What would your DLC Civ pack look like.

cjm81499

Chieftain
Joined
Aug 3, 2016
Messages
43
If tyou got to choose the Civs for a DLC with, say, around 10 new Civs, which ones would put your pack? (Leaders not required). Also, this is for new Civs to Civ 6, but you can make a seperate list for alternate leaders if you want.

Mine would be

1. Ottomans (Military heavy, both ground and navy)

2. Persia (Ground military and culture focused)

3. Mongols (Heavily ground military focused)

4. Babylon (Science and defense focused)

5. Polynesia (Exploration and culture focused)

6. Inca (Growth/Production/Culture focused)

7. Cherokee (Ground military focused)

8. Mali (Ground military/gold focused)

9. Ethiopia (Culture/defense focused)

10. Crusader State Civ (Kingdom of Jerusalem?) - (Ground military/religion focused)

I mainly tried to fill the non European gap.
 
I think all civilizations should have at least two leader options and two unique units.

If we expect Firaxis to add new civilizations in future expansions, I think we need to identify eligibility criteria. These are: (1) should be either nostalgic or interesting, (2) should not pose political problems (hence no Israel or Armenia), or (3) should be new.

The alternate American leader would inevitably be George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. I’m not in love with the idea of the P-51 Mustang as the unique unit. I think that the Minuteman, Sherman tank, or aircraft carrier would have been more iconic.

Arabia’s alternate leader could potentially be King Faisal I (of Lawrence of Arabia fame), but Zenobia is a female option and possibly better-known. I honestly don’t know that there’s a more iconic option for an Arabian military unit than the Mameluke. Possibly the Assassin or the Camel Archer? The latter feels hopelessly stereotypical and somewhat generic, but at the same time seems to fit the bill given Arabia’s geography.

No idea what to do about the Aztecs. The Aztec Empire lasted less than one hundred years, and most players are apt to be unfamiliar with any leader other than Montezuma. Of course, that shouldn’t be a show-stopper. Same problem with the unique unit. Probably a better fallback is a unique tile improvement, the temple complex.

Egypt could do with Ramesses, or, if Firaxis is feeling especially bold, Gamal Abdul Nasser. Their second unit should be the Mamluk.

England needs the Longbowman more than it needs the Redcoat. Maybe a Henry for the other leader? If not him, then William the Conqueror or Richard the Lionheart.

For France, the second special unit might well be the French Foreign Legion. The other optional leaders would be the Sun King or Charles de Gaulle.

The decision to give Germany the U-Boat is an interesting one, but it works. Bismarck is the obvious second leader option, followed by Frederick the Great. I guess Landsknecht and Panzer were considered passe. The former could be brought back, with interesting results.

Greece needs Alexander back, along with Companion Cavalry.

I guess, for India, you could go the Ashoka route leader-wise. Maybe the Gorkha Regiment as a second special unit, although that could be compromised by the colonial overtones.

Japan could add one of the early Shogun as a leader. One option for special units is the Zero fighter. Another is the aircraft carrier. Both might be too on-the-nose, but they’ve gone the Zero route before.

No idea what to do with the Kongo.

No idea what to do with Norway. They got Ski Infantry in an earlier title. Sounds plausible to me.

Rome needs Caesar. Other than the Legion, the only other recognizable unit is the Trireme, but that market is cornered by Carthage. Possibly the Bolt-Thrower? I guess there’s the possibility of the Forum as a district, or even the Colosseum.

Russia could take Catherine to complement Peter. The Cossack could be supplemented by the T-34 tank. The Mig is another alternative.

In the absence of Portugal, Spain can take the Caravel along with the Conquistador. The obvious female Spanish leader option is Isabella. They could also gain the Tercio, although we are talking about units for the same era in that case. Spain and Portugal both need a trading fort building option, sort of like the Colony in Civilization III.

Sumeria also has a leader problem. And a special unit problem. Gilgamesh and the War-Cart hit the nail on the head.

Brazil gets Pedro II. I can’t think of a second leader that would be worthwhile. The Minas Geraes unit is an interesting one, reflecting the naval race of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It’s as viable, I think, as the Pracinha. However, I really liked the Brazilwood Camp, which I think should make a return as a district.

One civilization that might be worth bringing back for nostalgic value is the Carthaginians, with leaders Hannibal and Dido. Their special units would be the War Elephant (more iconic than the Sacred Band) and Qaudrireme or Quinquereme. Interestingly, Civilization III assigned Carthage the Numidian Mercenary, which is arguably less well-known than any of the other options. Give them some kind of lighthouse or trading colony special district.

The Koreans are another plausible addition, if only because South Korea has a reputation for computer gaming. The Hwacha, which appeared in Civilization III, still seems viable as a unique unit. If they go for a second, I’d say it should be the Turtle Ship.

The Khmer Empire showed up in Civilization IV, and it has novelty value, if nothing else.

For North America, both Canada and Mexico are options. Canada might make more sense because there are probably more Canadian players of Civilization than there are Mexican. The obvious Canadian unit is the Royal Northwest Mounted Policeman. The special building would be some kind of fishery or fur camp. Canada would go for a diplomatic win, I’d guess. Maybe Pearson and Trudeau (the Elder) for leaders? You could also go Montcalm or even opt for a First Nations leader.

I guess you do need to consider bringing the Persians, Mongols, and Babylonians back as a sop to old players who loved them. The Cherokee are also a good pick for a Native American civilization. I really like the Mali idea, which I guess hearkens back to Civilization 4. I think South Africa is out because of potential connections to Apartheid and the opportunity to revisit the Zulu, while Nigeria is out because the older African civilizations are geographically more inclusive.

In Europe, I think it’d be interesting for them to try Poland, complete with Hussar. If you do the Netherlands, they get the windmill and the merchantman, for sure.

The Byzantines probably have to go for Varangians and Kataphrakts, or else the Dromon. Give them Justinian and Theodora for rulers. The focus would be on Culture or economy.

The Khmer special unit in Civilization IV was the Ballista Elephant, which is just plain interesting. The Byzantines probably have to go for Varangians and Kataphrakts, or else the Dromon.

No idea what to do with the Ethiopians, except to give them the obelisk as a building and Menelik as their ruler.

The Portuguese would get Henry the Navigator and the caravel, plus possibly the fort. A really neat option would be to give them a special feature called the Black Ship, in homage to Shogun, a vessel that leaves one Portuguese port and travels to another, but can be intercepted along the way.

Civilization V also tried adding Sweden, which is also a fine option. Their special units were the Hakkapeliitta. And the Caroleans. For lack of a better option, I guess that one stays.

I'd love to see them try Latin Frankia, but I think that's out for political reasons, along with a personal favorite of mine, Yugoslavia.

Australia is probably a good market, but Oceana makes sense as a more encompassing civilization. Possibly add the ANZAC Corps as a second unit for Oceana? The other option is the Bush Camp. The Maori Warrior was a good option in the past and remains such. The oracle is a second option. Focus on exploration and culture sounds good, as you said.
 
I'd try to include civilisations or empires that "nearly got there". What I mean is they were a big deal for a short space of time, but have since been largely brushed aside or forgotten. For example, Sweden was a pretty big deal there for a while, and then you had the Songhai in Africa and the Khmer in SE Asia. The Maya or the Toltecs in Mesoamerica. Bulgaria, Algiers, the Boers, Sudan (or Punt or whatever variant you like). There's a lot to choose from.

Definately have Phoenecia though.
 
Mine would be

- civil unrest
- revolution
- civil war
- separatism
- religious conflicts
- alternate tech branches
- more techs in general to fill gaps
- better fleshed out future techs
- barbarian camps can become City-states
- City-states can become a full civ

- add more leaders that would fit to those scenarios

more civs are always nice ( and I expect them anyway ;) ) - but at the moment I miss more game play features.
 
Last edited:
Mine would be

- civil unrest
- revolution
- civil war
- separatism
- religious conflicts
- alternate tech branches
- more techs in general to fill gaps
- better fleshed out future techs

more civs are always nice ( and I expect them anyway ;) ) - but at the moment I miss more features.

Add migration between civs, organic border realignment, and a few obvious missing units (riflemen paratroopers marines etc) and we have a real winner imo.
 
I think DLC-packs will be more scenario focused and less expansive. They'll add a new mechanic, build a scenario around it and add some corresponding civilizations and leaders.

I'd do an exploration dlc à la the one for CIV V.

New civs:
Inca for the South American Natives
Cherokee for the North American Natives
Cree for the sub-arctic Natives
Then Portugal and/or the Netherlands as European nations.

Also some exploration-oriented leaders for existing nations.
Leif Erikson for Norway
Isabella for Spain
Elisabeth for England
Henry IV for France

Some associated mechanics could be (colonial)separatism, migration and deeper religious conflicts
 
Not really in any particular order:

1. Tlingit
2. Babylon
3. Persia
4. Cree
5. Georgia (Tamar says hi)
6. Gaul
7. Korea
8. Muscogee
9. Maya
10. Phoenicia

It is possible I have a strong interest in Pre-Columbian North America and the Bronze and Iron Age Near East. :mischief:
 
I'd put in what I'd consider the big seven Civs that were missing: Persia, the Ottomans, Mongolia, the Inca, Siam, the Maya and the Iroquois.

That only leaves me three more slots. I think Africa and pre-Columbian America would definitely need more representation, so I'll add Ethiopia and the Chinook.

I've only got one slot left... I'll say Carthage because I find their history interesting. The current bonus of the Carthaginian city-state (Encampments get a trade route) would make a good Civ UA.
 
For just dlc I would go with a themed pack- say rise of Rome/ the ancient med. Sea.

-Alexander as new Greek leader (Companion cavalry as leader unique unit)
-Persians under Cyrus the great
-Ramsees as new egyptian leader
-Etruscans under Lars Porsenna (I envision faith generating swordsmen and civ unique getting a level of fortification by settling on hill tops)
-Celts devided into the Gauls of Brennus and the Britons of Boudicca
-Carthage under King Hanno
-Nubians under Queen Kandake
 
-Celts devided into the Gauls of Brennus and the Britons of Boudicca
Brennus was a title, not a person. I assume you mean the unnamed brennus who sacked Rome, but there's also the unnamed brennus who invaded Greece. (Fun fact: the Gauls disliked "kings" almost as much as the Romans did. You'll find the term rix [cognate with Latin rex] in names like Vercingetorix or Dumnorix, but it wasn't actually used as a title. Instead, you'll find titles like brennus. No such problem seems to have plagued the Gaels, who did use the cognate term as a title.) Personally, I see no reason to include both the Gauls and the Britons. The Britons were not terribly different from the Gauls, not terribly significant compared to the Gauls, and Boudicca's revolt was rather meaningless in the scheme of things. Plus every civ depiction of her has been egregious. I'd much rather see Vercingetorix personally. Given that we know nothing about the brennus who sacked Rome--not even his name--I don't see him as a likely candidate in a game that emphasizes the personality of the leader.

-Carthage under King Hanno
Carthage was a republic. There were three suffits (an elected position similar to a Roman consul) named Hanno, however...

-Nubians under Queen Kandake
Kandake was a title, not a person. I would like to see Nubia under Kandake Amanitore, though.
 
I'm comfortable with those generalizations. Though in terms of specifics you're very right, except for I think the Gaul / Briton devide is a needed one as the cov series is uncomfortable depicting tje celtic world with anything close to nuance.

And beyo d that with Perucles and Gorgo there is a drive to depict the smaller sub decisions within these bigger cultural blocks, so why not make use of it?
 
Here is a few Civs and leaders that I would like to see in DLC or ExpansionsI.
Mexico-Emiliano Zapata or Benito Juarez.
Colombia-Rafael Nunez./ Argentina-Eva Peron. /Cuba-Fidel Castro./ Cherokee-Dragging Canoe./ Cheyenne-Black Kettle/ Canada-John A McDonald./ Phoenicia-Hiram./ Sumera-Sargon./ Israel-Yitzhak Rabin./ Palestine-Yasser Arafat./ Babylon-Hammurabi / Persia-Xerxes / Saba-Samahu Ali./ Carthage-Dido./ South Africa-Nelson Mandela./ Aksum-Ezana or Kaleb./ Kush-Kashta./ Algeria-Ahmed Ben Bella./ Australia-William Morris Hughes. Philipines-Emilio Aguinaldo or Manuel Roxas./ Vietnam-Ho Chi Minh
Ireland-Michael Collins./ Romania-Vlad Dracula./ Italy Francesco Crispi
 
I'm comfortable with those generalizations. Though in terms of specifics you're very right, except for I think the Gaul / Briton devide is a needed one as the cov series is uncomfortable depicting tje celtic world with anything close to nuance.

And beyo d that with Perucles and Gorgo there is a drive to depict the smaller sub decisions within these bigger cultural blocks, so why not make use of it?
Sure, having a single Celtic civ with a Gaulish leader and a British leader could work (ideally giving each not simply separate capitals but separate city lists). For the reasons I already mentioned, though, I wouldn't want the British leader to be Boudicca, though. I'd suggest Cunobelinos, or Cartimandua if a queen is desired.
 
My ideal list:
  • Persia, led by Darius the Great or Cyrus,
  • Mayans, led by Lady Six Sky,
  • Mali, led by Mansa Musa,
  • Sioux, led by Sitting Bull,
  • Koreans, led by Queen Seondeok,
  • Majapahit led by either Hayam Wuruk or Gajah Mada (his prime minister),
  • Celts led by Brennus.
  • Mongols led by Genghis Khan. The most iconic Mongolian.
You will notice these civs are mostly non-European. This is because base game Civ VI has the most European/Western civs we've seen in a loooong time. Some powerful female leaders added in there too, though I replaced Boudicca as we have plenty of women warriors (especially with Lady Six Sky in the mix).

DLC leaders could include Isabella for Spain, Rameses II for Egypt, Lincoln for America, Ur-Nammu for Sumeria, Churchill for the UK ("British Empire" pfeh), and Kangxi for China.

I don't like the idea of Babylon as they barely had an empire, and I'm tired of how stereotypically scientific they are. At least the Koreans had interesting unique units and/or commercial bonuses in prior Civ games. Carthage/Phoenicia, while interesting for their trade bonuses and naval power, I am reluctant to add in due to how ultimately irrelevant naval units have seemed in Civ VI.
 
Last edited:
My suggestion for DLC pack will be grouped topic and regions
Free DLC: Georgia - Tamar

1. Rising powers civ pack
Mongolia - Ogadei Khan
Poland: Jadwiga
Korea - Seondok
Carthage: Hannibal
Persia - Khosrau I
Babylon - Hammurabi

Wonders: Apadana, Ishtar Gate(can be build in City Center but require ancient wall), Gyeongbokgung Palace, Erdene Zuu Monastery, Wawel Castle, Naghsh-i Jahan Square
Scenario: Greco-Persian Wars

2. Southeast Asian Pack
Siam - Naresuan
Cambodia/Khmer - Suryvavarman II
Vietnam - Trung Sisters
Burma - Bayinnaung
Indonesia - Samaratungga
Philippines - Lapu Lapu

Wonders: Angkor Wat, Borobudur, Shwedagon Paya, Wat Phra Kaew, Quán Thánh Temple
Scenario: Gateway to Suvarnabhumi
- China will appeared in the map as represent of South China
- European powers: Spain, Portugal, Dutch
- Arabia reused would be represent as Malacca and Saladin reused as Parameshwa
- Scythia reused will be represent as Mon and Tomyris reused as Shin Sawbu
- Japan reused will be represent as Laos/Lan Xang and Hojo Tokimune reused as Setthathirath
- India reused will be represent as Assam
- Germany reused will be represent as Dutch

3. Pre Columbian American pack
Inca- Topa Inca Yupanqui
Maya - Uaxaclajuun Ub'aah K'awiil
Sioux - Gall
Iroquois - Joseph Brant
Apache - Mangas Coloradas
Cherokee - Attakullakulla

Wonders: Macchu Picchu, Tikal Temple, The Great Serpent Mound, Monks Mound, The Great Mound of Troyville
Scenario: Wars for America similar to CIV 5 scenario one but more improved and epic
- Europeans now started a colony instead of their homeland like Dutch(New Amsterdam), Spain, Santo Domingo on Hispanola, France, Quebec, England, Virginia
- European cities that unhappy will start independence from European empires, starting with rebel units
- Mesoamerican civ will starts as empires like Aztec, Maya and Inca
- Native American in North America civs can move cities with repacking settler and able to building from migration
- Germany reused will be represent as Dutch

4. African Pack
Mali - Sundiata Keita
Zulu - Cestawayo
Nubia - Piye
Ethiopia - Tewodros II
Ashanti - Osei Tutu
Hausa - Usman dan Fodio

Wonders: Sankore Mosque, The Pyramid of Meroe, Church of Saint George(Ethiopia)
Natural Wonders: Mount Kilimanjaro

Scenario: Scamble for Africa

5. leader pack I
America - Lincoln
France - Louis XIV
Germany - Arminius
Russia - Vladimir the Great
China - Kangxi
Japan - Kanmu
England: Alfred the Great
India: Akbar
Scythia: Athes
Sumeria: Sargon

6. Leader pack II
Egypt: Ramesses II
Rome: Julius Caear
Greece: Alexander the Great
Spain: Isabella
Brazil: Vargas
Arabia: Muawiya I
Norway: Haakon VI
Kongo: Álvaro I of Kongo
Aztec: Izcoatl(Pre order DLC required)
Extra: Charlemagne for both France and Germany
 
Last edited:
That's a nice list (except for a few leaders, I would argue, such as Alvaro I of Kongo who I deem somewhat unsuited), but looks to be more for expansions than for DLC...
 
I'm sort of thinking that capital cities might be the limitng factor for other civs and the leaders limited by the alternate city

e.g.

England can get Alfred the Great with a capital at Winchester
Russia can get Alexander Nevsky at Novgorod, and a whole bunch of leaders at Moscow
Germany can get Fredrick the Great or Bismarck at Berlin, possibly other characters like Ludwig of Bavaria or Albert the Strong of Saxony or Fredrick the wise of Wittenberg. or Maria Theresia in Vienna.
Italy can get any of the famous renaissance princes in any of the cities of Venice, Milan, Florence or Naples
Spain can get Isabella at Toledo or Ferdinand at Barcelona
Rome can get Constantine or Justinian at Constantinopel
Japan can get a Meiji era or Shogun era leader at Tokyo and/or Edo
Arabs can get a Umayiid leader with commercial focus in Damascus, an Abbasid Leader with culture and science focus at Baghdad and a Rashidun leader with religious focus at Medina.
America can get a revolution themed leader at Philadelphia
Brazil can get a modern leader at Brazilia
Greece can get Alexander at Pella
Persia can have an Achaemenid at Persepolis, a Sassanit as Ctesiphon and a Safavid leader at Tehran
Norway can get Harald the Fair Hair at Tunsberg, Ingolfur Árnason or Leifur Eiríksson at Reykjavík or a modern Norwegian leader with Oslo and a Noble Peace Prize related ability.
India and China of course have more than enough leaders and capitals EACH to match all the other civs in the game on their own.
Mongols can be introduced with Temujin in Karakorum, Timur at Samarkand and Kublai Khan at whatever he called Beijing.
Poland can have Warsaw and Krakow as capitals with different leaders.
Egypt can get pharoahs for Thebes, Memphis and Alexandria

I think the only real limitation is the capital city and the leaders association with that capital city.
 
Kublai Khan at whatever he called Beijing.
Nanjing.

Anyway, I think your speculation is premature; we currently have a sample size of one on which to base it. Limiting rulers based on capitals precludes a lot of excellent second choices; indeed, it precludes any second choice for France, even Charlemagne who would conflict with Barbarossa's Aachen. I suppose one could get overly technical and have Louis XIV at Versailles, or just be ridiculous and have Philippe Pétain at Vichy. It also precludes 99% of the alternative leaders of Rome, and while I'd love to see a Saxon-era leader for England realistically I expect we'll see more London-based English monarchs*. At any rate, having leader-specific capitals is an interesting and appropriate mechanic, but I see no reason why it should preclude two leaders who ruled from the same capital.

*To be pedantic, there are no English monarchs in the game at present; Victoria was styled "queen of the United Kingdom," a title first born by Anne Stuart. Previous monarchs were styled "king/queen of England, Scotland, Ireland, and France"--or, prior to the unification under the Stuarts, "king/queen of England, Ireland, and France"--or, prior to Henry VIII, "king of England and France and Lord of Ireland." Obviously the part about France was just typical European royal bluster; I'm not entirely sure why Wales was left out.
 
Wales isn't a Kingdom, thats why, it's a principality.

And I looked it up

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanbaliq

Kublai called it Khanbaliq (City of Khans) or Dadu (Great Capital) or Daidu (also Great Captial)

You are going to need the Capital City limitation if you are going to be able to pick the same civ and different leaders in the same game.
 
Wales isn't a Kingdom, thats why, it's a principality.
Yes, but even prior to Henry VIII's adding "king of Ireland" to his titles, the kings of England still styled themselves "lord of Ireland." But now that you mention it, I forgot the heir-apparent is prince of Wales.

And I looked it up

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanbaliq

Kublai called it Khanbaliq (City of Khans) or Dadu (Great Capital) or Daidu (also Great Captial)

You are going to need the Capital City limitation if you are going to be able to pick the same civ and different leaders in the same game.
Well, Nanjing is what the Chinese called it under Kublai Khan anyway. ;) The capital limitation may facilitate including both in the same game, but personally I hate that feature with a passion and really hope that Ed Beach keeps his promise to make it able to be disabled. Overall, the capital limitation makes no sense in the scheme of things; too many civilizations have only had a single capital. America's only second option without Washington DC is George Washington, whose capital was Philadelphia. Post-Frankish France has always had its capital at Paris except for a few governments in exile; Rome's capital was always Rome; virtually every monarch of England after the Saxon period ruled from London. That's excluding three and possibly four of the likeliest civs to receive second leaders.
 
Top Bottom