New Expansion Speculation Thread

[Leyrann]

Could natural disasters be linked to a World Congress mechanic based around humanitarian relief?

Let's stop with the world congress. It's ridiculously arbitrary and at the same time too powerful and absolutely useless.

That doesn't mean there's no need for late-game advanced diplomacy though, we just need to build it differently. World congress can be used as a base if we know the fundamental problems it has. Which are: First, it makes no sense to have all nations in the World Congress; the closest thing we have to that is the United Nations, and even the UN has some nations not partaking, while it also suffers from a sense of powerlessness at times, for various reasons. Second, the World Congress required you to do resolutions, which could result in the most useless stuff happening. At the same time, it's very bland in it's victory; gather enough votes through population or city states (IV and V respectively) and vote yourself world leader.

The first thing to change, then, is the membership of the World Congress. There are a lot of real-life examples you can look at; NATO, ASEAN, EU, Warshaw (sp?) Pact, Arabic (Arabian?) Liga, etc. These are all diplomatic pacts that do various things together, like trade contracts, wars or embargo's on non-members. So, instead of a World Congress, let's implement Diplomatic Leagues, which can be founded by major civilizations, which other civilizations (major and minor) can join. Those Diplomatic Leagues do various things together; how much depends on what the League members agree on.

And the second thing, is to improve the power it grants, the frustration it may cause, and reduce it's occasional uselessness. Those can all be swept in a single change: Voting no longer happens at set intervals, but rather when a major civilization calls for it. They can vote on things like forming a defensive pact, whether the League declares war as a single entity, etc. Of course, there are limits on voting; if something is voted away it can't be voted for again for X turns.

And lastly, the victory. To make Diplomatic Victory deeper, we should look at what it represents. And that's pretty simple; you're so diplomatically powerful that you are the one that decides what goes on in the world. So how do we achieve this? By having the victory trigger if your League is large enough (e.g. 80% of the world's population) and you have been the leader for a long enough period of time, with that period being significantly longer than the minimum time between leader change votes, so that you need to win several in a row.

See also the link in my signature where I worked this out in more detail.

 

[Greywulf]

Could there be a blob Polynesian or Micronesian Civ with a leader representing Tonga, Hawaii, etc. separately? If both Gorgo and Pericles city state leaders can be used to represent the Greek blob, and there is a possibility of a Mercian Queen representing an alt English Leader, why not?

We had a blob Polynesian civ in Civ V with a Hawaiian leader representing it ~ along with Maori UU and Rapa Nui UI.
Out of curiosity, which leader would you want to represent a blob Micronesian civ?

Yeah, lets have a Micronesian Civ. They were at it long before the Polynesians.

We have a Micronesian CS at least (Nan Madol), though generally speaking I don't see us getting a Micronesian civ.

 

[L4Psha]

I'm more interested in what new units we could get in this expansions. I think there is a serious gap between knight and tank. Also i hope they'll do something with B-52 and missile cruiser. I know chances are low but this cannot stop bothering me, i don't know what were they thinking.

Also when i saw R&F trailer for the first time i thought that if sean bean died from some kind of plague there it will be a feature in the game. Maybe they wanted to do disasters in R&F but for some reason desided not to. There were also things like winged hussars in vanilla trailer - a quite recognisable unit. But it make it to the game only after dlc. Maybe those who make trailer already show some features someway but then they were moved out of a game for a time, because they weren't ready yet or something, and they desided to leave trailer as is. Surely, maybe i'm just overstretching this

 

[Haig]

While not hugely important, I would like to have new graphics/color theme for

I've been lurking and reading everyone's speculation and Wish Lists with great interest during recent days. I've no idea whether an expansion is actually coming, let alone what may be in it, but I'm hoping that Firaxis will, at some point at least, bring back some old favorites as well as introduce new Civs, Leaders, and features. Maybe it's largely due to the fame and charisma of Civ icons like Napoleon, Nobunaga, and Bismarck, among others (and the far superior and lifelike Leader animations in Civ V sure didn't hurt), but many of the Leaders for major empires in Civ VI just feel...second-rate, for lack of a better term.

I have a bunch of Leaders/Civs that I miss from Civ IV and V, such as Nebuchadnezzar II (Babylon), Napoleon (France), Nobunaga (Japan), Katherine (Russia), Bismarck (Germany), Elizabeth (England), Washington or Lincoln (United States), Dido (Carthage), Boudicca (Celts), Theodora (Byzantium), Pachacuti (Inca), Attila (Huns), Suleiman (Ottomans), Hiawatha (Iroquois), Kamehameha (Polynesia), Maria I (Portugal), Augustus or Julius Caesar (Rome), Pocatello (Shoshone), Ramkhamheung (Siam), Askia (Songhai), and Enrico Dandolo (Venice).

Civ 5 leaders better animated? I feel like they are on sedatives all the time, you declare war on Harun and he barely lifts one eyelid "Oh.. hmm..."

Some have personality like Harald but most of them are just stiff and on Prozac.

Funny that you want "classic" leaders back and mention likes of Dido and Maria I (!!!) that were panned when released.

 

[Myomoto]

I'm more interested in what new units we could get in this expansions. I think there is a serious gap between knight and tank. Also i hope they'll do something with B-52 and missile cruiser. I know chances are low but this cannot stop bothering me, i don't know what were they thinking.

Also when i saw R&F trailer for the first time i thought that if sean bean died from some kind of plague there it will be a feature in the game. Maybe they wanted to do disasters in R&F but for some reason desided not to. There were also things like winged hussars in vanilla trailer - a quite recognisable unit. But it make it to the game only after dlc. Maybe those who make trailer already show some features someway but then they were moved out of a game for a time, because they weren't ready yet or something, and they desided to leave trailer as is. Surely, maybe i'm just overstretching this

The R&F cinematic is weird. It shows stuff like plauge and the UN prominently, but it doesn't have any features at all dealing with this.

 

[Xur]

I just hope for bug fixing in an eventual patch. Just tried playing the game again and there's just some "not-bugs" that makes me cry. Why doesn't attached units enherit sleep orders etc - annoying doesn't describe what I feel when I need to put a unit on guard, and then also put a support unit attached on guard (AA, general or whatever)... and the icons are still randomly swapping places between actual unit and support. How many years does it take for them to fix obvious BS like this?

 

[Zdarg]

I just hope for bug fixing in an eventual patch. Just tried playing the game again and there's just some "not-bugs" that makes me cry. Why doesn't attached units enherit sleep orders etc - annoying doesn't describe what I feel when I need to put a unit on guard, and then also put a support unit attached on guard (AA, general or whatever)... and the icons are still randomly swapping places between actual unit and support. How many years does it take for them to fix obvious BS like this?

Are you sure they were informed about this bug?

 

[nzcamel]

I think there is a serious gap between knight and tank.

Yeah, that was my main complaint unit wise pre R&F and I assumed it would be the obvious candidate to have a unit in between. Apparently not though. Maybe they really liked the desperation many players probably felt to find (largely non existent on the huge maps back in the earlier days) land based oil so that one could stop seeing knights in an otherwise modern setting. Sadists lol

 

[Xur]

Are you sure they were informed about this bug?

Technically, I dont think they would say it is a bug. It's just another chapter in the long story about the terrible UI. Anyway, how would you report a bug to someone that isn't allowed to communicate with the community? You could do it here on a 3rd party fansite, and never know if it helps. I refuse to help someone that doesn't want help.

 

[Leyrann]

I refuse to help someone that doesn't want help.

I'm pretty sure Firaxis does want help. So stop being petty maybe?

 

[Zdarg]

Technically, I dont think they would say it is a bug.

May be yes, may be no. I meant, do they actually know that attached units doesn't inherit sleep orders?

 

[Xur]

May be yes, may be no. I meant, do they actually know that attached units doesn't inherit sleep orders?

I assume they play the game, so yes?

 

[Zdarg]

I assume they play the game, so yes?

I played the game for 3551 hour, almost never attached anything to something and definitely never put a unit with attachment to sleep.
I won't blame them for not testing a worthless mechanics intended mostly for AI.

 

[Proclo]

Let's stop with the world congress. It's ridiculously arbitrary and at the same time too powerful and absolutely useless.

That doesn't mean there's no need for late-game advanced diplomacy though, we just need to build it differently. World congress can be used as a base if we know the fundamental problems it has. Which are: First, it makes no sense to have all nations in the World Congress; the closest thing we have to that is the United Nations, and even the UN has some nations not partaking, while it also suffers from a sense of powerlessness at times, for various reasons. Second, the World Congress required you to do resolutions, which could result in the most useless stuff happening. At the same time, it's very bland in it's victory; gather enough votes through population or city states (IV and V respectively) and vote yourself world leader.

The first thing to change, then, is the membership of the World Congress. There are a lot of real-life examples you can look at; NATO, ASEAN, EU, Warshaw (sp?) Pact, Arabic (Arabian?) Liga, etc. These are all diplomatic pacts that do various things together, like trade contracts, wars or embargo's on non-members. So, instead of a World Congress, let's implement Diplomatic Leagues, which can be founded by major civilizations, which other civilizations (major and minor) can join. Those Diplomatic Leagues do various things together; how much depends on what the League members agree on.

And the second thing, is to improve the power it grants, the frustration it may cause, and reduce it's occasional uselessness. Those can all be swept in a single change: Voting no longer happens at set intervals, but rather when a major civilization calls for it. They can vote on things like forming a defensive pact, whether the League declares war as a single entity, etc. Of course, there are limits on voting; if something is voted away it can't be voted for again for X turns.

And lastly, the victory. To make Diplomatic Victory deeper, we should look at what it represents. And that's pretty simple; you're so diplomatically powerful that you are the one that decides what goes on in the world. So how do we achieve this? By having the victory trigger if your League is large enough (e.g. 80% of the world's population) and you have been the leader for a long enough period of time, with that period being significantly longer than the minimum time between leader change votes, so that you need to win several in a row.

See also the link in my signature where I worked this out in more detail.

I agree with you in most of what you've said and I think that the various leagues are a great idea man! Here I give you some other random ideas and questions with the possible various World Congress incorporations.

The reason for their formation could be an emergency like WWI for the League of Nations or the WWII for the U.N. or precisely the formation of other League like the N.A.T.O. and the Warsaw Pact.

The voting system was the biggest issue in Civ5's World Congress. How do you think guys, this could be solved?

Also being leader was the product of this bad system. How would it be the new mechanic to select one?

I think that the diplomatic currency seen in Beyond Earth, although less inmersive and poorly implemented, was a great idea. You should gain diplomatic points for each favor and trading pact with every civ. How could it be implemented?

 

[Laurana Kanan]

You could do it here on a 3rd party fansite, and never know if it helps.

There are many ways to report a bug to FXS if you take a few minutes:

• Civ6 - Bug Reports sub-forum here at Civfanatics.
• Firaxis's Civ VI social media pages - Facebook and Twitter.
• 2K's Civ VI Support/Bug Reports sub-forum.
• Submit a ticket/request directly to 2K Support.

When I reported the bug related to Immortals and Melee attacks I used all of the above. Whether it actually had an impact or not I can't definitively say, but it was fixed in the following patch. If we just sit around and complain in random threads and don't speak up and highlight problems with the game, real or perceived, then those issues might never be addressed. Be proactive!

 

[nzcamel]

I played the game for 3551 hour, almost never attached anything to something and definitely never put a unit with attachment to sleep.
I won't blame them for not testing a worthless mechanics intended mostly for AI.

I'll hazard a guess that 90% of players will link units; especially settlers, supporting military units, and GG's. The inability to link was an ongoing frustration with V where too many easily prevented clicks were required to move units.

 

[Xur]

There are many ways to report a bug to FXS if you take a few minutes:

• Civ6 - Bug Reports sub-forum here at Civfanatics.
• Firaxis's Civ VI social media pages - Facebook and Twitter.
• 2K's Civ VI Support/Bug Reports sub-forum.
• Submit a ticket/request directly to 2K Support.

When I reported the bug related to Immortals and Melee attacks I used all of the above. Whether it actually had an impact or not I can't definitively say, but it was fixed in the following patch. If we just sit around and complain in random threads and don't speak up and highlight problems with the game, real or perceived, then those issues might never be addressed. Be proactive!

I’ll be as proactive as 2K/Firaxis and stay silent.

 

[Laurana Kanan]

I’ll be as proactive as 2K/Firaxis and stay silent.

Then I guess you won't be disappointed when nothing changes.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I played the game for 3551 hour, almost never attached anything to something and definitely never put a unit with attachment to sleep.
I won't blame them for not testing a worthless mechanics intended mostly for AI.

I agree . . . it's a weird thing to have ruin someone's day this much

 

[God of Kings]

Apparently, Firaxis ignores requests on /r/civ (despite it being advertised in Civ VI itself).