Apparently in Multiplayer you can switch to any civ with no rules, like in Humankind. That's very disappointing to hear.

[kaspergm]

I would do it based on previous era score. With two options - forward (leader picks first) and backward (leader picks last).

Isn't it more likely there will simply be a player order that will determine it? I.e. player 1, player 2, player 3, etc. So player 1 gets first pick, player 2 second pick, etc.

Well that's just my guess, I just have a hard time imagining they'll go to the length of coding some specific system for multiplayer only.

 

[Krikkit1]

Isn't it more likely there will simply be a player order that will determine it? I.e. player 1, player 2, player 3, etc. So player 1 gets first pick, player 2 second pick, etc.

Well that's just my guess, I just have a hard time imagining they'll go to the length of coding some specific system for multiplayer only.

Easier is just to let them duplicate... If everyone wants to be Rome->Norman->France, that's fine... you can fight for control of the Colluseum, White Tower, and the Eiffel Tower. (just like you do other wonders)
(You just can't have everyone be Augustus)

 

[stealth_nsk]

Isn't it more likely there will simply be a player order that will determine it? I.e. player 1, player 2, player 3, etc. So player 1 gets first pick, player 2 second pick, etc.

Well that's just my guess, I just have a hard time imagining they'll go to the length of coding some specific system for multiplayer only.

The way I see it, changing order for picking civs is really a minor thing, but this, of course, depends on how the game is coded.

Another answer is more interesting - should the game restrict players from selecting the same civ at all? If not, the order doesn't matter.

 

[Uberfrog]

Yeah, it feels to me like it was always possible for players to pick the same civ in multiplayer, so why shouldn’t that still apply in Civ 7?

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

That's not how I understood the interview

I probably should have actually listened to the interview before wading in.

I have now listened, and I agree with you. Interesting decision, I hope the UI is good enough that it will be possible to make an informed choice and doesn't require you to make a guess based on what you remember. E.g., presumably they will still signal the historical and leader choices?

 

[Thormodr]

I don't play multiplayer, so meh.

I assume there will be mods 2 days after publication that allow me to play Rome -> Rome -> Rome.

The problem is - I should obviously pay the modders to give me the game I want. And buy the game once those mods exist Which might be fast.

Btw., Ara History Untold is coming out next week and it has the classical 1 civ for the whole game. I dislike the regions a little, but maybe they are ok. Discarding the hex map is a big move, but I can't judge yet whether this works better or not.

Hopefully, 7 is going to be extremely modder friendly.

The regions in Ara might help make a truly awesome TSL earth map, though.

 

[Zaarin]

The regions in Ara might help make a truly awesome TSL earth map, though.

Having played EL, HK, and Ara, I much prefer hexes to regions personally.

 

[Thormodr]

Having played EL, HK, and Ara, I much prefer hexes to regions personally.

I am open to the ideas of regions. Looks pretty good to me in this video. I will see very soon, I suppose.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

My take is understand why they would take of the restrictions for MP but I hope they can be turned on. It seems like the restrictions would be helpful in picking a civ transition.

Who chooses what civs is going to be up to local player rules... so you can impose any limitations you want on your group.

I hope they put some local player rules in the MP game, at least optionally. For example being limited to only one friend makes sense in MP but not SP.

 

[RedCourtJester]

I wouldn't be surprised if an option to turn on restrictions is introduced down the line.

I imagine the reasoning behind the free selection of progression is tied to two things:

1. A balancing of how difficult the prereqs are versus how easily they can be sabotaged by other players. Generally players are much better at the game than AI, and in many ways, even indirectly, could deprive opponents of achieving the prereqs. There may be so much likelihood of shutdown that the devs considered it an "unfun" restriction that needed to be removed.

1. The availability of restarts and save files. Single player mode is a lot more conducive to restarting or reverting to older saves if you make bad decisions or miss good ones. Obviously there are no takes-backsies in MP, and frankly I could see MP being extremely unfun for players who are forced into a crappy option for an entire third of the game.

 

[aieeegrunt]

If you can pick whoever you want and duplicates can exist this neatly side steps the whole issue of Picking Order

So I suspect this is how they will do it

It’s also a way to test for balance issues; if certain combos always win and the game quickly devolves into mirror matches it tells you who might need a nerf

The thing that will be enfuriating is if those balance changes also carry over into single player, which they usually do

That ruined Jakobs weapons in Borderlands for me