[R&F] Sneak Peak 9/01

[Gabhar]

Again, how many civs are the devs planning to have in total?

I don't think they are planning a total but another expansion pack with at least 8 civs is pretty likely (which is 42? I think). I think people should be wary about expecting more than that. Even if they decide to do more civ DLC packs, I wouldn't expect more than 2 or 3.

 

[anandus]

Like nearly all European Coat of Arms?

Except the ones that have eagles

 

[Leyrann]

As an aside, I am right now imagining the Firaxis team sitting ready with a stopwatch when the leak goes live, seeing how long it would take us to figure out it was Tamar of Georgia.

 

[shaglio]

The animal could be European mink.

Or possibly a civet.

 

[j51]

I feel like this every time a new Civ game is announced.

For some reason some people are under the impression Sid Meier's Civilization is like a Lifetime Achievement Award for historical cultures or something. It gets people very exercised.

It's not that for everyone. I think Tamar is a cool edition, but I want the big historical players early on. Those are the civs I want to spend most of my time civing with, for role play fun. By the time of the second expansion I'm usually pretty tapped out on the current iteration of the game and a few new features aren't gonna change that. I was pretty excited for the Assyrians in BNW, but never really ended up spending that much time with them.

Also, the Inca are always getting the shaft. For the largest pre-Columbian empire they've only been in the base game once.

 

[Sagax]

I think they preclude the Byzantines (more than they already were given Antioch) more than the Ottomans.

I believe Byzantines are not even in the equation at this point. People are worried about Ottomans and Inca.

 

[ChocolateShake]

Having a civ like Georgia in the game is great, hope they keep adding in new civs. Considering vanilla launched without Persia and the Mongols, I think it's ok for the expansion to miss out on the Ottomans, though they might still make it in. They'll be included at some point I believe, so if they don't make it in now they might add them in as part of a civ double-pack with the Byzantines (That would be pretty cool I think).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I don't think they are planning a total but another expansion pack with at least 8 civs is pretty likely (which is 42? I think). I think people should be wary about expecting more than that. Even if they decide to do more civ DLC packs, I wouldn't expect more than 2 or 3.

Civ 5 had 43. Every iteration of Civ has had more than the previous one. I would be disappointed for sure if it was just 42 with one more expansion.
Anyway I too was a Georgia skeptic, but I don't necessarily mind them being in. It was between them or Armenia for a Caucus Civ anyway.

 

[kaspergm]

So, Georgia is actually happening ... go figure. Good of them to acknowledge the community - not that Georgia is not a perfectly valid addition in itself, but I'm positive this happens in respons to the whole Tamar meme thing.

 

[CivLuvah]

The post that started it all:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/all-leader-portraits.570683/page-13#post-14351186

 

[Zaarin]

All hail Tamar of Georgia!

 

[DJ_Tanner]

I don't think they are planning a total but another expansion pack with at least 8 civs is pretty likely (which is 42? I think). I think people should be wary about expecting more than that. Even if they decide to do more civ DLC packs, I wouldn't expect more than 2 or 3.

There will almost assuredly be another expansion with 8. I think, while there will be less DLC the DLC themselves will be bigger (double and triple packs since there is no DD to package all the DLC) so 6-7 new civs between the expansions. Although I would love if there was a summer DLC that was, instead of 2 civs, like 8-10 leaders. Hopefully Anton's team is more interested in the leader mechanic than Ed's was, I would really like to see that explored more.

 

[CivLuvah]

There will almost assuredly be another expansion with 8. I think, while there will be less DLC the DLC themselves will be bigger (double and triple packs since there is no DD to package all the DLC) so 6-7 new civs between the expansions. Although I would love if there was a summer DLC that was, instead of 2 civs, like 8-10 leaders. Hopefully Anton's team is more interested in the leader mechanic than Ed's was, I would really like to see that explored more.

While we're at it, I'm wishing for a leader pack DLC. The alternative leader mechanic is very much underused as of now. Which is why I've been campaigning for Italy to be in the game.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

While we're at it, I'm wishing for a leader pack DLC. The alternative leader mechanic is very much underused as of now. Which is why I've been campaigning for Italy to be in the game.

I read it somewhere that it was originally just designed to help modders, and with how it has been totally ignored from an official standpoint that makes sense. That is why I do hope the change in lead does change some of the overall design direction as well and we get to see some official work done to bring more leaders into the fold.

 

[Gabhar]

Civ 5 had 43. Every iteration of Civ has had more than the previous one. I would be disappointed for sure if it was just 42 with one more expansion.

That's true though I say that's more coincidence than a planned trend per se. At this point V and VI's civs have a similar production overhead so it really comes down to their willingness to add more DLC or make a bigger expansion pack.

 

[Liufeng]

people will be rioting if Georgia are in and the ottomans or Inca are out. I think the exclusion of the Ottoman empire, specifically, over Georgia would make people riot and no amounts of Shaka Zulu would aleviate that sentiment.

Well, Portugal was an extremely important Civilization which should certainly be included, and I'm not complaining about their absence (not that much, I mean )

 

[Lord Lakely]

So, Georgia is actually happening ... go figure. Good of them to acknowledge the community - not that Georgia is not a perfectly valid addition in itself, but I'm positive this happens in respons to the whole Tamar meme thing.

Georgia and Tamar weren't on my Christmas wishlist either (not by a longshot, even), but Tamar herself is much more than the meme she became. She's a really fascinating character and an excellent choice for a female leader, one of better ones available.

The only reason to not like her is the Civ she represents.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Well, Portugal was an extremely important Civilization which should certainly be included, and I'm not complaining about their absence (not that much, I mean )

Portugal is inevitable for the next expansion.

 

[Merciorum]

It will be very interesting to see how many people complain about Tamar being a woman (if indeed they are going for her). I mean, she pretty much fills all the boxes even the most pernickity type can demand: she ruled as a queen regnant, she was a great military and civil ruler in her own right, she's one of the most famous and renowned rulers of Georgia. It'll be interesting to see the hoops they will jump through to cry tokenism. I presume they'll have to resort to questioning Georgia's inclusion in the first place.

 

[God of Kings]

Turns out that Tamar is in R&F!

The olives led us to Tamar, because for the longest time, we assumed that the olives were "date palms." Tamar's name means "date palm" in Hebrew.