Looks like Civ 6 is done: Kevin called April "final game update"

[Zaarin]

Civ V Africa: Carthage, Egypt, Ethiopia, Morocco, Songhai, Zulu
Civ VI Africa: Egypt, Ethiopia, Kongo, Mali, Phoenicia, Zulu

Carthage is already dubiously African, being ruled by Phoenicians, but Phoenicia is not African by any definition. Phoenicia is modern day Lebanon.

Civ V Americas: Aztec, Inca, Iroquois, Maya, Shoshone
Civ VI Americas: Aztec, Cree, Inca, Mapuche, Maya

I agree with your numbers, but it does feel like a step backwards when Civ5 had two Native North American civs and Civ6 only has one. I suspect Firaxis does think of the Mapuche as replacing them, but it still feels off.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Civ VI Africa: Egypt, Ethiopia, Kongo, Mali, Phoenicia, Zulu

Phonencia isn't african. If was Carthagen in the game we can speak about the same number of Civilizations


And do you think Civ 6 should be better than Civ 5. More one season is totally needed.

 

[Xandinho]

Although I'd like to have more eight civs, I think only four or five civs + one Alt Egyptian leader, at least, are enough. It means more 3 or 4 DLCs packs to fill the rest of the year. Civ7 can be left for 2022.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Are you sure about that?

Civ V Africa: Carthage, Egypt, Ethiopia, Morocco, Songhai, Zulu
Civ VI Africa: Egypt, Ethiopia, Kongo, Mali, Phoenicia, Zulu

Civ V Americas: Aztec, Inca, Iroquois, Maya, Shoshone
Civ VI Americas: Aztec, Cree, Inca, Mapuche, Maya

Those lists look even to me. Or do you not count South American native cultures as "Native American"? Even so, it's basically equal.

You forgot Nubia for Africa.
And I agree above that I wouldn't necessarily count Phoenicia as African, let alone Carthage either, but I do agree with your statement that Africa does seem a little better represented, barring North Africa being empty. Central Africa needed love and we got that with the Kongo.

 

[Kwami]

Carthage is already dubiously African, being ruled by Phoenicians, but Phoenicia is not African by any definition. Phoenicia is modern day Lebanon.

Phoenicia started in the levant, but large parts of their empire were in northern Africa, including Carthage. Anyway, we can scratch Phoenicia and Carthage without changing the balance between the two games.

I agree with your numbers, but it does feel like a step backwards when Civ5 had two Native North American civs and Civ6 only has one. I suspect Firaxis does think of the Mapuche as replacing them, but it still feels off.

Why, though? It seems fine to me. It's not like we have a bunch of South American groups otherwise. There's the Inca and... well, I guess the colonial nation of Brazil.

You forgot Nubia for Africa.
And I agree above that I wouldn't necessarily count Phoenicia as African, let alone Carthage either, but I do agree with your statement that Africa does seem a little better represented, barring North Africa being empty. Central Africa needed love and we got that with the Kongo.

Oh, Nubia! I did forget! Thanks!

 

[Zaarin]

Phoenicia started in the levant, but large parts of their empire were in northern Africa, including Carthage. Anyway, we can scratch Phoenicia and Carthage without changing the balance between the two games.

Yes, but are England and France African civs because they had African colonies? Phoenicia also had colonies in Spain, Sardinia, Sicily, Crete--so is Phoenicia a European civ? The Phoenician homeland is Lebanon; on a TSL map Phoenicia will start in Lebanon. We can have a bit more of a debate about Carthage--it had been in Africa for centuries and incorporated Libyans into its daily existence and culture if not into its elite. But substitute Nubia for Phoenicia and your numbers come out fine.

Why, though? It seems fine to me. It's not like we have a bunch of South American groups otherwise. There's the Inca and... well, I guess the colonial nation of Brazil.

True, and I'm happy to see Native South America get more civs; it just feels very empty when there's a single Native North American civ in the game. Having Canada just rubs salt in the wound.

 

[Pietato]

'...balance changes we have been sitting on for a long time.'

Pietato has denounced Firaxis!

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

'...balance changes we have been sitting on for a long time.'

Pietato has denounced Firaxis!

Cyrus has warned Firaxis for not following the Agenda: Oppurtunist.

"If there's deception afoot, I prefer it when I am the one providing the intrigue."

 

[TeddyMain]

Welp, if that's really the case its been a fun ride. Would've loved a last hoorah of Civs, especially some to give North America and Africa some more love, but what we have is still great. Guess I'll see y'all in the next installment.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Why, though? It seems fine to me. It's not like we have a bunch of South American groups otherwise. There's the Inca and... well, I guess the colonial nation of Brazil.

It is nice that South America did get more civs. That being said North America has the same number of civs as the previous game and one of them was Canada, so it does feel like we lost one and the Cree are the token tribe of North America.

 

[pokiehl]

The probability of dev team doing "maintenance mode" for Civ VI while observing how Humankind performs so they can develop a good Civ VII is getting higher.

Ive kept an eye on development since August 2019 and played the OpenDevs, and Humankind is shaping up to be something that I liked more before I knew many details.

It’s not going to be an existential threat or a good thing to emulate for this franchise. Some of you guys here are way too optimistic or you haven’t played it.

I hope it does well but I am way off the hype train.

 

[tedhebert]

having kept an eye on development since August 2019 and played the OpenDevs, Humankind is shaping up to be a mess and not a credible threat or a good thing to emulator for this franchise. Some of you guys here are way too optimistic or you haven’t played it.

I've played 2 open devs (missed the stadia one) and pre-ordered a long time ago. I was extremely hyped on it, but... I'm really far from convinced it'll replace civ in my heart. But I'm also very wary of getting to fast to conclusions based on beta and open devs tests. What I've seen is a very intriguing, and pretty polished product for the dev cycle it was at. I'm really going to reserve judgement for when I get the final, marketable product in my hand and have had a chance to play with it for many hours. My impressions so far are: Extremely beautiful graphic wise, lush, beautiful colors, attention to details... but confusing to play, confusing to interpret the information I was offered, battles that are both exhilarating and way too long and tedious in the long run, beautiful but cluttered HUD. But we really have to remember that those were beta tests, and we should trust them to take good care of the feedback and fix things. I really haven't given up on hoping it's going to be great. I'm just not very good at enduring beta testing I think ;-)

 

[ManoftheHour333]

Yes, but are England and France African civs because they had African colonies? Phoenicia also had colonies in Spain, Sardinia, Sicily, Crete--so is Phoenicia a European civ? The Phoenician homeland is Lebanon; on a TSL map Phoenicia will start in Lebanon. We can have a bit more of a debate about Carthage--it had been in Africa for centuries and incorporated Libyans into its daily existence and culture if not into its elite. But substitute Nubia for Phoenicia and your numbers come out fine.

If we're being honest, I would consider Phoenicia and/or Carthage a more culturally European Civ than an African one. While they were in the Levant, you have this kind of "Mediterranean" culture that permeates Greece, Southern Italy, Turkey, North Africa, and yes, the Levant. Plus, as you said, Phoenician colonies stretched across the entire Mediterranean and moreso onto the more typically "European" islands and peninsulas (I.e Italy and Iberia)

From an anthropological perspective, we consider the Greeks, Byzantines, and Romans/Italians European even though they are very similar genetically to the people of the near east...so I wouldn't discriminate with Phoenicia and lump them into the overarching Mediterranean/Southern Europe group.

It's a bit tricky as where do you draw the line? Egypt would also fit many of these similarities too...but they were centered pretty south of the Mediterranean for the majority of their history. The line blurs with Mediterranean civs as it's such an insanely important crossroads that should be a distinct group all it's own.

The probability of dev team doing "maintenance mode" for Civ VI while observing how Humankind performs so they can develop a good Civ VII is getting higher.

While I'm not overly worried I do think Humankind will have some impact on the development of Civ VII. I don't think it'll lead to us losing the core elements of civ (Boardgame style map, leaders, resources etc.) but it might give them an idea of what people didn't like from both Civ VI and Humankind...and it'll likely influence what they choose to put into the vanilla game.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Not gonna lie, low key irate about this.

Sure, the devs felt the need to chock the game full of second-Rome, second-England, second-Egypt, second-Canada, third-France...and they think the game is done already?

* No replacements for Venice or Morocco?
* Nothing in western America to replace the Shoshone?
* No Vienna or Nineveh or Copenhagen city-states?
* No representation of Burma at all?

And those are just the things that feel vaguely mandatory, let alone the lack of Maghrebi or Omani representation, no sorely wanted second Arabian or Egyptian leaders, no library UB, or plenty of other "duh" spaces to expand the game...

So frustrating...

 

[Mount Suribachi]

Phonencia isn't african. If was Carthagen in the game we can speak about the same number of Civilizations


And do you think Civ 6 should be better than Civ 5. More one season is totally needed.

Having more African civs seems a very strange metric to determine whether Civ 6 is better than Civ 5. At this point, I couldn't care less about new civs from wherever in the world.

What I would like to see x1000 is bug fixes, balances, strengthening of weak civs, more QoL improvements, better data presentation/filtering/sorting, and most of all, a console version of the game I can play for more than an hour without a crash!!!!!

 

[Nerevatar]

right but he said “final game update.” Seems a lot less ambiguous to me.

They have usually used the term "game update" to mean "patch" during the NFP cycle, so putting too much emphasis on "game" is probably not a good idea. That said, I guess it could still be interpreted as "final patch" (of civ6), but I wouldn't be surprised if what they really meant was "final patch of NFP".

 

[pokiehl]

They have usually used the term "game update" to mean "patch" during the NFP cycle, so putting too much emphasis on "game" is probably not a good idea. That said, I guess it could still be interpreted as "final patch" (of civ6), but I wouldn't be surprised if what they really meant was "final patch of NFP".

I don’t know that this is true. Up to now their communication has been quite specific to “NFP” or “season” - happy to concede if you can link to this not being the case. In general they are really careful about the words they use and consistently hedge what they’re saying, which is the entire reason I found this noteworthy.

 

[Gulathar]

I would've liked them adding more overarching gameplay mechanics instead of buildings, civilizations, leaders etc. If anything they should've added more inbetween units like compositebowman between archer and crossbowman, longswordsman between swordsman and musketman, and rifleman between musketman and infantry. Without the additions, the game feels unfinished. We had these units in previous iterations but now they're missing. Perhaps the biggest necessity are QoL changes like improved AI and opening up modding capabilities. If they leave the game is this state, they have delivered an unfinished product.

 

[Deliverator]

I would've liked them adding more overarching gameplay mechanics instead of buildings, civilizations, leaders etc. If anything they should've added more inbetween units like compositebowman between archer and crossbowman, longswordsman between swordsman and musketman, and rifleman between musketman and infantry. Without the additions, the game feels unfinished. We had these units in previous iterations but now they're missing.

You can use the Steel and Thunder: Unit Expansion mod to get some of these units.

What I'm getting at is are you going to do another pass. Can you say that at this point?

Strenger: We cannot, no. We don't have any concrete plans for the future right now.

If one really wants to over-analyse you could say that not having any *concrete* plans is not the same as having no plans whatsoever. There may be some vague preliminary discussions as to what happens next, if anything, for Civ 6 and the Civ franchise as a whole. As I understand it, Ed Beach et al are working on a new IP that is not Civ.

 

[Gulathar]

You can use the Steel and Thunder: Unit Expansion mod to get some of these units.

Thanks, but I mostly play multiplayer.