[GS] Future Update?

[Aussie_Lurker]

I definitely think that the Medieval & Renaissance Tech/Civic trees need a bit of fleshing out......as they seem the Ages that can be traversed the most quickly. I think they could also look to further revamp the religious part of the game (& the religious victory as well), in part by bringing back & fleshing out the old State Religion concept from Civ4. More upsides & downsides for religion, as well as the means to alter the rate at which various religions spread, would also be cool.

On a more aesthetic note, I really want to see them add a more diverse terrain pallet, especially for different land-masses/different latitudes. In the same vein, I'd like to see certain bonus & luxury resources be unique to and/or more common on specific land-masses/latitudes.

Lastly, I'd like to see them revamp the Bonus & Luxury resource mechanic, the way they did with Strategic Resources in Gathering Storm. Concepts like Food Diversity, varying quantities of Bonus Resources providing varying, empire wide benefits, varying quantities of luxury resources providing varying, empire wide benefits......the ability to trade Bonus Resources. That kind of thing.

 

[cvb]

way to solve the 'reroll' issue - I.e. check out the lay of the land and then choose your Civ

A minimum scope could perhaps be handled by them in a standard patch: give in the (single player) setup the option to choose the own Civ (on a map rolled without start biases for the human player) after seeing the (placeholder) warrior & settler on the map (before giving any commands to the settler/both).

.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I will be quite sad if we don’t at least get Babylon, Byzantium, the Maya, Ethiopia and Portugal back.

Particularly Babylon, as it is an all-time favorite.

Heck, I even miss the Iroquois, Assyria, Morocco and the Celts (although the latter needs a good deblobbing).

Just hoping for more. Hopefully they’ve seen enough fans chomping at the bit.

I don't think you have to worry about the Celts becoming a blob because they've already got rid of it by introducing Scotland.

I agree that it the game does look a bit glaring without the Maya but having the Mapuche along with the Aztecs and Inca.
Same goes for Portugal since we have Brazil and Kongo, and even a contemporary naval power with the Netherlands, both historically and gameplay wise introduced at the same time.

 

[The Kingmaker]

Scotland isn’t a good representative of “the Celts,” which have historically been represented by Gaulish or Briton leaders (or both).

It’d be like having Garibaldi representing the Roman Empire.

Anyway, I hope they fill those gaps!

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Scotland isn’t a good representative of “the Celts,” which have historically been represented by Gaulish or Briton leaders (or both).

It’d be like having Garibaldi representing the Roman Empire.

Anyway, I hope they fill those gaps!

Considering they used many cities in Scotland last game for their city list, I think it's safe to say we won't see a "Celts" blob again which is what I was referring too.

Even if Scotland is considered one of the modern Pan-Celtic nations, I agree and wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of Gaul or another ancient group appearing, but it might be less likely.

 

[Elhoim]

I definitely think that the Medieval & Renaissance Tech/Civic trees need a bit of fleshing out......as they seem the Ages that can be traversed the most quickly. I think they could also look to further revamp the religious part of the game (& the religious victory as well), in part by bringing back & fleshing out the old State Religion concept from Civ4. More upsides & downsides for religion, as well as the means to alter the rate at which various religions spread, would also be cool.

On a more aesthetic note, I really want to see them add a more diverse terrain pallet, especially for different land-masses/different latitudes. In the same vein, I'd like to see certain bonus & luxury resources be unique to and/or more common on specific land-masses/latitudes.

Lastly, I'd like to see them revamp the Bonus & Luxury resource mechanic, the way they did with Strategic Resources in Gathering Storm. Concepts like Food Diversity, varying quantities of Bonus Resources providing varying, empire wide benefits, varying quantities of luxury resources providing varying, empire wide benefits......the ability to trade Bonus Resources. That kind of thing.

Definitely. I've been playing Civ 4 and I love how corporations worked, giving increased benefits the more resources you owned, giving a motivation to keep expanding. Same for how "bonus" resources were related to health and buildings.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I'm kind of surprised. I always thought corporations felt a bit tacked-on and pointless. Like an example of what we didn't want in an expansion, actually.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm kind of surprised. I always thought corporations felt a bit tacked-on and pointless. Like an example of what we didn't want in an expansion, actually.

The way they were implemented in Civ IV wasn't great. It was basically a copy paste of the religion mechanic. But the Civ V Vox Populi mod shows that it has promise if implemented in a substantive way.

 

[Elhoim]

The way they were implemented in Civ IV wasn't great. It was basically a copy paste of the religion mechanic. But the Civ V Vox Populi mod shows that it has promise if implemented in a substantive way.

Not exactly. While it was similar, it greatly encouraged getting more resources, and it presented a very interesting situation:

- Spread to your cities to get the benefit, but lose gold, and if it's a foreign one, give gold to other player.
- Spread to other players and get their gold, but they get their benefits.

It works well because of the commerce yield, which makes gold hard to come by. Playing with it again I really love the sliders compared to the yields we have now. Before it was a matter of allocation of a limited resource: to increase your science/culture/espionage meant paying for it. Founding cities, maintaining armies, all is a delicate balance, and like in life, all costs money. Now we have magic yields that appear out of nowhere (like the city states spreading science to an infinite number of cities), money is plenty as all maintenance costs are extremely low, and every number is positive.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I mean I guess? To me it just felt like busywork. I'm over sliders too, to me it made it feel too easy to compensate for mistakes.

I know a lot of people did though.

 

[bbbt]

I was not a fan of the sliders either. But frankly the policy cards in Civ 6 are a (more complicated) equivalent - if you are putting a +gold policy card you are not putting a +science card, etc.

But I agree 6 doesn't have the challenge of empire management like early versions had. I feel like the pieces are there to do so - specifically loyalty, amenities, etc. and the possibility of having civil wars and revolting cities if you settle/conquer to fast. They don't really seem to want to pull the trigger on it though.

 

[The Kingmaker]

We also need more meaningful things to trade in diplomacy. Let’s be honest: trading “diplomatic favor” is a nuisance. In Civ2 you could trade technologies and world maps. You could also ask their opinion of other civs.

Civ6 could easily simulate diffusion of knowledge in this manner, with certain things remaining state secrets, like Byzantium did with Greek fire.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

We also need more meaningful things to trade in diplomacy. Let’s be honest: trading “diplomatic favor” is a nuisance. In Civ2 you could trade technologies and world maps. You could also ask their opinion of other civs.

Civ6 could easily simulate diffusion of knowledge in this manner, with certain things remaining state secrets, like Byzantium did with Greek fire.

They intentionally gave tech trading and map sharing to Alliances.

 

[The Kingmaker]

They intentionally gave tech trading and map sharing to Alliances.

Yeah... it just feels forced right now though.

Diplomacy should feel like more natural bargaining.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

See, I think there is a way to increase the amount of "things" to trade, without bringing back tech trading. If they brought back the State Religion concept, then that could be brought back as an "item of trade". Another potential "trade item" might be Government Switching. Though it was poorly executed.in Civ5, I think there might be a merit to bringing back the Pact of Secrecy-if it became available after you get spies. Likewise, you could also bring back the ability to "sell" info garnered from Spies.

 

[The Kingmaker]

What do you think of this lineup? I’m expecting something along these lines.

Babylon (Hammurabi or Nebuchadnezzar)
Byzantium (Theodora or Alexios Komnenos)
Ethiopia (Ezana or Yodit/Gudit)
Maya (Six Sky or Fire is Born [a longshot])
Portugal (Afonso or Henry the Navigator)
Navajo (Manuelito) or Apache (Geronimo)
Colombia (Simon Bolivar)
Vietnam (Trung Trac, with some mechanism featuring her sister, maybe a unique governor)
Second Leader for China, Russia or Egypt

This isn’t necessarily what I’d choose, rather it’s what I think most likely.

 

[bbbt]

What do you think of this lineup? I’m expecting something along these lines.

Babylon (Hammurabi or Nebuchadnezzar)
Byzantium (Theodora or Alexios Komnenos)
Ethiopia (Ezana or Yodit/Gudit)
Maya (Six Sky or Fire is Born [a longshot])
Portugal (Afonso or Henry the Navigator)
Navajo (Manuelito) or Apache (Geronimo)
Colombia (Simon Bolivar)
Vietnam (Trung Trac, with some mechanism featuring her sister, maybe a unique governor)
Second Leader for China, Russia or Egypt

This isn’t necessarily what I’d choose, rather it’s what I think most likely.

I'd guess at least another European country - quite possibly Italy as it's the only top 10 gaming market not explicitly in the game (Rome aside).

I doubt Columbia/Bolivar - my guess Maya will be it for Central/South America. And if they do add another I could almost see them doing something like Argentina led by Eva Perón (there has to be at least one female leader everyone complains about per expansion, no?)

The rest look pretty likely. Geographically speaking, I'd agree a west coast Native American group seems most likely.

 

[The Kingmaker]

Frankly, I’d much prefer Italy to Colombia. Renaissance Italy just lends itself to multiple leaders (Cosimo or Lorenzo de’ Medici, Caterina Sforza, Enrico Dandolo, maybe one of the Borgias).

Though I’d be over the moon if we got a Gaul-based ancient Celtic civ with Vercingetorix.

 

[Askia Muhammad]

I'm very late to the party but I think what I would like to see if the expansion of diplomatic options and perhaps some empire management added in.

Brief rundown of things I'd like to see:

• Plague/Health systems
• Vassalage
• Culture/Tourism affecting loyalty
  
• Civil Wars/Revolutions mechanic
  
• Dynamic events - somewhat random events that players can respond to.

Civs

• Morocco/Almoravids
  
• Sokoto Caliphate/Songhai Empire
  
• Western Plains NA Native American Civ: Shoshone/Pueblo/Apache
• Central/Eastern Native American Civ: Iroquois/Shawnee/Cherokee
  
• Inuit
  
• Siam
• Portugal
• Alternate Leader: Napoleon for France

Other
The devs have already explained why WC is the way it is but more than half the time I could careless about the congress resolutions. I MUCH prefer a system where we can draft our own proposals. I get that there would be an established meta and certain proposals would be better than others but I find the current system extremely boring and inconsequential.

 

[Alexadamz]

It would certainly be interesting if they add some Era before Ancient era, in some way. They could even add one extra Era (maybe 2) also between Renaissance and Industrial, as I think it goes to fast right now. As they added the Future Era, the soundtrack for Atomic has 3 eras now, so if they add one prior to Ancient, and 2 between Renaissance and Industrial (say, Exploration and Enlightenment) they could make all themes play for 3 full eras for all Civs. Don't ask me what they would add in the Tech and Civics Tree for that, but it is an idea - and something to help whoever has OCD problems.