Poll: Do You Want More Persona Packs?

[sonicmyst]

After we have Magnificence Catherine and Rough Rider Teddy in NFP, do we want more persona packs in the future?

Let us discuss.

 

[Bast]

I want more leaders than persona packs to be honest. But they are nice.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I find the idea interesting but at the same time I some of the personas could have been alternate leaders, such as Magnificent Catherine would have made a good Louis XIV. I'll still play as her though as I find this Catherine more interesting and the way I wanted France to be from the beginning.

At the same time I like the idea of the Teddy split and there are some instances to where alternate leaders might not be viable for a civ, and a new approach on a leader could be warranted such as Pedro II.

The main reason is I would like an agenda change to where he doesn't get mad at you for recruiting more great people than him.
I don't know what else major they could focus him on other than his abolishment of slavery though.

So I guess I'm not sure.

 

[Buktu]

I would like some alternate leader packs over persona packs.

 

[The Civs 6]

I like them better than vampires, but I like substantive improvements more, I'm not really sure why they are making these things and not just making underlying balance changes.

 

[Greywulf]

They can make as many or few persona packs as they like (though I'm sure most of us would prefer alt leaders), as long as far more important things are the priority: i.e. AI and diplomacy (including barbarians).

 

[leandrombraz]

There's two ways that I see this:

• It's cheaper and less time consuming to do, so that's something that allow Firaxis to add more options for us to play than they would otherwise. I would rather get more alternative leaders, but this isn't really a choice between one or the other. This is a choice between getting these persona packs or nothing at all. New leaders just take more to be made. Considering this, I see no harm in them adding more of those packs;
• However, It does feel bad to get a second Teddy and Catherine instead of brand new leaders. They just aren't as interesting.

 

[Sostratus]

I think persona packs have a place for some civs and leaders where you have a great personality that you could take more than one way.
Now at some point that becomes a separate leader entirely, but I could see civs that have one particularly strong leader choice being great candidates.

And the leaders get new hats, who doesn’t like new hats?

 

[King William I]

If you asked me a week ago, if say no. Buy honestly, I like what I've seen so far and wouldn't mind a few other personas.

Pillars Cyrus focused on happiness and/loyalty
Patronage Nzinga focused on science
Commander Pericles focused on military etc

 

[Josephias]

As commented, not as interesting and entirely new leaders, but worth it if there is no other options. If this would help the AI to focus more in a type of victory, it might even be welcome. Extending (and fixing ) @King William I list:

Pillars Cyrus focused on happiness and/loyalty
Patronage Nzinga focused on science
Stratego Pericles focused on military
Inquisitor (or Pious) Philip (focused in RV) vs Conquistador Philip (focused in Dom)
Civil (Builder) Trajan vs Centurion (Expander) Trajan
"Defender of the Faith" Saladin with military focus
...

Back on the days of Beyond Earth, I had an idea/suggestion which could apply as well the persona packs - in BE, firaxis told us they did not provide the leaders a very fleshed-out personality/strategy (versus, e.g. what you had in Alpha Centaury) because they wanted the playtroughs to be not equal to each other. I tought the principle was worth, but not the implementation, as it led to most playtroughs facing uninspiring leaders... but the same idea could be implemented by giving each leader three-four different personalities that evolve during the game.
In example you could have a "grandma" Elodie, peaceful, diplomatic, leaning towards purity affinity; an "elitist" Elodie, thinking herself better than anyone, quick to anger and maybe leaning more towards supremacy, or an "aesthete" Elodie, isolationist, mixed purity-harmony, and same for other leaders), and which were choosen randomly at the start of the game (or, if you want more complexity, where selected depending on the status of the civ at certain key points of the game). This way, even if you knew you were playing against a leader, you still had a lot of uncertainity regarding which version of the leader it will develop to.
Persona packs would give that away by changing the model of the leader early on (doh!) but still can provide you with different AI focus to play a civ, and that is the interesting thing. A civ does not need to be always your best neighbour or your "keep an eye on your border" neighbour, because you may face different personalities of their leader in each game. Nevertheless, let's wait and see how it works out with Teddy and CdM before providing a final opinion.

 

[AriochIV]

Seems like a waste of effort to me. Changing one trait and and an agenda doesn't really affect play very much.

 

[blackcatatonic]

I would say yes, if the alternative is no more Civs or leaders for Civ VI, but my preference would still be for new Civs or leaders.

 

[kaspergm]

I want actual new game features and/or improvements to existing features, so answer for me is no.

 

[sonicmyst]

I am actually torn when I pose this question because on one hand, leaders can be tweaked using mods and we have seen a lot of them in the workshop. On the other hand, I would like to see what Firaxis can do with persona packs. And of course there is no question that we all want more civs and more leaders than alt packs (hence my question is not about choosing between the two)

 

[Futumch]

I'd rather have more alternate leaders. I would prefer Churchill (as an example) over land-empire Vicky in johdpurs and a pith helmet.

The poll seems a bit premature though, as we haven't had a play around with the new Big Ted and Catherine personas. They might be really good - time will tell.

 

[GenyaArikado]

Yep. After all they are not replacing alt leaders, they simple weren't an option there

 

[King William I]

@Josephias Thank you for fixing my Pericles suggestion. I honestly couldn't remember the word Stratego when I made that post.

But like I said, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. There are so many possibilities and it would give them a good excuse to drag out the development cycle.

I don't know what it is but lately Firaxis has made a habit of making me like things I would've hated to see in earlier instalments

 

[leandrombraz]

I think persona packs have a place for some civs and leaders where you have a great personality that you could take more than one way.
Now at some point that becomes a separate leader entirely, but I could see civs that have one particularly strong leader choice being great candidates.

And the leaders get new hats, who doesn’t like new hats?

The gaming industry from the late 2000s onward was built upon hats... lots and lots of hats. We say that we like games, but really, they are just an excuse to buy more hats.

 

[Karmah]

Rework the weak ones or introduce new ones.
If and only if they can't do this for cost management rather than straight up greed based optimization , then persona are better than nothing.

 

[GunsGermsandSteel]

Persona packs are fun. I would like to see more of them

A few ideas:
Crusader Barbarossa
Contemplative Gilgamesh (After the death of Enkidu)
Resplendent Shaka