1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

How okay would you be with losing mainstays for new civs?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Synth, Jan 20, 2018.

  1. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,703
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Take out Polynesia, and the Zulu, and I'm with you. Oh, and like many I prefer a specific Gaulish and Norse Civ to their blob equivalents.

    I think that TSL fans are over-represented on these forums. Don't get me wrong - I'm glad it is an option for those who want it (and I enjoy watching AI only battles which make more immersive sense in TSL); but I strongly suspect that most players don't play it much. So I don't think it should be given as much weight as it is.
     
    Ornen, Liufeng, Zaarin and 1 other person like this.
  2. Arianrhod

    Arianrhod Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    190
    Gender:
    Male
    Not counting parallels to Civilizations already in the game, this would be: Byzantium, Goths, Huns, Mayans, Incas, Italy, Magyars/Hungarians, Berbers, Ethiopia, Mali, Portugal, Burma, and Vietnam. That's a rather long list to commit to and, while most of the civs there are pretty good, there are definitely a few there that would be harder to justify considering the larger scope of Civilization.

    If we really need to ape an Age of Empires game, might I recommend 1 or 3 instead for this one matter?
    1 would leave us with Phoenicia, Assyria, Babylonia, the Hittites, and Carthage, with the only weak links being Palmyra (who at least have a very neat leader) and Minoans (who could probably just be disregarded altogether). Would've been Macedon, too, but lucky us!
    3, on the other hand, nets us Portugal, the Ottomans, the Iroquois, and the Sioux. Certainly not the most comprehensive list of staples, but there's nobody there that I feel like the greater public would object to much, either.
     
  3. HyJinkx

    HyJinkx Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 17, 2015
    Messages:
    50
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    Personally I would always want the “mainstay” civs included. I always enjoy getting to try new civs but not at the cost of losing the older ones.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  4. K4wa

    K4wa Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Just want to throw my two cents in.
    I know that at some point we will get the likes of the Ottomans and such.
    But, if Ethiopia is out, and it seems likely, i will be really disappointed.
     
    Zaarin and nzcamel like this.
  5. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    I'm inclined to agree, but Firaxis has explicitly said it's part of their decision-making.
     
  6. K4wa

    K4wa Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Caucasus is it's own cultural entity and needs to be represented as much as Anatolia, Northern America or The Fertile Crescent.
    Georgia, is probably the most obvious choice to represent the region, other choices could have been the Circassians or the Vainakhs. Armenia, although in the Caucasus, culturally is closer to the civilizations from the Fertile Crescent like the Assyrians and the Copts.
    Caucasus is very ancient, very diverse and is full of unique architecture and history, unlike anything around it. Georgia is one of the most ancient countries that still exist today and is one of the first to adopt Christianity. The Georgian language is one of the oldest languages to be still in use. They also have remarkable medieval and modern history.
    I think Caucasus should be represented in every Civ game in one way or another.
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  7. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,635
    Firaxis got the message that fans wanted Persia, that they wanted an additional African civ, and more representation for SE Asia. They also apparently heeded the fans about the Georgia meme.

    It would be nice if they sought more direct input from the fans... maybe a poll?

    The vast majority of fans do want to see the classics back: Inca, Maya, Ottomans, Byzantium, Babylon, Ethiopia, Mali, Carthage, classical Celts (Gaul), Portugal, etc.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  8. Lord Lakely

    Lord Lakely Unintentionally a feminist.

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,297
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Belgium
    They will all be back, don't worry. Firaxis/2K would never risk alienating a large chunk of their fanbase by cutting out Ottomans, Inca or Babylon without an acceptable replacement.

    The fact they went with Georgia, Cree, Mapuche and Scotland most likely has to do with how they could interact with the new game mechanics, relative to other Civs from the same region. Georgia is an easy shoe-in for a Golden Age ability, Poundmaker is a excellent pick for an Alliance mechanic, etc. I'm sure both Mapuche and Scotland were chosen because they fit a better mold mechanicswise than Inca or BlobCelts would.

    I mean, better go that route than add staples for the sake of adding staples and making them BORING (I am looking at you, Korea :nono:)
     
  9. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    People keep equating Celts with Gaul, but Civ has never treated them that way - so while it may be desirable it can hardly be considered a 'classic'. Civ II Celts had a British leader and an almost fully British city list. Civ IV Celts had both a Gallic and a British leader, a Scottish unique building, and units that spoke Irish. Civ V was even worse. If they are indeed in Rise and Fall, it seems likely they have a Scottish leader and architecture and may even have been renamed Scotland. Only Civ III has approximated a Gallic interpretation of the Celts, and it still had British cities in the city list.

    Mali would be welcome, but having been in only one version of the game it's no more 'classic' than the Sioux.
     
  10. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,635
    The classical era.

    Civ2 had Celts with Briton leaders. Civ3 had a Gaulish leader, Civ4 had both a Gaulish and a Briton leader, and Civ5 had a Briton leader (speaking modern Welsh). :(

    I would be content with either the Gauls or the Britons returning.

    IMHO the Gauls would simply be easier.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  11. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    Fair enough, but almost none of the civs you mention were classical era. Byzantium was early medieval as was the oldest period of Maya history. Mali was medieval. Inca, Portugal and the Ottomans were late medieval/Renaissance. Babylon was pre-Classical.

    Outside Civ III the Celts have never been discretely one or the other - that's the whole problem with The Blob (though Civ II and Civ III had more internally-consistent takes on the civ than either Civ IV or Civ V). If the Celts came back as the Celts they'd probably be the usual mix of both, though hopefully not as much of a mess as Civ V, and probably with a unit just as fictitious as the "Gallic Warrior" or "Pictish Warrior".

    Either way, renamed or not if we get Scotland it will take the place of the Celts in the game even if it represents a later period.
     
  12. Giskler

    Giskler +1 Sleuthing

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,322
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Norway
    Bring on new civs. Seeing the same civs in every single iteration of Civilization is boring.
     
    Mr Jon of Cheam likes this.
  13. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,635
    I did not say all the civs I mentioned were Classical Era.

    I specifically said "classical Celts" in my post.

    Please forgive me if I was inarticulate, but I don't know how I could have been any clearer.

    I put Gaul in parentheses because that is my recommendation for the portrayal of the civ. We've already discussed how they featured both Gaulish and Briton leaders in the past and how it's been too blobby previously as well.

    I maintain that just doing Gaul would be a better interpretation than a blob.
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  14. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,703
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Sure; and those of us who think otherwise should speak up more, as I suspect we are being drowned out by a smaller minority.
     
    liv, Zaarin and The Kingmaker like this.
  15. Zaarin

    Zaarin My Dearest Doctor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    5,704
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    I think TSL is an interesting consideration in the sense that it's nice to have civs from lots of different places, but as a game mode I find it boring. I don't think a civ should ever be included or excluded solely on the grounds of TSL.
     
    Hakan-i Cihan and nzcamel like this.
  16. FairFenix

    FairFenix Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    21
    Gender:
    Male
    Every civ has dozens of reasons to be included, this will never be the case.

    So what weight factor would you apply for considering TSL?
     
  17. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,091
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    It depends how you define "mainstay". I would expect those that have been in every iteration of the game to always return. But I'd be happy to see a wide variety of civs fill the other spots.

    It would be silly from a marketing perspective to leave out the most popular mainstays that aren't in the top 16-20. They seem perfect for DLC.
     
  18. Wielki Hegemon

    Wielki Hegemon Prince

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Messages:
    442
    Location:
    Warsaw
    Nothing more nothing less. I would be ok with this list. But it means CIvVI needs two more expansions or DLC.
    @firaxis I know you are reading this forum guys :) Can You give us some feedback on this?
     
  19. Icicle

    Icicle Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Messages:
    398
    As someone who has played every civ game I'm totally fine with having a game where we get the "B" civ for a few of these options. Ideally we would get both and some of the C civs too but this is how they milk us for DLC money so there can only be so many. Of course 5 had a ton by the end so hopefully we don't need to have this conversation when its all said and done.
     
  20. steveg700

    steveg700 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    3,189
    Depends on where one places the bar. Certainly some standards are lower than others, and current notions about inclusiveness seem to go hand-in-hand with treating meritocracy as a dirty word.

    Then again, I would stipulate that consideration and inclusion are two distinct things.
     

Share This Page