What’s next? More DLCs or first expansion

[SupremacyKing2]

Tbf, elsewise we might have much more techs like square rigging, that only add one unit... and now got one passive boost so its not completely empty for Indonesia. ^^"

Well, like with everything else in game design, it is all about balance. Adding more techs just to have more, does not make much sense to me. Too many techs and you run into one of two problems. Either the player does not have time to research most of the new techs so the player still focuses on the same "best" techs and the new techs are wasted or the player is able to research nearly every tech and they get new techs so quickly that each discovery loses its value. I have always believed that each tech should be meaningful to the player. The tech should unlock a bunch of new stuff so that it is a big deal to the player.

 

[Vahnstad]

"two DLC's" ... 7 & 8 ... the missing link ... GH

Also native American civs sounds a lot like Railroad ... no?

edit: but first (in 7) Age of Discovery with Isabella etc.

I don't understand what you mean? The missing link... GH. How could that explain the "two DLC's? Or why Isabella in DLC 7?

I do not rule out the possibility of having one more European civ among the DLCs, though.

They will save them for the expansions, since they tend to be (more) popular, and there are not that many options left anymore, or they already have to go with Genoa/Florence and Austria/Hungary.

 

[cvb]

[edit:
G = 7th letter = Spain/Portugal: southern & middle A. / sailing first ships to the new world
H = 8th letter = England/France: northern A. / build Railroads from the east coast to the wild west]

I just want Otto von Bismarck back really

He was a highly gifted diplomat (being allied or at least have a non-aggression pact with whole Europe EXCEPT France was certainly a masterpiece ... albeit nevertheless fragile without people of his format to hold it in balance).
But it was also his genius, which instigated several wars to outmaneuver in the end Austria in order to form the 'small german' solution absolutely dominated by one mighty Prussia (1871 Versailles: 2nd Reich) instead of a 'large german' solution also containing Austria, more in balance as a whole, less centralistic, less militaristic, less expansive ... divide et impera!

Or Hitler but I know that will never happen.

Yes, the "little Austrian corporal" ... we Germans owe him eternally being target of all kinds of projections.

 

[Guandao]

I'm betting on the First Expansion with no more DLCs before. We will first hear news about it in March/April. Then it will be released in August, September, or October...

 

[stealth_nsk]

I prefer the expansion model because it forces the developer to focus their resources on overhauling aspects of the game that are truly lacking. Without an expansion there's nothing to guarantee drastic new features like the World Congress or late game ideologies ever materialize. Instead the developers might grow complacent and just stick with a slow drip of new Civs.

That's actually the problem of expansion model. Developers have to throw in new features even if those features aren't needed for the game. World Congress is one huge exploit and unless developers invent how to fix the concept, I wouldn't want it to reappear.

 

[Xandinho]

Could the Civ GH be Genoa and Hungary? it seems that someone had found something in the files in the game relating to Genoa. Is a scenario possible between these two civs?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Could the Civ GH be Genoa and Hungary? it seems that someone had found something in the files in the game relating to Genoa. Is a scenario possible between these two civs?

Civ GH was downloaded with the patch as part of the main game files.

 

[Cerilis]

Civ GH was downloaded with the patch as part of the main game files.

But what if that only means it's hidden among them now.

 

[darkace77450]

That's actually the problem of expansion model. Developers have to throw in new features even if those features aren't needed for the game. World Congress is one huge exploit and unless developers invent how to fix the concept, I wouldn't want it to reappear.

Something to break up the monotony of the late game is necessary, and the World Congress fills that role nicely. To not include it because it's "one huge exploit" in a game where warfare against an inept AI is already exploited to the Nth degree would be a tepid way to develop a game, in my humble opinion.

 

[Katakanja]

But what if that only means it's hidden among them now.

And in keeping with tradition, no one here will bother to check thoroughly for new unused files until the week before the next patch/DLC/expansion, at which point we will discover that a list of every civ in the first expansion has been sitting in the game files all along

 

[Zelda1983]

I'm betting on the First Expansion with no more DLCs before.

I think so too.

We will first hear news about it in March/April. Then it will be released in August, September, or October...

I think we get it in winter, because every quarter in the year was new content released. Additionally we know diplomacy we get updatet.

 

[CivLuvah]

I'm a minority here, but I really dislike Expansion model:
1. The last expansion comes close to the end of the game lifecycle, so it's never properly patched and balanced.
2. Maintaining different game version stretches developer resources thin, again affecting patching and balancing.

I'd prefer the developers to continue with what we've seen in the latest update:
1. New civs and leaders delivered with DLC.
2. New gameplay delivered in relatively small chunks through patches for the main game. This makes them easier to test and balance, also no different game versions to maintain.

My main issue with this particular model is that it is hard to keep tract of the changes in gameplay, mechanics and additional stuff. That's my #1 issue with Paradox's DLC policy.

 

[Katakanja]

I'm betting on the First Expansion with no more DLCs before. We will first hear news about it in March/April. Then it will be released in August, September, or October...

I don't think they can wait that long. Bear in mind that right now, Firaxis has no announced games, XCOM2 is probably complete, and we are seemingly at the end of Civ VI DLC cycle. As a company, I doubt they can afford to wait almost another full year before they put out any kind of content. From this, we can assume one of three things is true:

1. They have an all new, unannounced game in development that will be released in the next six months (the most unlikely option IMO)
2. You are right, and they don't plan to release an expansion until the second half of next year, but to ensure some continued revenue they will produce a second cycle of DLC to be released January through to maybe June (This could happen, but I would be surprised if this is their plan)
3. They'll announce an expansion near the beginning of 2018, to be released around the end of Spring. (Most likely IMO)

​

My main issue with this particular model is that it is hard to keep tract of the changes in gameplay, mechanics and additional stuff. That's my #1 issue with Paradox's DLC policy

I wouldn't trust anything this guy says - he's Will Riker's evil twin!!

 

[CivLuvah]

I wouldn't trust anything this guy says - he's Will Riker's evil twin!!

Edited off topic stuff: I've just changed my avatar. I know he has an evil twin, so original Riker is here! I've only started TNG and I've only watched a few episodes pls dont kill me

 

[Prima Italia]

I think an expansion since from an article after the Australia DLC, it said that Firaxis was working on an expansion. Khmer and Indonesia were one-offs in my opinion because of the Deluxe Edition not making enough savings. I think they will anounce the expansion probably in February, if memory serves me correctly that was when Gods and Kings was announced as well.

 

[bite]

Civ GH was downloaded with the patch as part of the main game files.

Do we know what it was yet?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Do we know what it was yet?

Not really. There are some suspicions that it is the cross-platform multiplayer, since the Mac users got a mini patch too, and broke the game for them.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Just a reminder, in regards to the timing of any Expansion. Civilization V released in September of 2010, & Gods+Kings was released in late June 2012. That's around 20 months between the base game & expansion. If they stick to a similar release cycle, then I reckon we could see a new expansion no later than August.

 

[mitsho]

They got a small dilemma with an expansion. Having introduced the multiple-leaders-mechanic, it makes sense for them to add more leaders. As single leaders are however not really enough for a buyable DLC, they should get grouped into an expansion. 'Leaders for existing civs' + new mechanics looks like a good formula for an expansion, you can also add a few new civs, scenarios and map scripts in there if you want to.

But you can't really add second leaders for DLC-civs, no? I mean I'm sure Firaxis will find a way if they really want to do another Persian leader, but it seems strange.

Also, these new leaders, say Napoleon, Ramses or Washington seem like they would be interesting and recognizable to a lot of players. They would be a good sales argument in a way that Nubia or Indonesia aren't. So, from a marketing perspective, wouldn't it make more sense to have new civs in the expansion and alternative leaders in DLC's? Now I'm interested in what direction they'll chose to go

 

[CivLuvah]

I would like a combination of new civs, alternative leaders for existing ones, and a combination of returning and new mechanics for the expansion.