[NFP] Game Mode Speculation

[Backero]

Prehistory mode:

Based a bit on Humankind where you are starting as nomadic society with 3 special units. They can scout, gather resources, hunt etc. After 10 turns when you advence to Ancient Era you are choosing one unit to settle your first city when the rest is becoming Scouts. The city gains additional temporary bonus based on points received by this unit while being gatherer or hunter. Having larger part of map discovered and having 3 potencial starting positions, you are able to select fine position as well.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I posted a similar idea in the thread "Other new features you want in New Frontier":

My hope for the new game modes is that we'll finally be able to mix and match any leader with any civilization. Maybe call the mode "Great Man Theory"

Another slightly similar mode I've wanted to see for some time would be one that fuses two or three civilizations together. The new civilization would have access to all of the Unique Abilities, Districts, Improvements, and Units. They'd be able to select any leader from among the civilizations that were fused. The idea would specifically be to have unbalance civilizations, creating a more random and chaotic mode than usual (and limited of course to single-player only). The mode would be called "Bold Fusion" and include combination like the following:

The Caliphate (Arabia & the Ottomans)
Great Britain (England & Scotland)
The Mediterranean (Greece, Macedonia, & Rome)
Mesoamerica (The Aztec, Inca, & Mayans)
Mesopotamia (Persia & Sumeria)
The New Kingdom (Egypt & Nubia)
The Orient (China, Japan, & Korea)
Scandinavia (the Norse & Sweden)
South America (Brazil & Gran Columbia)
The Steppe (the Mongols and Scythia)
Sub-Sahara (Ethiopia, Kongo, & the Zulu)

Hansa - (Netherlands, Germany, Sweden & Poland)

 

[NukeAJS]

If they want to go crazy and give the art department a lot to do -- go interstellar a la Stellaris.

I don't think this is a very good idea because Stellaris is a very, very good game that would do this much, much better, but Civ4 had a game mode like this and it was a fun addition even if it was just something you played once or twice. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever played a scenario more than twice. So there's that ...

 

[acluewithout]

Some random thoughts.

• Better Big Mechanics. The big advantage of Game Modes is that FXS can take a particular mechanic idea, eg more disasters, more espionage, ideologies, corporations etc., and really lean into those mechanics and do things like make them really tough challenge-wise or really game changing. If it works, awesome!, everyone will play the game with that mode on as default. If not, no worries!, people can just switch it off. It seems to me that, for example, if FXS were minded to bring back ideologies, I’ll probably get better game mechanics via a game mode then a change to the base game, precisely because FXS can take more risks with the mechanics and don’t have to please everyone. I mean, imagine if FXS had introduced Dark Ages as a game mode - they could have made them completely crushing, with no risk of actually ruining the game for the maybe (majority) of players that don’t want mechanics like that.
  
  
• Do stuff that’s controversial. This sort of follows from the point above, but game modes totally lets FXS introduce mechanics they know only some players want. Plagues, slavery are good examples, as are bringing back some sort of corruption and or global happiness mechanics.

• No shortage of ideas. Again, related to the previous points, I think game modes really opens up the possibility of FXS introduces all sorts of mechanics. It’s really not hard to think of lots of really cool things FXS could introduce. For me, I really want a DLC on ideology, another on trade / corporations, and either in those or something else mechanics like corruption that making controlling a wide empire more challenging. But there’s tonnes of stuff FXS could do - steampunk / diesel punk, aliens, expanded war, more challenging Barbarians, race to build the most wonders, etc.

• Flesh out existing mechanics. I think the most interesting news (well, after this news) is that the Apocalypse DLC includes more disasters for the base game. Disasters are one of a bunch of areas where I think the game has lacked a bit of content - other examples include Dedications (4 per Era is very restrictive), units-buildings of course, more unique religious units (not just Monks), great people, and IMO Governors (the game needs more variety, including ideally more ways to get unique governors eg unlocking late or mid game via governments, or linked to Civs like Ottomans). Seems like rolling game modes is a good excuse to flesh out some of these mechanics and others where they probably otherwise have justified a DLC or expansion of their own.

• Should FXS reconsider Loyalty and other mechanics? Related thought - I really think FXS should consider making Loyalty an optional game mode. I love the loyalty mechanics, but it clearly causes some players a lot of agony, and I think players would find the game more approachable if this Mechanic was optional. I’m sure making it a game mode would be a real hassle, but I do think it would really help bring more players to the game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Some random thoughts.

• Better Big Mechanics. The big advantage of Game Modes is that FXS can take a particular mechanic idea, eg more disasters, more espionage, ideologies, corporations etc., and really lean into those mechanics and do things like make them really tough challenge-wise or really game changing. If it works, awesome!, everyone will play the game with that mode on as default. If not, no worries!, people can just switch it off. It seems to me that, for example, if FXS were minded to bring back ideologies, I’ll probably get better game mechanics via a game mode then a change to the base game, precisely because FXS can take more risks with the mechanics and don’t have to please everyone. I mean, imagine if FXS had introduced Dark Ages as a game mode - they could have made them completely crushing, with no risk of actually ruining the game for the maybe (majority) of players that don’t want mechanics like that.
  
  
• Do stuff that’s controversial. This sort of follows from the point above, but game modes totally lets FXS introduce mechanics they know only some players want. Plagues, slavery are good examples, as are bringing back some sort of corruption and or global happiness mechanics.

• No shortage of ideas. Again, related to the previous points, I think game modes really opens up the possibility of FXS introduces all sorts of mechanics. It’s really not hard to think of lots of really cool things FXS could introduce. For me, I really want a DLC on ideology, another on trade / corporations, and either in those or something else mechanics like corruption that making controlling a wide empire more challenging. But there’s tonnes of stuff FXS could do - steampunk / diesel punk, aliens, expanded war, more challenging Barbarians, race to build the most wonders, etc.

• Flesh out existing mechanics. I think the most interesting news (well, after this news) is that the Apocalypse DLC includes more disasters for the base game. Disasters are one of a bunch of areas where I think the game has lacked a bit of content - other examples include Dedications (4 per Era is very restrictive), units-buildings of course, more unique religious units (not just Monks), great people, and IMO Governors (the game needs more variety, including ideally more ways to get unique governors eg unlocking late or mid game via governments, or linked to Civs like Ottomans). Seems like rolling game modes is a good excuse to flesh out some of these mechanics and others where they probably otherwise have justified a DLC or expansion of their own.

• Should FXS reconsider Loyalty and other mechanics? Related thought - I really think FXS should consider making Loyalty an optional game mode. I love the loyalty mechanics, but it clearly causes some players a lot of agony, and I think players would find the game more approachable if this Mechanic was optional. I’m sure making it a game mode would be a real hassle, but I do think it would really help bring more players to the game.

It would be nice if they could place some of the features of the past expansions inside individual modes. I know some people would like to be able to turn off the GDR or the WC.

 

[acluewithout]

It would be nice if they could place some of the features of the past expansions inside individual modes. I know some people would like to be able to turn off the GDR or the WC.

Yeah, I meant to mention the WC as an example, along with emergencies. Again, I like both mechanics, but so many people dislike it, and it’s such a modular (or some would say “stuck on”) system, that I think making it optional has a lot of merit for broadening the appeal of Civ VI.

Indeed, if FXS went that route, they could maybe make Loyalty, WC etc mechanics a bit tougher / complicated which might actually make them more popular mechanics for some players that like those things and want more challenge.

Really, I’m starting to wish FXS had taken the Game Mode approach all the way back in RnF. I think that might have made the game both more crowd pleasing but actually maybe also more adventurous.

Anywho. I’m still not all that excited about Apocalypse Mode and or Secret Freemason Mechanics. I’m sure they’ll be fun, but they’re not what I was looking for. But I am really excited about the possibility the base game might get some good targeted content and quite hopeful at least some of the modes will hit some of the things I want (and might do so better than a business as usual expansion might have done).

Fingers crossed.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

https://twitter.com/antonstrenger/status/1259887099001688071

Oh that is interesting, suddenly the game modes are much more appealing to me! I imagine having all 6 turned on will be ridiculous chaos

 

[bbbt]

Yeah, I meant to mention the WC as an example, along with emergencies. Again, I like both mechanics, but so many people dislike it, and it’s such a modular (or some would say “stuck on”) system, that I think making it optional has a lot of merit for broadening the appeal of Civ VI.

Indeed, if FXS went that route, they could maybe make Loyalty, WC etc mechanics a bit tougher / complicated which might actually make them more popular mechanics for some players that like those things and want more challenge.

Really, I’m starting to wish FXS had taken the Game Mode approach all the way back in RnF. I think that might have made the game both more crowd pleasing but actually maybe also more adventurous.

Anywho. I’m still not all that excited about Apocalypse Mode and or Secret Freemason Mechanics. I’m sure they’ll be fun, but they’re not what I was looking for. But I am really excited about the possibility the base game might get some good targeted content and quite hopeful at least some of the modes will hit some of the things I want (and might do so better than a business as usual expansion might have done).

Fingers crossed.

I feel like this is a trial balloon in that regards. I think they'll be watching closely to see what game modes get used compared to others as an indicator for future direction.

 

[Isengardtom]

PACK 6 Saami or Inuit Civilizations alongside with Ice Age game mode.
PACK 5 Alt Dutch leader and Portugal or Venice alongside with Corporations game mode
PACK 4 Italy alongside with Pandemic game mode
PACK 3 Vietnam and Babylon alongside with Alien Invasion game mode

I like these ideas a lot
Ice age or even a volcanic eruption with global Temporary effect on temperature could diminish yields on tiles (food) with effects on happiness, growth and loyalty
I wouldn’t mind these as long as they’re not too random. They could happen in a certain age for example for a number of turns

pandemic could similarly effect production Output of citizens , hapiness and loyalty

 

[returnofbabylon]

Having learned more about the game modes, I'm more enthused about the season pass than I was initially. One big concern - I think Civ VI already has something of an issue with its mechanics being heavily siloed and not interacting enough. It's hard to see how these optional systems, which can be toggled on and off in isolation, won't exacerbate that problem.

Anyway, in addition to the apocalypse and secret societies (which I'd assume is an expansion of espionage, but we'll see) that we know about, I'd like to see to see something like:
trade - luxury resource rework, manufactured resources, economic victory
health - separated from housing at the city level, plagues, hospitals
empire management - rebellions, civil wars, corruption, courthouses
religion re-work - schisms, reformations, less explicit control of religion by the player (possibly removing religious victory)

My guess is in reality we'll get some options that are more whimsical (fantasy/mythical elements, etc.). The other big question - they've spent the past year planning this suite of DLC, so the decision about whether to do a season 2 is probably being made Soon(TM), if it hasn't been already. If we are only getting the one season I really hope the game modes focus on more historical mechanics, as stuff like soothsayers doesn't really appeal to me. Hopefully they'll keep going, and we can all eventually get what we want.

 

[Casworon]

I love the idea of more advanced barbarians. Which maybe even have barbarian cities. Being able to conquer more cities to make barbarian empires. Being able to pay them to launch raids/invasions on other players.

Apocalypse does seem like it is upping the game difficulty. I'm interested to see if this is going to be a pattern with all of the game modes. All of them making the world a more dangerous place. Personally I would love this, the lack of challenge is one of my biggest gripes with Civ Vi.

Having cities destroyed by meteors, citys possibly being taken over by secret societies, maybe having huge invasions from Barbarian Empires. All this stuff sounds like it can make the game more interesting, challenging and exciting even without significant AI improvements.

It's also interesting to note that Anton is listed as the main designer of New Frontiers.

If I remember correctly Anton was the main designer of Rise and Fall, while Ed was the main designer on Gathering Storm.

This makes me think that we could possibly be seeing a second season where Ed is the main designer.

 

[AntSou]

I don't think there will be a Colonisation mode. That seems to make more sense as a scenario.

I wish they expand a bit on the sci-fi/fantasy potential of the future era. I mentioned Ocean Cities already, but giving other uses to Ocean tiles would be very cool. It takes half the map after all.

Another cool possibility are unique wonder units, which provide bonuses but (maybe) can be captured. They have active and retirement bonuses like great generals.

 

[returnofbabylon]

I love the idea of more advanced barbarians. Which maybe even have barbarian cities. Being able to conquer more cities to make barbarian empires. Being able to pay them to launch raids/invasions on other players.

This actually might be the thing I want in the game the most. At the very least the camps need to be able to turn into cities somehow, but you should also have some kind of diplomatic option with the barbarians as well.

One challenge I can foresee - players killing all the barbarian units and not taking the camp, to wait for it to mature into a city they can capture, giving the human player a way around building settlers the AI wouldn't use. I'm not sure how you'd prevent this, though I suppose that's the beauty of these things being optional.

 

[Deggial]

Whatever those (yet unknown) modes are - I hope they add substantial new mechanics to the game. Something in the realm of “Vassals” or “Corporations”. (Not necessarily exactly those, just in respect to their expected “size” and impact.)

I do understand and applaud the idea to make them optional. Some (and not only new) players might find new mechanics overwhelming or just too much of a clutter. The optionality is the perfect solution for this even if it makes the modes’ interaction with existing game elements questionable.
Because the later is the main reason I personally would have preferred a full expansion over the series of DLC we have now: the possibility of meaningful and well integrated new concepts.

If those modes are exactly that, I will happily await their streched-out appearance over the next year.
If they don’t equal a full expansion’s game mechanics potential, I will feel a tiny bit underwhelmed due to the “full expansion pricing”.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Game Mode: Rise of Pagans
Instead of establishing religion, you can choose a paganism path. Each pagan path (few to choose like Druidism, Shamanism, etc.) will give you benefits like UI, UU, policies or other bonuses.
Civilizations with established religions can trigger new special emergencies against pagan ones "Crusade".

 

[AntSou]

Game Mode: Rise of Pagans
Instead of establishing religion, you can choose a paganism path. Each pagan path (few to choose like Druidism, Shamanism, etc.) will give you benefits like UI, UU, policies or other bonuses.
Civilizations with established religions can trigger new special emergencies against pagan ones "Crusade".

That just sounds like Religion.

It would be cool if you could pick Unique Infrastructure and Unique Units as Religious traits.

 

[bbbt]

Whatever those (yet unknown) modes are - I hope they add substantial new mechanics to the game. Something in the realm of “Vassals” or “Corporations”. (Not necessarily exactly those, just in respect to their expected “size” and impact.)

They explicitly said 'no new systems' were coming, so I'd think that makes corporations (and say an economic victory) unlikely imho. You could arguably do 'vassals' as part of they systems they have in place.

I'm expecting less 'new' mechanics, and more reworks or 'alternate versions' of existing mechanics. And part of the game modes being optional is to see how many people 'like' the new mechanics as trial balloons for future games (as well as being a good idea in general - I think the more options for customization, the more player friendly).

With the screenshots of age and reknown on a Unit, I'm expecting a game mode that does a rework of unit production and promotion, possible with logistics, different rules for upgrades, and the like.

 

[Deggial]

... With the screenshots of age and reknown on a Unit, I'm expecting a game mode that does a rework of unit production and promotion, possible with logistics, different rules for upgrades, and the like.

Maybe our definition of “game mechanics” differ. I mean ... interesting production changes *), new upgrade rules and even more logistics do sound very much like new game mechanics for me!

*) I would love, if railroads would have an impact on production again. And wouldn’t a new district (which we will get, so this is in the limits of what they are willing to do) that houses a specific corporation, which could make use of excessive bonus or strategic ressources, improve existing features (ressources, districts) just as you define modes?

 

[bbbt]

Maybe our definition of “game mechanics” differ. I mean ... interesting production changes *), new upgrade rules and even more logistics do sound very much like new game mechanics for me!

*) I would love, if railroads would have an impact on production again. And wouldn’t a new district (which we will get, so this is in the limits of what they are willing to do) that houses a specific corporation, which could make use of excessive bonus or strategic ressources, improve existing features (ressources, districts) just as you define modes?

Oh definitely, I'm just managing my own expectations more than anything. I have no idea what Anton meant by 'no new systems' and where that line falls for them.

 

[Caprikel]

What I'd really like from one of these game mode's is something similar to the Poland scenario, with swarms of barbarians attacking in waves.
In order for it to work in a general game rather than the scenario, it would have to give you sufficient time to prepare before the full on barbarian waves start.
It would also be important that the waves intensify over time, enough so that they stay threatening throughout the entire game.
It could also include some of the ideas mentioned in this thread, with advanced barbarians that can form cities, and actually conquer cities to make more barbarian cities.
Maybe these barbarian cities could spawn from existing cities that have low loyalty (Or low amenities for non R&F players) such that they effectively replace free cities.

What I really liked about the Poland scenario is how it feels like a tower defense game, but where I'm defending with units that get stronger from constantly fighting.
It's really satisfying melting through swarms of barbarians with your super units that have all sorts of upgrades from constant warfare. I also kind of miss those unit carpets that would happen in civ 5, where a civ would have all their tiles covered in units. It made the AI much more menacing without requiring them to use them smartly.

Anyway, something like this would be perfect for this optional game mode thing, since it would make the game harder in a fun way, while being optional.