The Possible Mechanics Left After Gathering Storm

[Aussie_Lurker]

This post is mostly in response to the idea that GS will cover most of the gameplay content left for Civ to add. While asking for a 3rd expansion is still mostly wishful desperation to see some of the gaps in civs that this expansion will inevitably leave out: I wanted to make a legitimate post exploring the features Gathering Storm has missed and may be a really good addition to a third expansion.

With that said the main ideas I came up while browsing the forums were:
1. Health/Diseases
2. Migrations
3. Vassalage
4. Slavery
5. Corporations
6. Colonies
7. Improvements to Religion

Just reading down that list I feel like a lot of those mechanics could feasibly be tied together in some hypothetical Expansion 3. It would give Expansion 3 a return to known history and really flesh out the effect that migrations have had on people in both sharing culture, setting up international companies, creating vassal states, spreading diseases, capturing people from far away lands, etc. All of these mechanics focus on how people have moved over time and how the world has been interconnected.

I feel like this kind of expansion would further reinforce the tone set in Gather Storm where they are trying to create a dynamic map that you interact with, by having the citizens of the map in every country also be people with their own reactions and interactions (Migrating, spreading disease, being turned into slaves, etc) I also think this would be enough content to warrant a new expansion and not feel too little, maybe not as big as GS but still sizable.

What do you all think? Do you have any other features you would like to see in Civ 6 that won't be making it to Gathering Storm? Are you hoping for a 3rd expansion after this one?

Though I'd love for a 3rd expansion to come out (& I believe there is sufficient longevity in this version for the game to receive one) I'd be happy enough just to receive 2 or 3 large DLC's.

As for what I'd like to see in any future updates:

1. More ways to interact with City-States & Major Civilizations.....especially towards the later eras. In particular, I'd like to see Government Type, Religion Choice & Espionage play a bigger part in your relations with CS's & Major Powers.

2. Have Bonus, Strategic & Luxury resources play a bigger role in the broader civilian economy. I'd like to see working these resources impact on Great People points, increase City Yields on a Nation-wide basis & allow for the construction of more unique buildings within your cities (like the Mint from Civilization V). I'd also like to see the switch to a military focus impact on the economic benefits of these resources.

3. More Civics directly related to the Legal & Labour spheres of government. In particular, don't be afraid to have certain Civics provide negative consequences along with their benefits.

4. More balancing of going Wide vs going Tall. Make Specialists more meaningful, make resource access more meaningful (see point 2), make wider empires with more cities more costly.....but with buildings available that can mitigate those costs, & also make overcrowding more of an issue for tall empires (in particular when it comes to diseases).

5. Bring back certain aspects of Culture from Civilization IV-like Ethnicity & Culture Pressure on shared borders. Also, have a migration system to go along with this.

6. Bring back some of the secondary abilities that Great People had in Civilization V-particularly Artists, Musicians & Writers. Also, let Holy Sites continue to generate Great People points, but give Great Prophets abilities outside of founding religions (maybe give them a Schism ability).

7. Expand the theming bonus system to all artistic Buildings & Wonders (as it was in Civilization V), & generally make the Culture Victory more in-depth (again, as it was in Civilization V). Make Tourism & cultural pressure an issue in diplomatic relations.

8. A dynamic Eureka/Inspiration system that can change with each new game. So whilst killing a unit with a Slinger might boost Archery this time around, in the next game it might be building a Camp that does it. Some Techs/Civics might have 3 or 4 potential triggers apiece, thus leading to a wholly different system each game.

Those are the key ones for me.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I like the idea of including ethnicity, although it would need to be implemented in a way so as not to perpetuate stereotypes that minorities are inherently less loyal than the dominant population. Maybe more of a national affinity than ethnicity or nationality, at least if it's tied to loyalty.

Ethnicity could be handled in a manner similar to the faith of the citizens of each city. Combining it with the loyalty system and the policy card system could open up lots of very interesting empire management dynamics.

I'd like there to be a separate lense as well. I think it would make sense if it was somewhat tied to religion, loyalty, and tourism to an extent.

The only way I think that ethnic origin could somewhat negatively effect loyalty would be if you have the population of some those cities close by, as in share borders, but that would be somewhat minimal and easier to handle as even your population going over to the other Civ might balance it out. Also the more amenities you have, the more they are likely to come.

I'd like levels of immigration to unlock at different levels in the game. In the early game there won't be an opportunity for many and as you advance in tech and civics, immigrants come and have somewhat more of an impact:
First level: Shared borders
Second level: Roads connecting to different Civs. Walls to cities can inhibit immigration depending on the level.
Third level: Cartography is researched and immigrants can arrive by harbors. Walls don't inhibit immigration anymore.
4th level: Railroads built to connecting Civs
5th: Seaports built in cities
6th: Aerodromes built (Maybe a third building: International terminal would be needed)

To tie it in to victory conditions: For religion most likely immigrants will come over following the religion of the dominant Civ. That could ultimately be a hinderance or strategy on your part to convert a Civ.
As for culture say you have a large part of Romans in your city as your dominant ethnic group. If you have high enough culture in that city, the Roman international tourists might be the most prominent because it might remind them of home, where as other Civs might not want to visit that particular city.

 

[WillowBrook]

As for culture say you have a large part of Romans in your city as your dominant ethnic group. If you have high enough culture in that city, the Roman international tourists might be the most prominent because it might remind them of home, where as other Civs might not want to visit that particular city.

I like a lot of the ideas in your post. I'm thinking the tourism might work the opposite way, though (unless I'm misunderstanding you). I know a lot of Korean Americans, and many (though certainly not all) are interested in Korean cultural products and visit Korea occasionally as tourists. In game terms, the Korean population in America adds to Korea's tourism from America - not only do they visit as actual tourists, they're also watching Korean dramas and listening to their K-pop.

When it comes to loyalty, however, Korean Americans in general have no political allegiance to either government on the Korean peninsula - they may be interested in the politics over there, and care about what happens, but, in game terms, their loyalty is with America. So no relationship between ethnicity and loyalty, at least when the different ethnic group is where it is voluntarily.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

So no relationship between ethnicity and loyalty, at least when the different ethnic group is where it is voluntarily.

Under an immigration system, I agree re loyalty. Immigration, however, still raises both positives and issues for states (see current politics). Tying those issues into a more general empire management system makes sense to me. Do we shut our borders, lose the population growth, lose both the benefits and the problems, or do we run open borders and embrace all the above?

If that's too sensitive in the current era, there are similar issues that could be handled around how to treat minorities that come into your empire through expansion (peaceful or warlike … I still love the ideas from another thread about treating all tiles as occupied but slowly falling until your political authority as your city spheres expand).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I like a lot of the ideas in your post. I'm thinking the tourism might work the opposite way, though (unless I'm misunderstanding you). I know a lot of Korean Americans, and many (though certainly not all) are interested in Korean cultural products and visit Korea occasionally as tourists. In game terms, the Korean population in America adds to Korea's tourism from America - not only do they visit as actual tourists, they're also watching Korean dramas and listening to their K-pop.

When it comes to loyalty, however, Korean Americans in general have no political allegiance to either government on the Korean peninsula - they may be interested in the politics over there, and care about what happens, but, in game terms, their loyalty is with America. So no relationship between ethnicity and loyalty, at least when the different ethnic group is where it is voluntarily.

Hmmm... I was thinking that if Korea had a significant population in an American city, that they would be more inclined to visit that particular city, but I actually like your reasoning better.

As for the loyalty thing, I was basing it off of geography location, though it would still be minimal. There are a lot of border places that people might have an affinity for two different types of countries, and like loyalty be more influenced. In the case of Korea and America, it makes since in the real world and game world.

But maybe the word "loyalty" at the end of the day isn't the best way to describe this concept and it should be something different along the lines of calling it cultural identity or subcultures.

 

[God of Kings]

How about Great Felons: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/great-felons.635080/

History is filled with Great Felons from Herostratus who burned down the Temple of Artemis for easy fame to Guy Fawkes who nearly blew up the British Parliament to Al Capone who was the king of bootleggers and tax evasion.

Edit: confused Herostratus with Herodotus

 

[theadder]

How about Great Felons: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/great-felons.635080/

History is filled with Great Felons from Herodotus who burned down the Temple of Artemis for easy fame to Guy Fawkes who nearly blew up the British Parliament to Al Capone who was the king of bootleggers and tax evasion.

Herostratus.

 

[God of Kings]

Herostratus.

Corrected post.

 

[DanSquire]

I believe another cool feature would be dynamic populations.

Pops could have ethnicity (as another user already suggested) as well as perhaps ideology.

Another feature, as other users have suggested, would be dynamic rebellions.

These two features would tie into one another wonderfully, if cities dominated by a different ethnicity than your civilization, and it becomes unhappy, then you could see a rebellion across those cities for either independence or to join with the civilization of their ethnicity.

Pops could also have ideologies. If they are unhappy, or disloyal, populations could switch ideologies. They could also switch because of pressure from other cities of a differing ideology. To combat this you may need to heavily invest production into propaganda projects. If enough pops join an ideology different to your own, they’ll all join up in rebellion in a civil war, that either ends with you being dethroned and losing the game, you letting them have independence after enough fighting, or winning over the rebels.

Migration is another feature that could play into this. If your cities are surrounded by cities more happy and prosperous, or of the same religion or ideology of your pops, they will eventually leave. This would make amenities much more important if you wanted a large thriving city. But migration is also a double edged sword, because while migrants are free population, they also bring with them their ethnicity, ideology, and religion, but it could be easy for your cities to be overwhelmed with these questionable pops, whom may then just rebel.

This would also create the possibility for late game governments with legitimate differences and abilities, not just a different selection of policy cards.

Communism could have closed borders, allowing them to create massive unhappy cities without having to worry about half the population packing up to leave, for example.

I think there is quite a bit of room still to expand if they knew were to look.

 

[fail-deadly-]

This post is mostly in response to the idea that GS will cover most of the gameplay content left for Civ to add. While asking for a 3rd expansion is still mostly wishful desperation to see some of the gaps in civs that this expansion will inevitably leave out: I wanted to make a legitimate post exploring the features Gathering Storm has missed and may be a really good addition to a third expansion.

With that said the main ideas I came up while browsing the forums were:
1. Health/Diseases
2. Migrations
3. Vassalage
4. Slavery
5. Corporations
6. Colonies
7. Improvements to Religion

Just reading down that list I feel like a lot of those mechanics could feasibly be tied together in some hypothetical Expansion 3. It would give Expansion 3 a return to known history and really flesh out the effect that migrations have had on people in both sharing culture, setting up international companies, creating vassal states, spreading diseases, capturing people from far away lands, etc. All of these mechanics focus on how people have moved over time and how the world has been interconnected.

I feel like this kind of expansion would further reinforce the tone set in Gather Storm where they are trying to create a dynamic map that you interact with, by having the citizens of the map in every country also be people with their own reactions and interactions (Migrating, spreading disease, being turned into slaves, etc) I also think this would be enough content to warrant a new expansion and not feel too little, maybe not as big as GS but still sizable.

What do you all think? Do you have any other features you would like to see in Civ 6 that won't be making it to Gathering Storm? Are you hoping for a 3rd expansion after this one?

Here's my list, but I am not including anything you mentioned

1. Limited combined arms stacking
2. Insurgencies
3. Ethnicity and assimilation
4. Multi-civ treaties
5. Improved Space Race
6. Resource processing
7. Ideologies to compliment religions and governments

 

[kaspergm]

For me, the big wishes are:

• Corporations: Put resources to work in factories to produce new resources for amenities and for trade (like Toys, Jeans, Perfume, ...).
• Health and Diseases: A limiter to growth, similar to how pollution will be a limiter to production.
• Improvements to Espionage: I feel this is more needed than improvements to religion. I want an Espionage district (can be a one-per-civ like Government Plaza), I want promotion trees instead of random promotions ...
• Different types of Great Works of Writing (and theming): Just a small wish, but: Please separate writings into novels, poetry and dramas, and add appropriate theming bonuses to make writers a bit more nuanced.
  
• Improved Space Racing? They already say, there will be tweaks in this in upcoming expansion, it would be nice if something other than just-wait-X-turns-to-produce-items came into play.

 

[blackcatatonic]

How about Great Felons: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/great-felons.635080/

History is filled with Great Felons from Herostratus who burned down the Temple of Artemis for easy fame to Guy Fawkes who nearly blew up the British Parliament to Al Capone who was the king of bootleggers and tax evasion.

Edit: confused Herostratus with Herodotus

Having read your linked post for the first time (I clearly don't visit that forum as often as I should), I really love this idea! It could be a great way of adding another layer to Dark Ages.

 

[Ryansinbela]

How about revolutions and proxy wars

 

[AntoineS]

Given the map centric approach of Civ 6 the 2 main things that are missing in the main game in my opinion are

Plagues: adaptation of the black death to the main game

Navigable rivers (it fits perfectly with the map theme of Civ 6) can be intertwined wit commerce, conquest and plagues

Then some simple things need to be included or reworked:
Simple things like pledging to protect city states
The religious victory (the others were revamped with GS)
The World Congress (we need to have more control over what is bring discussed)

I'm guessing they'll keep fine tuning diplomacy as well and explore the alt. Leader concept more

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Given the map centric approach of Civ 6 the 2 main things that are missing in the main game in my opinion are

Plagues: adaptation of the black death to the main game

Navigable rivers (it fits perfectly with the map theme of Civ 6) can be intertwined wit commerce, conquest and plagues

Then some simple things need to be included or reworked:
Simple things like pledging to protect city states
The religious victory (the others were revamped with GS)
The World Congress (we need to have more control over what is bring discussed)

I'm guessing they'll keep fine tuning diplomacy as well and explore the alt. Leader concept more

Tying Religion in more with diplomacy & Domestic Policy would be great, as would JFD's Great Theologians.

 

[UWHabs]

The main ones for me would be corporations, and also some way to have tourism more directly relate to the regular game. Maybe I could see a case made for health, as a sort of modern revamp of housing. Also wouldn't mind some ways for the map to fill up automatically somehow later in the game too.

For Corporations, I don't really want to see battling evangelists of the corporation, so not sure what really makes sense. Perhaps they would be a "modern" upgrade to trade routes, so once you reach the industrial/modern era, the old method of trade routes gets completely replaced with something that would be more about corporation spreading, and giving you some different way to play the game.

Tourism would likely be implemented in some sort of loyalty/migration mechanism.

For health, I definitely wouldn't mind some better way to handle housing in the modern game. It always feels wrong to me that a sewer is simply worth 2 housing, and that if you get housing by other means, you can grow a city to size 30 without a sewer system in place. I'd much rather see some sort of system where urbanization actually means something, and that in the modern era you can truly pack your cities. This would also be a big improvement, since one of the problems of the district system to me is that you cap out, so that there's literally no different between a city of size 16 or 26 because they have the same number of districts. I'd also love something so that aqueducts can essentially be "upgraded" in modern times to a neighbourhood or another district, since it's a bit weird to have this old aqueduct take up a massive tile in the modern era.

And finally, I wouldn't mind also seeing things be a little more dynamic in the game. So, for example, if there was an island or place on the map that was empty for a long time, having a new city-state or free city crop up in there would also add some interest. It pains me on some maps to see whole sections of the map that never get settled, so having like a whole "minor free city civ" suddenly settle onto that terrain would be a neat twist.

 

[God of Kings]

The main ones for me would be corporations, and also some way to have tourism more directly relate to the regular game. Maybe I could see a case made for health, as a sort of modern revamp of housing. Also wouldn't mind some ways for the map to fill up automatically somehow later in the game too.

For Corporations, I don't really want to see battling evangelists of the corporation, so not sure what really makes sense. Perhaps they would be a "modern" upgrade to trade routes, so once you reach the industrial/modern era, the old method of trade routes gets completely replaced with something that would be more about corporation spreading, and giving you some different way to play the game.

Tourism would likely be implemented in some sort of loyalty/migration mechanism.

For health, I definitely wouldn't mind some better way to handle housing in the modern game. It always feels wrong to me that a sewer is simply worth 2 housing, and that if you get housing by other means, you can grow a city to size 30 without a sewer system in place. I'd much rather see some sort of system where urbanization actually means something, and that in the modern era you can truly pack your cities. This would also be a big improvement, since one of the problems of the district system to me is that you cap out, so that there's literally no different between a city of size 16 or 26 because they have the same number of districts. I'd also love something so that aqueducts can essentially be "upgraded" in modern times to a neighbourhood or another district, since it's a bit weird to have this old aqueduct take up a massive tile in the modern era.

And finally, I wouldn't mind also seeing things be a little more dynamic in the game. So, for example, if there was an island or place on the map that was empty for a long time, having a new city-state or free city crop up in there would also add some interest. It pains me on some maps to see whole sections of the map that never get settled, so having like a whole "minor free city civ" suddenly settle onto that terrain would be a neat twist.

Barbarian camps left alone for a sufficiently long enough time can become city-states.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Barbarian camps left alone for a sufficiently long enough time can become city-states.

Or, at the very least, Independant Cities. In fact, Civilization IV had something much like that.