a few thoughts about a relatively simple mod to handle some concerns at launch before more civs are available

[Gedemon]

When the civ-switching mechanism was announced, there was an immediate demand for a "classical mode", and while I'm one of those who where patiently waiting to see how it would be implemented before judging, I was also already thinking about a way to allow "transcendence" based on my experience modding/playing HK, as it would be required by a potential "unlock by territory on TSL map" mod.

Now that the number of civs at release have been announced, maybe it's time to think about how to design such a mod. A simple one.

The base idea is to have something very simple, by triplicating every civ into bare-bones version of themselves for the ages they are not in, and their previous age version being the only one able to unlock the next age version.

By "bare bones" copy I mean no uniques, no ability, no new icons, nothing except maybe an age-specific name and an art style taken from an existing civ.

The mod's objectives would be:

• guarantee a path to the AI that will not break immersion in your current game (I mean not more than having an antique version of a modern civ as in previous games)
• allow more than 10 players in a game without duplicating civs in the same age
• optionally lock every civs into their unique path (a simple "Classical mode"), or lock some civs that don't have a logical path yet while keeping the switching ability for others (the "logic" being player dependent, maybe that should be set from different mods, or would require a bit more coding to have it actionnable per civ on setup)
• be released ASAP

What the mod would not be about:

• providing more historical path with new civilizations, the bare-bones copies should not take the position/name of a potential choice that could be made available from DLC or full-civ mods.
• re-balancing the game for a "classical mode", that would be a lot of work for a more complex mod

thoughts ?

 

[LastSword]

It should work. Optionally some insert-selects to populate uniques for balance and it is ready to go.
I am quite positive that mod cutting civ-switching will be available before I buy the game.

However the main damage of civ-switching is much harder to repair. I mean civless leaders and leaderless civilizations.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Peace Nobel Prize for anyone who will provide a "classical mode" mod.

In theory it shouldn't be that difficult for those who already have vast experience with modding Civ and Humankid - make clone civs (use ancient/AoE cultural templates for provided "modern" civs and modern templates for existing "ancient/AoE" civs etc) and create only one option for them to pick when transitioning. City names are already there, just copy-paste (for example French city names into the newly created "ancient French civ"). No unique abilities/units/buildings would function as true "classical mode" giving those civs their UU/UB only in their respective eras (Americans will have to wait until modern era and so on).

I don't know how to prevent duplicate civs though (if there will be, I quite lost interest lately and don't follow the news) - to make sure there won't be two Chinese civs on the map. Cutting all variants except one? Seems like a waste of material. Leaving them as they are will give them unfair advantage with two or more eras with UU/UBs.

 

[GIO888]

PLEASE GEDEMON!!

PLEEEASE!!

 

[AntSou]

For Civ VII I want to be as far away from a "classical mode" as possible, because I can't see it being able to compare with any of the preceding titles which were designed that way, no matter how good a mod is, let alone a simple one.

Why not just play Civ VI if that is the experience I seek?

Edit: I don't dislike the idea of Civs being able to transcend once, by the way. But as a proper well implemented game mechanic.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Why not just play Civ VI if that is the experience I seek?

Because Civ VII offers other interesting things that are not present in Civ VI?

If some people want to play Civ VII in "classical mode" - then why not just... I don't know... let them if someone skilled will provide a mod?

 

[AntSou]

Because Civ VII offers other interesting things that are not present in Civ VI?

If some people want to play Civ VII in "classical mode" - then why not just... I don't know... let them if someone skilled will provide a mod?

Of course. But Gedemon is being clear about what such a mod would be at release. It doesn't involve rebalancing the game.

Out of curiosity, which other things are you excited about in Civ VII? There's a couple of interesting changes but so far nothing that would me want to play it over Civ VI if we exclude the Age system.

 

[Sagax]

Of course. But Gedemon is being clear about what such a mod would be at release. It doesn't involve rebalancing the game.

Out of curiosity, which other things are you excited about in Civ VII? There's a couple of interesting changes but so far nothing that would me want to play it over Civ VI if we exclude the Age system.

Not the person you asked, but to me the navigable rivers, legacy points, town/city split, proper city sprawl, and reduced micromanagement remain the biggest draws of Civ7. The features they’ve been more actively advertising have actually been more of a turn off to me.

 

[JNR13]

I think such a mod will be doable, had that thought pretty much immediately when the feature was revealed that this should be the way to do it - duplicates without uniques. But it's not gonna be a good experience, I think. Some things base their bonuses on using traditions. Numerical values need to be adjusted because presumably all civ abilities should be moved to the ancient era copy for a true classic mode, but some might have strength that is balanced around coming in the modern era. But once you start rebalancing, the question becomes where to stop.

As for China, I'd say keep the different dynasties as different civs. Just like Rome and Byz were different civs in "classic" games before, or England and its various colonies, etc.

 

[Leyrann]

It should work. Optionally some insert-selects to populate uniques for balance and it is ready to go.
I am quite positive that mod cutting civ-switching will be available before I buy the game.

However the main damage of civ-switching is much harder to repair. I mean civless leaders and leaderless civilizations.

Damage?

I think you've misunderstood something. Civilization VII won't replace earlier games. It'll be released separately, and all previous games remain playable. Nothing is being damaged by Civilization VII.

--

Re: thread: the main issue I'm seeing is that you'll be stuck with modern city art in the antiquity, and vice versa. Unless you're grabbing art from other civilizations that do fit the era, I guess?

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Of course. But Gedemon is being clear about what such a mod would be at release. It doesn't involve rebalancing the game.

I'm one of those who don't care that much about balancing. Besides, even in "classical mode" the game will still be divided into three eras with crises which will more or less "reset" the game.

Out of curiosity, which other things are you excited about in Civ VII? There's a couple of interesting changes but so far nothing that would me want to play it over Civ VI if we exclude the Age system.

Graphics, elevated terrain, navigable rivers, independent people to name a few.

As for China, I'd say keep the different dynasties as different civs. Just like Rome and Byz were different civs in "classic" games before, or England and its various colonies, etc.

It'd be a bit odd to have two Chinas on the map. Byz managed to become totally distinctive on its own, I don't know enough about Chinese dynasties to compare it.

Re: thread: the main issue I'm seeing is that you'll be stuck with modern city art in the antiquity, and vice versa. Unless you're grabbing art from other civilizations that do fit the era, I guess?

I think that's the idea. For example clone Greeks and use their art as "Ancient Byzantines" or clone Romans and use their art as "Ancient Spain". Same with other civs, using the closest cultural/historical link.

 

[Gedemon]

It should work. Optionally some insert-selects to populate uniques for balance and it is ready to go.
I am quite positive that mod cutting civ-switching will be available before I buy the game.

However the main damage of civ-switching is much harder to repair. I mean civless leaders and leaderless civilizations.

I'm one of those strange people around that never cared about leaders and played with/against Empires. I should care a bit more, as I only now realize there may be an issue with the number of leaders limiting the number of players in a game, unless the mod also provide copies of leaders if "duplicate" is not a setup option.

I think such a mod will be doable, had that thought pretty much immediately when the feature was revealed that this should be the way to do it - duplicates without uniques. But it's not gonna be a good experience, I think. Some things base their bonuses on using traditions. Numerical values need to be adjusted because presumably all civ abilities should be moved to the ancient era copy for a true classic mode, but some might have strength that is balanced around coming in the modern era. But once you start rebalancing, the question becomes where to stop.

As for China, I'd say keep the different dynasties as different civs. Just like Rome and Byz were different civs in "classic" games before, or England and its various colonies, etc.

I'm pretty sure I first read "triplicate" in one of your messages, yes.

And I would not bet on what mod would be released first: a good "balanced classical version" or a pack of new civs, each with their own abilities and uniques, that would complete the historical paths into something decent.

I agree on the dynasties.

Re: thread: the main issue I'm seeing is that you'll be stuck with modern city art in the antiquity, and vice versa. Unless you're grabbing art from other civilizations that do fit the era, I guess?

Yes, one of the things I'd like to determine here is which art style from another civ would fit which copy of a civ in an Age.

 

[LastSword]

Damage?

I think you've misunderstood something. Civilization VII won't replace earlier games. It'll be released separately, and all previous games remain playable. Nothing is being damaged by Civilization VII.

Sigh, I do not follow your mental gymnastics. Where did I wrote that civ7 damaged something.

If anything I meant that civ-switching damaged civ7. Despite marketing civ7 offers a lot much more interesting features/things than civ-switching. Like graphics for example. I am also personally biased towards era switching as well. I understood that you like it (civ-switching), great, sorry to dislike.

Though maybe, the solution is indeed to cut leaders altogether.

 

[Leyrann]

Sigh, I do not follow your mental gymnastics. Where did I wrote that civ7 damaged something.

If anything I meant that civ-switching damaged civ7. Despite marketing civ7 offers a lot much more interesting features/things than civ-switching. Like graphics for example. I am also personally biased towards era switching as well. I understood that you like it (civ-switching), great, sorry to dislike.

Though maybe, the solution is indeed to cut leaders altogether.

In order to argue it 'damaged' Civ 7, there first needs to have been a Civ 7 that didn't have it.

If you don't like Civ 7, that's fine. But it's not as if they ruined a perfectly fine game after the fact. Civ 7 has never pretended to be anything else than what it is.

As for my opinions on civ switching, I was intrigued by Humankind, but never really got into the game (definitely in part because of real life stuff at the time, not just the game itself), and saw a lot of people put off by it, so I was quite skeptical. I do think Firaxis understands the causes for the issues it has in Humankind though, and I like some related concepts like the crises and splitting the game into parts like the novels of a trilogy. All in all, I'm mostly neutral towards it - it doesn't excite me, but it doesn't worry me either. I'm just going to play the game as Civilization VII, not as Civilization VI II or Civilization IV IV or anything like that.

 

[Shirotora Kenshin]

I'm one of those strange people around that never cared about leaders and played with/against Empires. I should care a bit more, as I only now realize there may be an issue with the number of leaders limiting the number of players in a game, unless the mod also provide copies of leaders if "duplicate" is not a setup option.

Hmm… so we would need custom leaders then?

 

[dagriggstar]

At the moment I wouldn't be concerned about say, having three Indias, because we are getting a Buddhist/Hindu/Muslim split, those should all be very distinct. China perhaps less so but Ming I expect to still play very differently to the other two. Ming and Chola I expect to have a naval focus, something neither China or India has never had in civ.

South India (Chola power base) is approximately the same distance away from Delhi as Berlin is from Istanbul.

 

[Leyrann]

South India (Chola power base) is approximately the same distance away from Delhi as Berlin is from Istanbul.

You know, I often see comparisons like this used to illustrate how big the world is.

But I think they should instead be used to show how small Europe is. Europe has a lot of mountain ranges, bays, seas, peninsulas and so on which divide it into a lot of parts and make it appear bigger, but it's actually really small compared to other continents. What doesn't help is that it's also one of the most densely populated, wealthy and (in terms of independent nations) fragmented parts of the world, which between them cause an outsized footprint in pretty much every area.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

At the moment I wouldn't be concerned about say, having three Indias, because we are getting a Buddhist/Hindu/Muslim split, those should all be very distinct.

But that's already covered by the in-game religion system.

But it's true we always had just "India", while it can be divided into different cultures from different parts of the subcontinent.

 

[8housesofelixir]

But that's already covered by the in-game religion system.

Though, the in-game religion system never materialized into any meaningful cultural or political difference, whether mechanically or visually.

 

[Krajzen]

I have also thought about thread like that, either a mod or even an official oprion.

"Classical mode" may be too much for the devs to put in the game of their vision, allowing to entirely avoid it. But what if we simply had the option to retain the old culture into the next age by handling crisis really well?

I mean let's see
1) It makes sense within the game's narrative: some exceptional civs may survive dramatic era transitions after all
2) It makes historical sense - you can totally find many examples of multi-era civilisations, not matter how you define both terms. Maya and Khmer (already in civ7), Japan (it even has the same dynasty for 1500 years), Vietnam, Armenia, Georgia, Jews, Assyrians, Basque, Ethiopia, Ireland, France and many European cultures etc (not to mention Persia and China in a way IMO, though that's controversial)
3) It provides an additional incentive to handle the crisis well
4) It makes retaining old civ feel "earned" and actually "standing the test of time"
5) AIs would sometimes do that, but you could never predict who and when, so when you enter new era it is even more unpredictable adventure
6) It would greatly simplify players' and Firaxis headache of seeking historical civ transitions, filling TSL maps etc.

The main problem with the civ switching imo is not "I can't unlock preferred civ immediately" but "I am forced to abandon it". The former is not contrary to the basic game design and psychology (make player earn something) whereas the latter is (forcefully take away toys from the player). The former is also far easier to justify historically and narratively than the latter. Sure, I'm fine with having to play as Slavs before I become Poland, in fact I think Poles would find this very cool, but forcing them to switch to Russia or Germany in the modern era is the worst insult civ game could make - you basically confirm the Prussian propaganda trope that Poles can't govern themselves and their failure against imperial colonialism is inevitable