[R&F] New Leaks (new civ Cree, new alt leader Chandragupta Maurya of India)

[AvianBritish]

Also if there is 2 new leaks , that means next week we will get 2 reveals

It could be that they have already uploaded the other 4 Civilizations first looks and that these are the last 2. I imagined the alt leader to be the last first look and it's still a possibility. ...maybe.

 

[Depravo]

Isn't it strange that the franchise has never represented one of the historically semi-civilised tribes of the US southeast or southwest? We know the Pueblo (or similar) almost made the cut in Civ 5 but as far as I know that's as close as it's ever come.

It's nice that they're trying new things, but the continuing omission of the Inca (again, as far as we know) has gone from puzzling to almost ludicrous. Inca, Maya, Muisca at least would have been better choices.

With every reveal a north-west or west African based civ, or one from the Rift Valley or Indian Ocean coast, or a central Asian or southern Indian one, or Babylon, gets less likely. It's great that SE Asia finally got some love, and things are definitely moving in the right direction, but I'm not feeling the Cree.

 

[PhilBowles]

I disagree that India needed a second leader; at least half of the original 18 Civilizations were either more in need of an alternate (e.g. France, America), or had better potential leaders to offer (e.g. England, Germany, Rome).

Odd. In gameplay terms there may have been other civs that needed one more (France high on the list, indeed), but England, Germany and Rome have some of the best leader choices for all that the portrayal of Victoria is atrocious.

 

[LastSword]

Leaks are followed by a hangover of no new information.

Generic Native American Civ #1 arrived as excepted.

Maurya is great actually, very mature from Firaxis (acknowledging that Gandhi is a joke and prioritizing India to have a leader finally). Gandhi's joke is fine (just reverse an order, add valid leader first and then drop Gandhi in dlc or expansion). Solid choice, I was afraid they will pick something I would consider waste of assets.
So Georgia, Ottomans, Inca and Italy, and we are settled perfectly (except modern Wilhelmina, but well...).

@Edit
Iirc the dlc with Indonesia was initially supposed to be a Civ + Leader instead 2 Civs delivered (more precise they were promising 2 civs and 1 alt leader, including Nubia).

 

[bite]

I assume @bite is asleep in his crypt since things are leaking.

saw the start of it then I needed sleep because I am leading the carols tonight at church and thus need my beauty sleep

 

[Guatenadian]

Isn't it strange that the franchise has never represented one of the historically semi-civilised tribes of the US southeast or southwest? We know the Pueblo (or similar) almost made the cut in Civ 5 but as far as I know that's as close as it's ever come.
It's nice that they're trying new things, but the continuing omission of the Inca

I mean this is also the first time that we have a tribe from outside current American borders. Even the Iroquois were primarily from upstate New York. Plus I highly doubt that this will be the only indigenous tribe in NA when all the expansions and DLCs come out. On the topic of the Inca, well, with the Maya out of the running the Inca are highly likely to be in R&F.

 

[Arianrhod]

Oh, wow, this is the first thing so far that's actually caught me off guard. I would've been pleasantly surprised with the Sioux or something, but this is even better, so I wasn't even going to dare to get my hopes up for it. Eagerly looking forward to seeing the Cree in action if they're real.

And India's easily the civ that needed an alt leader the most, so good on that, too.

With every reveal a north-west or west African based civ, or one from the Rift Valley or Indian Ocean coast, or a central Asian or southern Indian one, or Babylon, gets less likely..

Babylon's already out, unless Babylon is being added as a civ without the city of Babylon. It was confirmed as a city state a bit ago.

 

[Uberfrog]

I’m late to this party but I couldn’t be happier to see the extra leader being for India. Also nice to see a new tribe represented!

 

[Sagax]

with the Maya out of the running

I find it ironic that one of the civilizations most known for its mysterious rise and fall is not included in the expansion called Rise and Fall.

 

[Phrozen]

Isn't it strange that the franchise has never represented one of the historically semi-civilised tribes of the US southeast or southwest? We know the Pueblo (or similar) almost made the cut in Civ 5 but as far as I know that's as close as it's ever come.

The Pacific Northwest had sedentary tribes as well. They weren't agricultural tribes because they didn't need to be living in a temperate rain forest. The mid Atlantic had semi sedentary tribes around the Chesapeake bay with the tribes moving up or down the various rivers every so often.

 

[Phrozen]

I find it ironic that one of the civilizations most known for its mysterious rise and fall is not included in the expansion called Rise and Fall.

Sure the Maya city states collapsed before the Spanish came but that collapse isn't really mysterious. A bit of climate change, a bit of overpopulation, and a bit of desert and jungle tending to be really poor soil leading to nutrient exhaustion.

 

[Gabhar]

Another Indian leader is a good idea given that India's leader choice gets pigeonholed by Gandhi's mascot status, glad Firaxis is listening. Still think the alt leader implementation is really lacklustre but that needed addressing.
I prefer Cree over Canada simply because Australia, Brazil and America are enough in terms of new world colonial civs. I'd prefer Inca but we'll see them eventually surely. Not much to say without knowing the mechanics.

 

[The Highwayman]

Is India's alt leader going to resemble Greece where the Civ ability, unique unit, and district are the same and only the Leader ability changes?

 

[Sagax]

Sure the Maya city states collapsed before the Spanish came but that collapse isn't really mysterious. A bit of climate change, a bit of overpopulation, and a bit of desert and jungle tending to be really poor soil leading to nutrient exhaustion.

Is it that definitive now? But regardless, even if you remove the word "mysterious" from my comment, the point will still stand

Is India's alt leader going to resemble Greece where the Civ ability, unique unit, and district are the same and only the Leader ability changes?

Should be the case. Granted, the leader ability itself might include an additional unique unit (speaking of which - what if LUA provided additional unique infrastructure? Would that be OP?.

 

[Phrozen]

Is it that definitive now? But regardless, even if you remove the word "mysterious" from my comment, the point will still stand

Best guess and makes the most sense given the evidence as the cities were abandoned but the Maya culture was still in the area just not urbanized anymore. They just didn't disappear.

 

[clapyourhands]

Maurya is great actually, very mature from Firaxis (acknowledging that Gandhi is a joke and prioritizing India to have a leader finally). Gandhi's joke is fine (just reverse an order, add valid leader first and then drop Gandhi in dlc or expansion). Solid choice, I was afraid they will pick something I would consider waste of assets.

India was definitely at the top of my list for a new leader. The thing with Gandhi is that I actually think he was an excellent choice for Civ VI since the game has a much larger focus on leader personality and traits--the big blunder they made was always making him Nuke-Happy with his hidden agenda. Without that, you have a leader with personality, a very distinct and famous agend, and a leader ability that fits his legacy very well.

 

[bbbt]

Okay. Have we ever had a 'surprise' reveal on Firaxis's part yet? Everything that's not clearly hinted at in things like trailers gets leaked in accidental previews or is data-mined in files or the like. I'm starting to think it's part of their marketing strategy by this point.

 

[pgm123]

I disagree that India needed a second leader; at least half of the original 18 Civilizations were either more in need of an alternate (e.g. France, America), or had better potential leaders to offer (e.g. England, Germany, Rome).

There's no way Gandhi is more deserving as the sole leader than Theodore Roosevelt.

 

[pgm123]

Isn't it strange that the franchise has never represented one of the historically semi-civilised tribes of the US southeast or southwest? We know the Pueblo (or similar) almost made the cut in Civ 5 but as far as I know that's as close as it's ever come.

I'm not sure I care for the term "semi-civilized" there. In the case of the Southeast tribes, they were called the "Five Civilized" because they adopted European crops, dress, and chattel slavery. I don't think the Five Nations were less civilized than the Cherokee. That said, I'd love to have the Cherokee, Chocktaw, etc. in the game. The Chocktaw are descendants from the Mound Builder cultures, so they could have a UI tied with that.

 

[PhilBowles]

Okay. Have we ever had a 'surprise' reveal on Firaxis's part yet? Everything that's not clearly hinted at in things like trailers gets leaked in accidental previews or is data-mined in files or the like. I'm starting to think it's part of their marketing strategy by this point.

Nubia was out of the blue, as I recall - if only because everyone was preoccupied dissecting Eagle Pursuit's hints about Indonesia.