Ill keep my bets on the Ottomans, Inca and Mali for the last three, however its possible that Mali could be replaced by the Ashanti or Benin, or Ghana. I doubt Canada will be in R&F its better saved for DLC or a future expansion that adds a World Congress mechanism.
I think Firaxis is currently incapable of pulling off an Etruscan Civ. If they struggled to find someone to write Sumerian dialogue (Gilgamesh speaks Old Akkadian instead), they will struggle to find a linguist who can write Etruscan dialogue.
Also, we don't know much about the Etruscan Kings (thanks Romans....).
Ill keep my bets on the Ottomans, Inca and Mali for the last three, however its possible that Mali could be replaced by the Ashanti or Benin, or Ghana. I doubt Canada will be in R&F its better saved for DLC or a future expansion that adds a World Congress mechanism.
True, I only mentioned them since many people will often mention the Ghana Empire when discussing a potential West African Civ, personally I see the Ashanti as a very likely choice.
I think Firaxis is currently incapable of pulling off an Etruscan Civ. If they struggled to find someone to write Sumerian dialogue (Gilgamesh speaks Old Akkadian instead), they will struggle to find a linguist who can write Etruscan dialogue.
Also, we don't know much about the Etruscan Kings (thanks Romans....).
Yes, I had not thought it through properly. In addition, they would represent the ancient Era, but geographically they would be too close to the Romans, I think.
Maybe there is no ancient era civilization in R&F after all.
That makes sense though, since the mechanics of Rise and Fall suggest that the civs in question weathered good times and bad. Most ancient civs were pretty solid risers, but the only *documented* bads usually resulted in them ending. After all, there is a reason that 2300 years later (over 2 _millenia_) one of the most famous phrases in military history is still, "Carthago delenda est."
Most of the "ancient" civs that would fit the theme nicely are already in-game (Rome, Greece, China, Egypt for sure)
Yes, I had not thought it through properly. In addition, they would represent the ancient Era, but geographically they would be too close to the Romans, I think.
Maybe there is no ancient era civilization in R&F after all.
That makes sense though, since the mechanics of Rise and Fall suggest that the civs in question weathered good times and bad. Most ancient civs were pretty solid risers, but the only *documented* bads usually resulted in them ending. After all, there is a reason that 2300 years later (over 2 _millenia_) one of the most famous phrases in military history is still, "Carthago delenda est."
Most of the "ancient" civs that would fit the theme nicely are already in-game (Rome, Greece, China, Egypt for sure)
Rome, Greece, and Carthage are all Classical, and China wasn't a unified state (as unified by Qin Shi Huang) until the Classical Era, either. Sadly, to add insult to injury, they went for a late Classical leader for Egypt, too.
I am 99.9% positive about the Inca. I am about 98% positive on the Ottomans. I'm not convinced at all about Italy, and I am almost positive we will not see a Wallace-led Scotland or Celts. But we'll see.
I'm 99.9% positive on the Ottomans. I guarantee you we'll see both the Ottomans and Byzantines before the game is done with expansions, so one or the other has to get in sooner or later and I'm betting sooner. With Antioch spotted and Janissaries technically in the game already, I think the Ottomans are imminent.
The only thing holding me back on the Inca is the lack of Machu Picchu. If they were planning to add the Inca in an expansion and had room for 8 wonders, it's hard to believe that Machu Picchu wouldn't have been one of them. That said, it seems the Maya are not in due to Palenque CS and South America is underrepresented (and unrepresented from a native standpoint), so I think the Inca are still more than likely.
I also don't share the confidence some have for Italy. I don't think the plague doctor scene in the cinematic was a clue for anything other than symbolizing a fall/dark age. I admit that the lack of Renaissance Italian CSs are puzzling, but I'm putting my money on an African civ for the final spot.
I'm 99.9% positive on the Ottomans. I guarantee you we'll see both the Ottomans and Byzantines before the game is done with expansions, so one or the other has to get in sooner or later and I'm betting sooner. With Antioch spotted and Janissaries technically in the game already, I think the Ottomans are eminent.
The only thing holding me back on the Inca is the lack of Machu Picchu. If they were planning to add the Inca in an expansion and had room for 8 wonders, it's hard to believe that Machu Picchu wouldn't have been one of them. That said, it seems the Maya are not in due to Palenque CS and South America is underrepresented (and unrepresented from a native standpoint), so I think the Inca are still more than likely.
I also don't share the confidence some have for Italy. I don't think the plague doctor scene in the cinematic was a clue for anything other than symbolizing a fall/dark age. I admit that the lack of Renaissance Italian CSs are puzzling, but I'm putting my money on an African civ for the final spot.
Could they not release a Ottoman/Byzantine expansion soon after R&F release? Similar to how they released Macedon and Persia together? I like the idea of releasing two historical rival civs together and adding a historical scenario for the two. I would wait for that as long as it got released in the first half of this year.
How do you know Machu Picchu isn't a wonder for sure? Have they confirmed all 8 now? It looked awesome in Civ5 so imagine how pretty it would look in civ6? Looking forward to seeing Inca. South America needs to get filled (Brazil dominating that continent at the moment) and will be good to see a civ benefiting from mountain tiles.
There needs to be a west African civ now on the world map theres just a giant void there now. Mali, Ghana, Songhai, Moors, Morocco, Carthage whoever they are all good. Just need to fill that space. I've heard a lot of demands for Italy but is it really right for this game? Rome is already in. It would be like having Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. Plus Italy was always small city states until it unified in the 19th century. So do people want a 1800s type European civ leader? how would it work on the world map with Rome already in?
Maybe a scenario for the Italian city states would be better. You could play as Venice Milan or Florence etc. Could be a good way to show how golden/ dark ages work too. Doing the Hundred Years War between England and France would also be a good scenario for this.
We've successfully seen all the wonders due to livestreams, teasers, pictures on the website etc... @bite created a thread dedicated to all information on R&F us fanatics can find here. But yea Machu Picchu is not a wonder that will be featured in R&F.
We've successfully seen all the wonders due to livestreams, teasers, pictures on the website etc... @bite created a thread dedicated to all information on R&F us fanatics can find here. But yea Machu Picchu is not a wonder that will be featured in R&F.
Furthermore a city wonder on a mountain would be a bit difficult to implement with full tile wonders. In CiV they used very small buildings for mountain wonders (like Neuschwanstein too). Maybe thats the reason there is no Machu Picchu this time around.
I can see the Incas getting a unique government district they can build on mountains... though they would have to visually redesign everything about the district instead of just adding a few new cultured graphics like they usually do with unique districts. Would be interesting though.
Whatever the case, I hope we do see my favourite gold-digging mountainmen in the game.
I can see the Incas getting a unique government district they can build on mountains... though they would have to visually redesign everything about the district instead of just adding a few new cultured graphics like they usually do with unique districts. Would be interesting though.
Whatever the case, I hope we do see my favourite gold-digging mountainmen in the game.
That's about the only way I can imagine Machu Picchu being used as the Inca's unique infrastructure... unique government plaza replacement. It would need a completely unique model that could somehow incorporate the various buildings without looking ridiculous. Since it would be the first and only UI that can only be built one time, it would have to have some hefty yields/effects. It would be closer to a unique wonder than a district.
I would much rather Machu Picchu stay an Incan city/UI/UD whatever, than open it up to other civs as a wonder. I hated playing the Inca in Civ5 when another civ beat me to Machu Picchu, and all I got was an oddly named city called "Machu." Machu Picchu=Inca, end of story.
I would much rather Machu Picchu stay an Incan city/UI/UD whatever, than open it up to other civs as a wonder. I hated playing the Inca in Civ5 when another civ beat me to Machu Picchu, and all I got was an oddly named city called "Machu." Machu Picchu=Inca, end of story.
Machu Picchu is considered to be one of the seven wonders of the modern world, so it makes sense that anybody can build it just as anyone can build the Pyramids, Hanging Gardens, etc. How is Machu anymore unique to the Incas than the Taj Mahal to the Indians? The Eiffel Tower to the French? I can speak for myself when I say it's equally annoying to play as the Egyptians only for somebody else to beat me to the Pyramids.
Machu Picchu is considered to be one of the seven wonders of the modern world, so it makes sense that anybody can build it just as anyone can build the Pyramids, Hanging Gardens, etc. How is Machu anymore unique to the Incas than the Taj Mahal to the Indians? The Eiffel Tower to the French? I can speak for myself when I say it's equally annoying to play as the Egyptians only for somebody else to beat me to the Pyramids.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Sadly, to add insult to injury, they went for a late Classical leader for Egypt, too. 
