What after the New Frontier Pass - the end or more

[blackbutterfly]

Civ only now is getting some kind of competition

Humankind?

Yes, I too am looking forward to playing Humankind. Coincidently it is due in April just a month after Civ VI's last (official) DLC pack.

C:BE2 maybe a considerable $$$ opportunity for 2K+Firaxis esp. given the plethora of platforms Civ VI runs on. The fact that there are consumers like me who will part with $$$ for a Beyond Earth successor, is enough.

Civ VI may get some free patches courtesy of C:BE2 much like Civ V got patched along with Beyond Earth's development.

 

[Starina]

I'm for another season. Maybe not 8 new civs, the main thing is interesting!
BUT
Moreover, what would this year be spent on 7. I do not want to participate in open alpha testing again for my own money.

 

[Buktu]

More Alt Leaders World be nice. I dont know why they added this Feature and then added only a few (like 5 or sth). It would also be a good opportunity to rework some older civs.

 

[Linklite]

More Alt Leaders World be nice. I dont know why they added this Feature and then added only a few (like 5 or sth). It would also be a good opportunity to rework some older civs.

There are 6 in total:

1. Chandragupta.
2. Kublai Khan.
3. Gorgo/Pericles (not sure which is the alt).
4. Eleanor of Aquitane.
5. Catherine de Medici Magnificence.
6. Bull Moose Teddy (or is it Rough Rider? I can't remember).

I like the idea of alts, and I would welcome more of them, however, I'm not entirely convinced. Would it be better to have alts, or just brand new civs? In some, it definitely makes sense (I think Sparta needed representing, but didn't justify a whole new civ if Greece was present, while Greece also needed representing). Others like Eleanor don't seem to fit that same need and perhaps could have had another new Civ fill that niche.

Not sure how people would feel about being able freely swap leaders - be able to choose to play as Trajan leading Mali, for example. It's possible that this could introduce significant balance issues, I guess.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

There are 6 in total:

1. Chandragupta.
2. Kublai Khan.
3. Gorgo/Pericles (not sure which is the alt).
4. Eleanor of Aquitane.
5. Catherine de Medici Magnificence.
6. Bull Moose Teddy (or is it Rough Rider? I can't remember).

I like the idea of alts, and I would welcome more of them, however, I'm not entirely convinced. Would it be better to have alts, or just brand new civs? In some, it definitely makes sense (I think Sparta needed representing, but didn't justify a whole new civ if Greece was present, while Greece also needed representing). Others like Eleanor don't seem to fit that same need and perhaps could have had another new Civ fill that niche.

Not sure how people would feel about being able freely swap leaders - be able to choose to play as Trajan leading Mali, for example. It's possible that this could introduce significant balance issues, I guess.

Rough Rider Teddy, actually.

 

[Linklite]

Rough Rider Teddy, actually.

Thanks, Inalways get confused between them, I was never familiar with the American bonuses before they released the persona packs, so I don't recognise which is which.

 

[UWHabs]

It does feel a bit like, if the last Civ is Portugal, then Civ is over.

Seems unlikely we’d get another big Expansion either way.

If sales are good, and FXS are still interested, I could see one or more mini-expansions or another season pass. There’s plenty more FXS could do with the current engine / game, even more so after NFP. And the “Game Modes” lets FXS add stuff without risking overcrowding the game. I mean, Corporations and Monopolies is basically base game content rather than a real “alt game mode” like eg Apocalypse, but it’s implemented as a game mode all the same.

Fingers crossed.

Yeah, I'm kind of in the same thinking. If we see Portugal in March, then I think content is done. But if we get someone else, and assuming their internal NFP numbers look decent enough, then I could see them doing another similar thing. Maybe a little smaller - say, 6 new civs and 2-3 alt leaders?

Still plenty of places on the map that still could add more. Could easily fit in another couple civs in the Americas, Africa is still largely open too. And while the rest of the map is filling up, I'm sure they can expand a little more. Italian States are often mentioned as a possible option, and still a lot of nations in SE Asia that could potentially get a civ. Sure, you're stretching things a little bit in some cases, but not any more than a lot of the current ones out there. Yeah, another 4-5 game modes might clutter things even more, but still some features that people would like to see, or smaller game modes. Heck, they could even do stuff like incorporate details from some popular mods like an "eras expanded" one, as an "official" game mode, and those would be quite popular to be able to easily turn on and off.

 

[Myomoto]

Hoping for 7 to be announced soon, I feel 6 has had its day. I still like starting games but by the end it's more of an effort to finish than a pleasure. NFP has been a bit of a fresh coat of paint but really, I would rather think dev effort was being directed more toward making 7 a better game. Hard to imagine paying for any further content for 6 at this point.

It's a giant mystery why they didn't dedicate more of the game modes towards the mid and late game. The early game of 6 is pretty damn fantastic, but everything just gets bogged down in the late game, without many new interesting game systems popping up.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

It's a giant mystery why they didn't dedicate more of the game modes towards the mid and late game. The early game of 6 is pretty damn fantastic, but everything just gets bogged down in the late game, without many new interesting game systems popping up.

That's a problem with most of the Civ franchise. I've played Civ 5 before, and it's late-game is just as bad as Civ 6's, if not more.

Edit: So it appears BNW is better than Civ 6's endgame, to which I can somewhat agree with.

 

[Zaarin]

That's a problem with most of the Civ franchise. I've played Civ 5 before, and it's late-game is just as bad as Civ 6's, if not more.

I'd say with BNW Civ5's late game is considerably more interesting than Civ6's. But yes, that is a recurring problem in the 4X genre as a whole.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I'd say with BNW Civ5's late game is considerably more interesting than Civ6's. But yes, that is a recurring problem in the 4X genre as a whole.

True, true.

 

[Myomoto]

That's a problem with most of the Civ franchise. I've played Civ 5 before, and it's late-game is just as bad as Civ 6's, if not more.

BNW civ 5 stays pretty interesting from start to finish. It's no accident that almost all the content of BNW was tailored for late game.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

BNW civ 5 stays pretty interesting from start to finish. It's no accident that almost all the content of BNW was tailored for late game.

I see your point. Maybe they could devote a mode or some patches to the Late Game? What do you think, @Andrew Johnson [FXS]?

 

[SirWill90]

That's a problem with most of the Civ franchise. I've played Civ 5 before, and it's late-game is just as bad as Civ 6's, if not more.

I seem to remember IV BTS games often being pretty exciting in the end.

I went back and tried to play BTS a while back. I always maintained that was the best version, but I found that with all that was added between then and now, I guess Thomas Wolfe was right... you can't go home again.

It would be nice to see Vassalage back, incidentally.

 

[playshogi]

If HK turns out to be very good, they will have wished they had started on Civ7 rather than waste time with NFP.

 

[Joezumah]

I’ve recently just been losing interest in games mid/late game. It just feels like there is no tension, no reason to keep clicking other than to say I’ve completed the game/won. Whichever way they go regarding 6 or 7 doesn’t really matter to me, they just need to try some new things to give the game some tense moments after the early game.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I'd say with BNW Civ5's late game is considerably more interesting than Civ6's. But yes, that is a recurring problem in the 4X genre as a whole.

This is mainly a problem of snowball and linear path to the win. If this path would be split into few milestones and each milestone had a slightly different win condition (perhaps even moderately randomized to avoid repeatability) than this effect could be minimized even in 4K game, because you would have to snowball at each milestone, and correct your strategy at each stage. In this case, your "score" would be sum of each milestone..

 

[nzcamel]

There are 6 in total:

1. Chandragupta.
2. Kublai Khan.
3. Gorgo/Pericles (not sure which is the alt).
4. Eleanor of Aquitane.
5. Catherine de Medici Magnificence.
6. Bull Moose Teddy (or is it Rough Rider? I can't remember).

I like the idea of alts, and I would welcome more of them, however, I'm not entirely convinced. Would it be better to have alts, or just brand new civs? In some, it definitely makes sense (I think Sparta needed representing, but didn't justify a whole new civ if Greece was present, while Greece also needed representing). Others like Eleanor don't seem to fit that same need and perhaps could have had another new Civ fill that niche.

Not sure how people would feel about being able freely swap leaders - be able to choose to play as Trajan leading Mali, for example. It's possible that this could introduce significant balance issues, I guess.

I wouldn't consider either Catherine de Medici Magnificence and whichever Teddy you decide is the Alt; to be Alt leaders in the same vein as the others. They were only available to people who ordered NFP as a whole, so a massive chunk of Civ 6 players do not have them and cannot get them.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I wouldn't consider either Catherine de Medici Magnificence and whichever Teddy you decide is the Alt; to be Alt leaders in the same vein as the others. They were only available to people who preordered NFP, so a massive chunk of Civ 6 players do not have them and cannot get them.

I'm pretty sure it's for people who bought the NFP in one purchase, not just for the ones who perodered. I didn't preorder the NFP, but I got the Persona Packs.

 

[nzcamel]

This is mainly a problem of snowball and linear path to the win. If this path would be split into few milestones and each milestone had a slightly different win condition (perhaps even moderately randomized to avoid repeatability) than this effect could be minimized even in 4K game, because you would have to snowball at each milestone, and correct your strategy at each stage. In this case, your "score" would be sum of each milestone..

Your solution would certainly work, but it isn't what many players would want to see. I'd like to see it as an alternative option available in Civ etc.