There will be a third expansion and/or more DLC for Civ5?

[mitsho]

Yeah, a "mountain" civ just for the hell of it isn't necessarily a good thing. It needs catchy gameplay of course. But there are less and less themes available for new gameplay, even though moysturfumer manages to get a few. But even there, the horses/horses/horses is repetitive. And then there's themes that may sound good like a Ice/(Coast) focus for the Inuit, but doesn't translate too well to gameplay (very narrow region on the map)

But good list, moysturfumer. That'd would sound about right for a small xpac.

 

[BrokenSky]

We already talked about this earlier in the thread, although it wasn't so much resolved as forgotten.

to repeat what I said there, my understanding was that if there was significant demand from fans for DLC and/or a third Expansion, then they would make it/them; otherwise maybe a couple of polishing patches and they'd start work on new stuff.

Also I'm pretty sure the point was that Afghanistan had more depth than just being mountainous. Not that we should/n't add a civ simply because its particular play style wasn't/was represented enough. Although maybe I misunderstood.

 

[DeutschDachs]

A dlc i would really like is the map editor that has been a staple of the series. Would be fun to create some scenarios like the crusades or battle of venice without necessarily having to do a mod

 

[BrokenSky]

There is a map editor. Its part of the mod making software called 'Sid Meier's Civilization V SDK' available for free on steam. Its in the tool section.

 

[monkspider]

I am surprised that we still don't have Sumeria since they already had artwork for their flag, UU and UB created for Wonders of the Ancient World scenario.

 

[omnishakira]

crossing my fingers for an AI improvement DLC.

 

[theadder]

crossing my fingers for an AI improvement DLC.

There's absolutely no chance of this.

I can't even begin to imagine the outrage if they tried to sell better AI separately. Note that they have carefully ported the enhanced AI code back to even the original game in the pre-BNW patch.

They are clearly very afraid of being seen to favour newer expansions with better AI.

 

[Monado]

I am surprised that we still don't have Sumeria since they already had artwork for their flag, UU and UB created for Wonders of the Ancient World scenario.

Sumeria/Hittites would make a very nice dlc combo pack!

 

[Sheershaw]

I am surprised that we still don't have Sumeria since they already had artwork for their flag, UU and UB created for Wonders of the Ancient World scenario.

I'm against Sumer being added. For one, we already have two ancient Mesopotamian civs in the game, Babylon and Assyria. The other thing is that Sumer wasn't really a unified state, but rather a collection of similar city-states, and the city state mechanic was made for such civs. It's why we have Italian and Phoenician cities appearing as city states.

Before you mention Greece, I should point out that Greece WAS united under Alexander (hence why he is the leader).

 

[Loaf Warden]

For one, we already have two ancient Mesopotamian civs in the game, Babylon and Assyria.

So?

Sumer wasn't really a unified state,

No, but it was a civilization. Now, what's the game called again? I forget. I'm pretty sure it's not "State V".

 

[mitsho]

Sumer and the Hittites were probably planned as new civs but then sometimes along the development scrapped and we got the Ancient Wonders DLC instead. I can see some problem with the voice actors similar to what happened to the Pueblo. Maybe after the discussions due to whatever Ramesses II and Darius in the game talk, they changed their mind. But then we did get Babylon. So it's kind of a mystery. But the inclusion of new icons etc. ... does point towards some planning having gone into it. Though not too much probably.

In the end, I think it's unlikely that we'll get those civs now when (if) they already had a go at it and chose not to.

 

[Loaf Warden]

Sumer and the Hittites were probably planned as new civs but then sometimes along the development scrapped and we got the Ancient Wonders DLC instead. I can see some problem with the voice actors similar to what happened to the Pueblo. Maybe after the discussions due to whatever Ramesses II and Darius in the game talk, they changed their mind. But then we did get Babylon. So it's kind of a mystery. But the inclusion of new icons etc. ... does point towards some planning having gone into it. Though not too much probably.

In the end, I think it's unlikely that we'll get those civs now when (if) they already had a go at it and chose not to.

Unfortunately, this is probably correct. I've long been of the suspicion that their decision to have leaders speak lines in "their own language" has, by itself, kept some civs out of this incarnation. On the other hand, they've already compromised that principle to the point of meaninglessness with some civs, so other compromises could be found. In a pinch, it would not be completely illogical to have a Sumerian ruler speak Akkadian. It wouldn't be as good as Sumerian, but at least Akkadian did eventually become widespread in Sumer and would have been well known to later Sumerians. It would be a better fit than Arabic for Ramesses, for example. I hold out some hope, small as it may be, that if there is more DLC or another expansion coming, that Sumer will be a part of it.

 

[Tsuchinoko]

The latest 2k Q+A session has given me some hope that there could be more on the way for Civ V after all. I was rather concerned by the Polygon article as they sounded rather certain that there wouldn't be anymore content (or at least, any more expansions) for the game. I'm wondering whether Firaxis' official stance has been that Civ V is 'completed' so that no-one would complain that they had left it 'unfinished'/without content they had planned for it if they did decide that they wanted to move onwards to Civ VI.

 

[Liufeng]

I'm against Sumer being added. For one, we already have two ancient Mesopotamian civs in the game, Babylon and Assyria. The other thing is that Sumer wasn't really a unified state, but rather a collection of similar city-states, and the city state mechanic was made for such civs. It's why we have Italian and Phoenician cities appearing as city states.

Before you mention Greece, I should point out that Greece WAS united under Alexander (hence why he is the leader).

Well, if you by that route, I can guarantee you : SUmer WAS unified once, under Lugalzagesi, until the latter was defeated by Sargon. So yes, there was a unified Sumer.

 

[EulerMcE]

What did Sumerian units speak in Civ IV?

 

[Liufeng]

What did Sumerian units speak in Civ IV?

Well, sumerian ... There is a sumerian language, and we know it (otherwise we wouldn'r have been able to translate so much tablets), which has phonetically the same value as akkadian : We know how to write it, but we can only guess how they spoke it.

 

[EulerMcE]

Then I don't see the language being all that insurmountable a barrier to a Sumer civilization. Seems more likely to me that Sumer's absence was just out of a desire to use Assyria, who are alleged to be one of the developers' favourite.

 

[JokerJace]

After playing XCOM and loving it and what they've done with CiV I will definitely buy anything they will put out there. That is especially true for anything CiV related. But I guess dedicated fans are a comperable small marketing factor.

 

[crimson_ghost]

No firsthand experience with software sales in China. I'd welcome someone with detailed knowledge to chime in, but this seems like an area that is accepted as convention and one I'd challenge. Sure they'll ban it. But so what ?

I live in China, and from what I can see, the game is not marketed at all. I've had to use a VPN to purchase it. My Chinese friends download hacked Chinese language versions.

That being said, if we're worried about going against the worldview of the Chinese government (a more basic argument than 'pissing them off') they consider Mongolians to be a Chinese ethnicity. From what it appears, with FDI and border city projects, the PRC would like to absorb Mongolia, though I highly doubt it's a top priority.

I think it's still possible for another expansion. Based on the "if there's a good idea, we'll make Civ VI" POV, it seems more likely to be able to improve AI, mechanics, improve random events (which GEM has done, maybe the devs can officially work out disasters), and corporate entities (a lot of good ideas have been mentioned in these forums).

One clue I can see for Civ VI is that they want to work out a way to have a weighted tile occupation, based on unit types, instead of strictly one military unit per tile. I love this idea as a healthy compromise between the annoying navigation from OUPT and the stacks of doom.

I personally would like to see CS's keep conquered cities, instead of razing them (like in Civ Nights), and hostile CSes actually acting more aggressive (Venice anyone?).

What about incorporating a diagnostic tool in the main menu for pointing out conflicts with mods?

 

[Depravo]

There's still room for improvement in warfare. Especially naval warfare and the sea in general. Find a use for the Great Admiral, give non-coastal cities some means to make effective use of the water tiles around them, that sort of thing.