Permanently a City-State

[Furycrab]

It is not necessarily that they are planning certain civs for the future. In fact, with the exception of the first few DLC, it is unlikely that they have a list of civilizations that they plan to use in the future. That said, any City-State could be "upgraded" in the future.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk

It's unlikely they have a full list, but seeing how games are typically developed, the art teams are likely already working on the next expansion and the last 2 months are usually play testing and hammering out bugs.

It's a fair bet that they have a list for the first expansion and DLCs already and that they might have selected the current list of city states with that in mind.

Forever no Canada .

 

[Zaarin]

I doubt it. I'd say that Korea, Portugal, and The Netherlands are 99% certain to return, and many of the others could.

What I don't like about many of the city-states they picked is that much of them were never really characterized by being a city-state.
It's just important cities of civilizations they didn't want to include.
And I speak of Stockholm, Toronto, Seoul, Libson, Hattusa(!), and maybe Buenos Aires.

That is more or less the point of city-states in Civ5/6 (which might be better termed "minor factions"): they represent the smaller and second-tier nations that aren't quite civ-worthy. (Granted, some of those are civ-worthy, like Hittites and Korea--but still, it allows those factions to be represented until they become civs.)

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

It would be neat in the sense that "it's present in this version of history, but for whatever circumstances it never progresses into a major player".

But the downside is that you will see it as a city-state and it will inform you that it isn't present as a civ, which is kind of immersion breaking.

You could tell that in Civ V when you encountered a military CS and saw the UU it provided...was never terribly immersion breaking for me in those situations.

 

[Golehm]

I don't see posibility of adding Israel with capital Jerusalem. Jerusalem was a capital city for kingdom of Judah. And for UN capital city of modern day Israel is Tel Aviv (Tel Aviv-Yafo).

 

[Thormodr]

I don't see posibility of adding Israel with capital Jerusalem. Jerusalem was a capital city for kingdom of Judah. And for UN capital city of modern day Israel is Tel Aviv (Tel Aviv-Yafo).

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Tel Aviv may be the capital of the Useless Nations' version of Israel but that means nothing.

Israel is long overdue to becoming a nation in Civ again.

 

[Gabriel Sergio]

Firaxis will hear their fans, Many wants Canada, Portugal, Indonesia, Sweden, and Netherland.

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

Nah, quite a few traits could be interchangeable with other civs. Lisbon is a good example, all you'd need is a city with a reputation of being protectionist about their trade.

 

[Ebrim]

I know I'm hoping that Argentina finally makes its way into Civ with this iteration. Imagine a TSL South America with Inca, Brazil and Argentina - so much better. So I'm not going to see Buenos Aires as an obstacle to that goal.

 

[BenZL43]

Some of the city states look like they're staying. Examples are La Venta and Zanzibar.
Others like Geneva or Nan Madol looks too generic and could be replaced by Switzerland or Melanesian DLC.

I'm already seeing Vilnius (When you enter a new era, earn 1 random Inspiration from that era.) could be replaced by something else when Poland's Jadwiga DLC released.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I'm already seeing Vilnius (When you enter a new era, earn 1 random Inspiration from that era.) could be replaced by something else when Poland's Jadwiga DLC released.

Vilnius could stay, but Seoul, Lisbon and Amsterdam are likely to be replaced at some point.

 

[EDre]

Honestly it could go both ways. All these unique abilities can make the City States stay city states because they are taking time to make them unique. Or these unique abilities could be the path to new Civilizations. Only Time Can Tell...

 

[stealth_nsk]

Honestly it could go both ways. All these unique abilities can make the City States stay city states because they are taking time to make them unique. Or these unique abilities could be the path to new Civilizations. Only Time Can Tell...

The most logical way is what those city-states will be just renamed once civs needed to be added.

 

[Loaf Warden]

I might have worried about this question, if not for some of the specific City-States we've seen. Maybe the Hittites were only in for Civ III and are never coming back, and maybe Sweden was only in for Civ V and is never coming back. But, as already mentioned, it's basically not conceivable that the Netherlands, Portugal, and Korea are being permanently locked out of becoming full civs in VI. Especially considering that the base game already includes Brazil and Kongo under the ruler who specifically did everything he could to "Portugalize" his nation; if Civ VI ends its development cycle without Portugal having become a full civ, I will eat a box of hats.

My assumption is that when a civ like Portugal or Korea is included, they will simply slap on a new name and icon for the relevant City-State. Honestly, I quite like the idea that they would keep the City-State as-is and only let, for example, Lisbon spawn if Portugal is not in the current play-through. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing City-States created for already-existing civs, just to represent that their empire never quite made the big leagues in this particular timeline. I doubt they're going to do it that way, but it would be cool. I wonder if a mod could be made for that, actually. I would leave it perma-activated if such a mod came out.

 

[BenZL43]

Vilnius could stay, but Seoul, Lisbon and Amsterdam are likely to be replaced at some point.

I'm saying Vilnius because Jadwiga's reign in Poland was around the time of Polish-Lithuania whose capital is Krakow and Vilnius - so it's not a baseless assumptions.

Seoul might change, its effect doesn't looks strongly tied enough to the country; but I think Amsterdam's and Lisbon's effects are strong enough to make them stay a CS.

 

[isau]

I wonder if Vatican City hasn't shown up as a city state because there are plans to make it a Civ a la Venice. With the Religious Victory in play, it seems completely feasible, if a bit of a wild guess.

 

[Nikae]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=574565

Just an idea, but in my opinion it could work well.

 

[Loaf Warden]

Seoul might change, its effect doesn't looks strongly tied enough to the country; but I think Amsterdam's and Lisbon's effects are strong enough to make them stay a CS.

Are you saying the bonuses the City-States give are strong enough that they won't want to take those bonuses out? Or that the bonuses are tied strongly enough to the identities of the Dutch and Portuguese--in contrast with the bonus of Seoul, which you specifically say is not strongly tied to Korea--that you think the Netherlands and Portugal are never going to get in?

If the former, then sure, the bonuses will be left in. The City-States will just be given new names and icons. There's no reason to abandon the bonuses.

If the latter, then I completely disagree. If they had just announced that "we have a City-State that gives your foreign trade routes additional gold for every Luxury Resource at the destination," nothing about that would make me say, "That could only be Amsterdam!" It's not like Amsterdam grants you a Tulip resource, or anything else quintessentially Dutch like that. They could very easily add a Netherlands civ and rename the Amsterdam City-State to, say, Lübeck, without changing anything about its bonus.

 

[labrynianrebel]

I'd like it if instead of removing Stockholm as a city-state if Sweden is added, they just make Stockholm not spawn in Sweden is in a game.

 

[Absolution]

I doubt it. I'd say that Korea, Portugal, and The Netherlands are 99% certain to return, and many of the others could.



That is more or less the point of city-states in Civ5/6 (which might be better termed "minor factions"): they represent the smaller and second-tier nations that aren't quite civ-worthy. (Granted, some of those are civ-worthy, like Hittites and Korea--but still, it allows those factions to be represented until they become civs.)

And it also harms the historical charm of playing among city-states, in my opinion.

 

[steveg700]

I don't think being a city-state is preclusive to introduction as a civ. Korea is a must-have, I'd say. So much so that it's one of the more profitable DLC options. Also, I think the science-focused civ's warrant holding off until they get a good handle on how science-based strategies influence dominant gameplay.

It's more likely a civ be precluded by having its signature traits doled out in the base game.

For instance, having a Mughal empire civ would be somewhat precluded by giving India Mughal temples and war elephants. Or, having a Khmer civ might be precluded by making Angkor Wat a generic monument and giving the wat over to Siam.