Scotland precludes a Celtic civ because there would be a lot of overlap. Typically we don't see multiple Civs from the same region over time (with Venice and Rome being a notable exception in V).
On the matter of tinfoil, I'm proud to announce I have tonight joined the club of those who have dreamt about a third expansion.
I went all the way to their office to test the new expansion, which apparently is right down the road from where I live. Once there I saw only a greenish monitor with a Spanish Conquistador. Somehow my father ended up there as well and commented on 'how the image was so much sharp and brighter in this expansion', to which I replied that no, that's just because it's a 144hz screen. After that I questioned one of the devs as to why ' the books' delivery is taking so long given it was meant to be dispatched within 24 hours' to which she replied 'it must be a problem at the source'. She made the remark with such authority that I didn't even bother questioning what 'at the source' even meant, taking for granted that it must, indeed, be a problem at the source. I then left the 'store' and never even tried the expansion. Wasted opportunity.
Why doesn't anybody assume Celts for the upcoming expansion? We had Boudicca in Civ 5 and Civ 2 as well... And Celts seem nice with religion rework/rebalance
I'm organizing a spiritistic seance tomorrow afternoon to ask The Ancestors about the contents of the next EP anyone wants to come? I count on the devs announcing something out of concern for our sanity.
Babylon should be in the 3rd DLC because its the only of the original civs since Civ1 that is missing. I refuse to believe its because of the Sumer, since they co-existed in both Civ3 and Civ4.
Romans ✓
Babylonians ✗
Germans ✓
Egyptians ✓
Americans ✓
Greek ✓
Mongols ✓
Russians ✓
Zulus ✓
French ✓
Aztecs ✓
Chinese ✓
English ✓
Indians ✓
So best case for missing Civ's are : there is no Babylon (always been in), there is no Native-USA-civ (almost always, except Civ 1), no almost standard Portugal, Byzantine and Maya.
Counter argument would be: There is Sumeria for Babylon (close enough), there is Cree which is almost the same, Portugal is not that important, Byzantine -> there is already enough versions of Greece, Maya -> there are many central/south America native Civ's : Aztec, Inca, Mapuche
When it comes to Civs, is this first time in the series that we dont have native USA civ, Cree is more Canadian ... that could also be hint for 3rd exp, along side no Babylon, Maya, Portugal
I'd probably vote the Navajo. I've seen a lot SW US rock art recently which seems like it could be implemented as an interesting UI. And the Navajo would be a good candidate for it.
Counter argument would be: There is Sumeria for Babylon (close enough), there is Cree which is almost the same, Portugal is not that important, Byzantine -> there is already enough versions of Greece, Maya -> there are many central/south America native Civ's : Aztec, Inca, Mapuche
Sumeria and Babylon aren't close enough;
Cree aren't almost the same;
'Portugal is not important' is a statement that only makes sense in the present tense;
There being enough Greece relates little with Byzantium;
Central America should not be represented by the Aztecs only.
Babylon should be in the 3rd DLC because its the only of the original civs since Civ1 that is missing. I refuse to believe its because of the Sumer, since they co-existed in both Civ3 and Civ4.
Romans ✓
Babylonians ✗
Germans ✓
Egyptians ✓
Americans ✓
Greek ✓
Mongols ✓
Russians ✓
Zulus ✓
French ✓
Aztecs ✓
Chinese ✓
English ✓
Indians ✓
Well by those criteria, the alt from the 3rd expansion should be Elizabeth the First, as she's the only one of the original leaders since Civ 1 that is missing. All of the other 5 timers are in the game already.
Sumeria and Babylon aren't close enough;
Cree aren't almost the same;
'Portugal is not important' is a statement that only makes sense in the present tense;
There being enough Greece relates little with Byzantium;
Central America should not be represented by the Aztecs only.
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.
