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

[Leucarum]

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

This is more a complaint about the historic paths I think than civ switching per se. I get why they introduced them, but it leads to icky connotations. At least you can avoid them as a player by unlocking specific civs...

 

[Sagax]

At least you can avoid them as a player by unlocking specific civs...

Not quite. Even unlocked civs come with their own and forced naming and architectural style. If I play as Maya and unlock enough horses, I don’t mind taking on Mongolian gameplay traits or even becoming “the Mayan horde”, “the Mayan khanate”, or whatever. I do mind becoming straight up Mongolia, without any say in how exactly this new direction is mixing in with the Mayan heritage.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Not quite. Even unlocked civs come with their own and forced naming and architectural style. If I play as Maya and unlock enough horses, I don’t mind taking on Mongolian gameplay traits or even becoming “the Mayan horde”, “the Mayan khanate”, or whatever. I do mind becoming straight up Mongolia, without any say in how exactly this new direction is mixing in with the Mayan heritage.

This.
There's a significant difference between becoming a "Mongolian-like Mayans" (acceptable) and literally becoming Mongolia (ridiculous).

 

[Leucarum]

Not quite. Even unlocked civs come with their own and forced naming and architectural style. If I play as Maya and unlock enough horses, I don’t mind taking on Mongolian gameplay traits or even becoming “the Mayan horde”, “the Mayan khanate”, or whatever. I do mind becoming straight up Mongolia, without any say in how exactly this new direction is mixing in with the Mayan heritage.

Agreed that it's not preserving your civ - I meant that you can avoid icky civ transitions like Poland into Russia, Shawnee into USA etc...

 

[chaosprophet]

This.
There's a significant difference between becoming a "Mongolian-like Mayans" (acceptable) and literally becoming Mongolia (ridiculous).

I think that problem is more people wanting to see that way, because in the end what actually happens is that your Maya-themed cic changed with times on a Mongolia-themed civ. It was never Maya nor Mongolia though, as even a TSL civ game is nothing historical at all as the way the game abstracts things wouldn't allow it even if you play a hotseat TSL game where you control all civs to try to make it as historical as possible.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

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 ?

Mirrors thoughts I've had for a while now. Just shared them on another thread, but probably would have been better here, since they mostly match what you're suggesting:

I think the dev team missed an opportunity to include 3 additional, very basic civs, one for each age, selectable only by players, not AI:

"Ancient X" (or "Proto X") - select a civ from Exploration or Modern Age, the base civ uses that name in place of X and uses that civ's city name list (and military leader name list, if applicable); will always unlock the selected Exploration Age civ (if you chose an Exploration civ) or an Exploration civ that leads to the selected Modern Age civ (if you chose a Modern civ)

"Exploration X" - same, but inherits X and name lists from the civ you used in the Ancient Age; always available for a player to select

"Modern X" - same, but inherits X and name lists from the civ you used in the Exploration Age; always available for a player to select

Bonuses for these 3 civs could be very generic, like 2 Legacy points on transition or something like that.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

Sounds like you have some takers. To me this feels like the scene in Falling Down where he's upset that McDonalds stops serving breakfast at 10:30, only too realize he did want a hamburger after seeing them being served.

 

[aieeegrunt]

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?

I love all of the changes I’ve seen so far except civ switching and the forced crises era change

I’m on the fence about the latter. The former is pretty much a deal breaker

 

[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

I have realized the fundamental problem with my proposal, and Gedemon's proposal has similar issue: players changing civs have an obvious advantage over players retaining old civs, since they always get unique units and infrastructure appropriate for each era (and IIRC they get both new and old social policies). Meanwhile even if retained civs still have relevant passive abilities, they don't get new era uniques mentioned above.

Humankind solved (?) this issue with retained civs getting higher and higher fame (victory point) bonuses to account for that, but idk how we'd solve that balance issue here. Maybe each "transcending" civ should get a set of powerful policy cards designed specifically for all such civs in general?

You know, policies referencing past era glory, such as:
- Shahnameh: A national epic based on previous era exploits
- The Art od War: A bonus to generals to account for the ancient military traditions
- Studying Classics: A boost for the museums
- Lion of Judah: A bonus to [minor civ] diplomacy as a venerable ancient civilization
- Silk Road: Increased gold when trading in the same direction yet another era

Meanwhile depending on the type of "transcending" civ's unique unit, this branch of military receives unique legacy bonus; same with the type of unique infrastrucure you had and some aspect of city development, or yield.
Yet another idea: transcending civ's old era unique infrastructure present on the map gets unique bonus yields (mainly culture).

So for example I transcend as Slavs to era II. I can no longer build my unique heavy warriors and hillforts, and lack era II specific UU and UI and policies, but get legacy bonus towards heavy infatry and fortifications, and legacy policy cards shared by all transcended civs. Also my ancient hillforts are subject of veneration, generating bonus culture and even faith.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

All civs should have their earlier/later stages. Greeks should have their own AoE and modern version. Byzantines should have their own ancient and modern versions. Americans should have their ancient and AoE versions. And they should be able to follow that one path only (Ancient Greece > AoE Greece > modern Greece). This is the closest thing to the classical mode that we can have in Civ VII.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I have realized the fundamental problem with my proposal, and Gedemon's proposal has similar issue: players changing civs have an obvious advantage over players retaining old civs, since they always get unique units and infrastructure appropriate for each era (and IIRC they get both new and old social policies). Meanwhile even if retained civs still have relevant passive abilities, they don't get new era uniques mentioned above.

That's not really a problem, though. Civ-solitaire is not a competitive game. This mod would only appeal to people who find civ-switching to be immersion breaking, and those people who presumably don't want to stack uniques and benefits from age to age. Just give them a couple of generic bonuses as partial compensation (I suggested extra Legacy points elsewhere) and that should be fine.

Won't do anything for people who don't want age transition and crisis events, but could at least eliminate Civ-switching, if the game is moddable enough to allow that.

 

[HktkNban]

"Every civilization should have its own ancient version" -- this idea is ridiculous.
The need arises to create a fictional fantasy civilization such as "Ancient American Civilization".

Many of the civilizations that exist in the modern world today were separated from their parent civilizations in the Middle Ages or the Modern Era.
Hence, a system in which a single civilization divides into multiple civilizations as time progresses would be more reasonable.
It would be historically correct if medieval England then diverged into Great Britain and America.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

"Every civilization should have its own ancient version" -- this idea is ridiculous.

It's not, unless you think literally all Civ games were ridiculous.

Ahistorical - yes. But it's just a game. It's not Europa Universalis, it's a game where you play on a randomly generated map. I can easily forgive it having "ancient Americans". It's still better than ancient Egypt > Mongolia which is ridiculous as well.

Many of the civilizations that exist in the modern world today were separated from their parent civilizations in the Middle Ages or the Modern Era.
Hence, a system in which a single civilization divides into multiple civilizations as time progresses would be more reasonable.
It would be historically correct if medieval England then diverged into Great Britain and America.

That's how vanilla Civ VII will work. This is the thread for the "classical mode" mod.

 

[Gedemon]

Hmm… so we would need custom leaders then?

or remove everyone, if my choice is playing a small map with 8 civs and animated leaders or playing on a huge map with 20 civs and leaderless static diplomatic screen, I'll pick the later.

I have realized the fundamental problem with my proposal, and Gedemon's proposal has similar issue: players changing civs have an obvious advantage over players retaining old civs, since they always get unique units and infrastructure appropriate for each era (and IIRC they get both new and old social policies). Meanwhile even if retained civs still have relevant passive abilities, they don't get new era uniques mentioned above.

I acknowledge that, but re-balancing would not be my goal here, I've already mentioned development time for such a task, and that from my PoV balance is less important than immersion, now one of my other consideration is to keep the mod simple to be compatible with any other mods I'd like to make if I stick with civ7.

"Every civilization should have its own ancient version" -- this idea is ridiculous.
The need arises to create a fictional fantasy civilization such as "Ancient American Civilization".

I kind of agree, and disliked that in every previous version of the game, which is why I made "Historical Start Date" mods for civ5 and civ6, but here I am, proposing the opposite...

Many of the civilizations that exist in the modern world today were separated from their parent civilizations in the Middle Ages or the Modern Era.
Hence, a system in which a single civilization divides into multiple civilizations as time progresses would be more reasonable.
It would be historically correct if medieval England then diverged into Great Britain and America.

... because that's civ7 in a few months/years, but at this point IMO the list of official Civilizations would make some transitions as ridiculous as the USA in antiquity, especially for the IA if a player steal their "historical" choice at the end of an age.

My proposal here is to provide a temporary solution for 8+ players in a game and give me a base to implement TSL for all ages, which, the way I see it, could also have a kind of "Historical Start Date" mod option, in that case the game would start with antique civilizations as designed for civ7, but then allowing transition into historical choices or "transcending" into a next age version of themselves and spawning exploration civilizations from minor civs or from splits in major civilizations, then, same thing again for the 3rd age.

Which is kind of what you propose, and also how I made it in my mod for HK.

In that configuration you'd have antique civ in the first age, exploration civ + transcended antique civs in the second age, and modern + transcended exploration civs + 2x transcended antique civs in the third age.


And the mod would allow a simple classical mode gameplay, because at this point, it also provide all that is needed for it, and it is essential for some players.

 

[Nigel_Tufnel2]

Gedemon, I would definitely get good use out of the mod you envision. Especially if it allows for a better TSL experience, and more players (I don't need the animated Leader screens more than a 20 Player game!).

 

[Aquila SPQR]

or remove everyone, if my choice is playing a small map with 8 civs and animated leaders or playing on a huge map with 20 civs and leaderless static diplomatic screen, I'll pick the later.

Absolutely agree.

I kind of agree, and disliked that in every previous version of the game, which is why I made "Historical Start Date" mods for civ5 and civ6, but here I am, proposing the opposite...

I always thought of it as "they are people who will become Americans/Russians/Germans" instead of "they are the same Americans as in the XIX/XX century, just in the ancient era". Basically the "transitioning" from early Slavs > Kievan Rus > modern Russia through technology. That was always my interpretation when playing.

Gedemon, I would definitely get good use out of the mod you envision. Especially if it allows for a better TSL experience, and more players (I don't need the animated Leader screens more than a 20 Player game!).

I wonder how TSL maps were popular in HK and how much they will be in Civ VII. Unlimited city districts basically killed any Earth maps for me. Seeing the entire Iberian peninsula or the entire India covered with tiny houses in the ancient era breaks the immersion so much I can't handle it. Not to mention the bad (IMO) idea of wonders occupying the entire hex.

For TSL Earth maps Civ IV and V are the best.

 

[Civinator]

For TSL Earth maps Civ IV and V are the best.

For TSL Civ III in my eyes is the best. The true starting locations in Civ 3 (C3C) can be set by only a few clicks in the editor for each civ on a map.

 

[Shirotora Kenshin]

if my choice is playing a small map with 8 civs and animated leaders or playing on a huge map with 20 civs and leaderless static diplomatic screen, I'll pick the later.

Me also, but i would pick the 20 civs with 2d images of leaders on a huge map. That‘s a compromise i guess, but this way you would have a graphical representation of leaders AND the huge map and many civs… but only if that would work, of course

 

[UWHabs]

From the various reveals, I think the big problem with a mod like this is any semblance of balance. Sure, I wouldn't hate a mode which locked civs to only their "natural" path, or locked leaders to their regional setups. But I think from all the reveals there's a LOT of uniques for each civ (unique culture trees, unique great people, UD/UB/UU, etc... It's way more uniques than any version in the past. So if you locked the AI into some sort of bare civ without any uniques, it would pretty heavily skew against them. I don't necessarily think we need any more penalties for the AI.

 

[Shirotora Kenshin]

So if you locked the AI into some sort of bare civ without any uniques, it would pretty heavily skew against them. I don't necessarily think we need any more penalties for the AI.

True. The civs in the mod would need the same amount of uniques as the original civs. This is something that wouldn’t be impossible, if modding capabilities are at least the same as in Civ6.