Asset file hinting at future and/or cut content

[ButtBillionaire]

Not sure how I feel about Edward Teach. Like sure, Blackbeard, big name, but dev resources are limited and as far as pirate/sea captain-type leaders go I was more interested in Zheng Yi Sao, Grace O'Malley or Laskarina Bouboulina. Nothing in the way of more than one of these existing at the same time, but it certainly feels less likely if he is indeed planned and hasn't been cut.

 

[RedCourtJester]

Not sure how I feel about Edward Teach. Like sure, Blackbeard, big name, but dev resources are limited and as far as pirate/sea captain-type leaders go I was more interested in Zheng Yi Sao, Grace O'Malley or Laskarina Bouboulina. Nothing in the way of more than one of these existing at the same time, but it certainly feels less likely if he is indeed planned and hasn't been cut.

I absolutely prefer Sayyida as a concept over Laskarina if we are looking at that general era/region.

I would be fine with Zheng Yi Sao, although I think a more interesting pirate niche for the area would be Queen Soma. Sadly I think Trung Trac competes for conceptual space with both of them for different reasons.

I think Grace's chances are still okay if we ever get Irish representation. I think her odds are a bit diminished by Sayyida/Teach, but I would still put her in top three most likely Irish leaders alongside Brian Boru and Michael Collins. Just depends on what era of Irish independence the devs are feeling I suppose.

 

[Unlinkingduck]

Figured it was worth mentioning (since I haven't seen anyone else mention it yet), but the "Flying Gang" is actually an Exploration Age independent power with the city of Nassau. I have them (hilariously land locked) in my current game, I'll send a picture later if anyone wants to see it. Figured this points to them still considering the Pirate Republic as an idea

 

[Menocchio]

This might be a controversial opinion, but I dearly hope that Big Ben is not Great Britain's designated wonder. If there was a particularly British "world wonder" of the 19th century, it was the Crystal Palace, which I hope gets in instead. It's mostly forgotten about today, but in its time it was a really remarkable structure: it had numerous immediate imitators (to say nothing of today's predilection for glass-and-steel structures), and represented to people who saw it or heard about it a kind of utopian vision of the future that rationalism and progress would bring about. It's a great symbol of the modern era.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

This might be a controversial opinion, but I dearly hope that Big Ben is not Great Britain's designated wonder. If there was a particularly British "world wonder" of the 19th century, it was the Crystal Palace, which I hope gets in instead. It's mostly forgotten about today, but in its time it was a really remarkable structure: it had numerous immediate imitators (to say nothing of today's predilection for glass-and-steel structures), and represented to people who saw it or heard about it a kind of utopian vision of the future that rationalism and progress would bring about. It's a great symbol of the modern era.

Screenshots suggest we're getting the Battersea Power Station.

 

[Menocchio]

Oh, that'd be excellent!

 

[Willie5000]

I absolutely prefer Sayyida as a concept over Laskarina if we are looking at that general era/region.

I would be fine with Zheng Yi Sao, although I think a more interesting pirate niche for the area would be Queen Soma. Sadly I think Trung Trac competes for conceptual space with both of them for different reasons.

I think Grace's chances are still okay if we ever get Irish representation. I think her odds are a bit diminished by Sayyida/Teach, but I would still put her in top three most likely Irish leaders alongside Brian Boru and Michael Collins. Just depends on what era of Irish independence the devs are feeling I suppose.

There’s no reason why they can’t put in more than one Southeast Asian leader. There are plenty of White European leaders

 

[Willie5000]

denmark makes the most sense going forward, I think—it’s the longest-lived scandinavian state (norway and sweden both spent hundreds of years under danish rule), works for both exploration and modern, broadly the most powerful nordic country for most of history, and can be more than just “viking raiders”. also unlike norway and sweden, it didn’t appear in civ 6.

finland obviously isn’t scandinavian, but it would be really interesting to see as well.

TBH it’d be better to call the exploration age Viking Civ “the Norse” and be honest about it rather than hapazardly applying the name “Denmark” or “Norway” to what is clearly just a Viking Civ.

 

[wilcoxchar]

Any ideas on what wonder Iceland could get? I've always wanted the ancient Temple at Uppsala as a wonder in Civ, but I imagine that would be more appropriate for a Nordic pillager civ than for explorer Iceland.

Probably the Þingvellir.

EDIT: Or at least some representation of the Althing.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

TBH it’d be better to call the exploration age Viking Civ “the Norse” and be honest about it rather than hapazardly applying the name “Denmark” or “Norway” to what is clearly just a Viking Civ.

Arabia I Mean Abbasid has set an unfortunate precedent, I'm afraid...

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

TBH it’d be better to call the exploration age Viking Civ “the Norse” and be honest about it rather than hapazardly applying the name “Denmark” or “Norway” to what is clearly just a Viking Civ.

I'd rather the "Viking" Norse civ be in Antiquity. That way Exploration Denmark could focus on the Kalmar Union.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

TBH it’d be better to call the exploration age Viking Civ “the Norse” and be honest about it rather than hapazardly applying the name “Denmark” or “Norway” to what is clearly just a Viking Civ.

that means that it’s pretty much impossible to have an antiquity era civ for it

would far prefer “the norse” to be antiquity, focus exploration norway on being more politically militaristic (like harald hardrada), and a modern denmark to be commercial/welfare/culture focused (perhaps also abilities oriented around efficient building/retaining the previous era’s buildings to reflect denmark/copenhagen’s strong infrastructure despite having old bones?)

 

[Evie]

I mean call me crazy but I"d put the exploration norse in the exploration era, and the raiding norse in the antiquity but what do I know...

 

[Xefjord]

An exploration "Norse" civ sounds awful to me tbh. I am very happy they are trying to do specific names instead of generalized ones as much as possible. The "Celts" of previous civ games and Ara bugged me a lot. If we did have a Norse, it would be OK for antiquity, but not Exploration, Exploration goes up to gunpowder, that needs to be like Denmark or Norway or something.

 

[RedCourtJester]

I'd rather the "Viking" Norse civ be in Antiquity. That way Exploration Denmark could focus on the Kalmar Union.

that means that it’s pretty much impossible to have an antiquity era civ for it

would far prefer “the norse” to be antiquity, focus exploration norway on being more politically militaristic (like harald hardrada), and a modern denmark to be commercial/welfare/culture focused (perhaps also abilities oriented around efficient building/retaining the previous era’s buildings to reflect denmark/copenhagen’s strong infrastructure despite having old bones?)

I mean call me crazy but I"d put the exploration norse in the exploration era, and the raiding norse in the antiquity but what do I know...

1. I think the specific addition of the Normans begs for an antiquity "Norse" civ to progress from (not to mention the general flow of Scandinavian history), much like how SEA gets Khmer. I do not think this will be a matter of "if," but "when."

2. Given that the Norse exploration era does not start that much prior to the settling of Normandy, and is almost simultaneous with the settling of Iceland, I am about 50/50 on Iceland being the "Norse" antiquity civ. The more defining features of Iceland definitely "feel" more antiquity than exploration with respect to the greater Scandinavian story.

3. Which we get I think will depend on which "path" the devs are envisioning for Scandinavian progression, and a large part of that hinges on whether we get a "Norse/Norway" civ separate from the Normans (or for that matter, separate conceptually from exploration era Iceland). The two most probable pathways I see are:

* Norse (antiquity) -> Normans + Iceland + Denmark (exploration) -> Sweden (modern)

* Iceland (antiquity) -> Normans + Denmark (+ Norway?) (exploration) -> Sweden (modern)

I really do think Iceland's strengths are better as "the Maya to Norse's Olmec" when comparing it to the other Scandi civs, plus that pathway will prove a lot more conservative dev-wise, so I am leaning toward the second scenario being more probable. I'm sure there are plenty of reasons to suspect the contrary.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

* Norse (antiquity) -> Normans + Iceland + Denmark (exploration) -> Sweden (modern)

This path makes the most sense to me. Sweden is bound to have some reference to the Nobel Prizes, maybe even as unique Great People.
I still don't see how Iceland>Norway makes any sense considering it was Norwegian/Norse explorers who found and settled Iceland.

 

[RedCourtJester]

This path makes the most sense to me. Sweden is bound to have some reference to the Nobel Prizes, maybe even as unique Great People.
I still don't see how Iceland>Norway makes any sense considering it was Norwegian/Norse explorers who found and settled Iceland.

What I'm saying is that if, in the second scenario, Iceland is the antiquity civ, there likely won't be an exploration era Norway in VII.

Like I said, I see pros and cons. I do think it would be bizarre to not make the Norse the antiquity civ, but I am also wondering how many exploration era civs the devs will add to the region before giving us options for the other eras.

One thing I am really not enjoying about VII's release schedule is that they are deliberately creating incomplete, dissatisfying historical pathways to force a demand effect on DLC. You want Trung to lead a relevant civ? Better buy Right to Rule. You want Hawaii to have a decent start point? Well then you have to buy the next DLC.

And then these are designed to compound and extend the cliffhanger. You got Britain, which should have been in the base game, but now you're waiting on Gran Colombia. You got Dai Viet, but look at Meiji and Silla looking sad over there. You got Tonga/Maori, but now you really need to buy the next DLC to get the Norse for your two exploration Norse civs.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

What I'm saying is that if, in the second scenario, Iceland is the antiquity civ, there likely won't be an exploration era Norway in VII.

Like I said, I see pros and cons. I do think it would be bizarre to not make the Norse the antiquity civ, but I am also wondering how many exploration era civs the devs will add to the region before giving us options for the other eras.

It's just hard for me to see a scenario where Iceland is put in Antiquity regardless of whether Denmark or Norway also show up in Exploration. Because if we're talking about a game where "history is built in layers", Iceland comes after all the other Scandinavian/Norse countries. Iceland and its culture was built off of the Norse/Norway.

 

[untitledjuan]

It's just hard for me to see a scenario where Iceland is put in Antiquity regardless of whether Denmark or Norway also show up in Exploration. Because if we're talking about a game where "history is built in layers", Iceland comes after all the other Scandinavian/Norse countries. Iceland and its culture was built off of the Norse/Norway.

I think the ideal Scandinavian timeline should be as follows:

Antiquity:
-Norse
-Gothic

Exploration:
-Denmark
-Norway
-Iceland
-Rus'

Modern:
-Sweden
-Finland

I don't think they should include all of them, with just one of those per age, I think it would be fine.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think the ideal Scandinavian timeline should be as follows:

Antiquity:
-Norse
-Gothic

Exploration:
-Denmark
-Norway
-Iceland
-Rus'

Modern:
-Sweden
-Finland

I don't think they should include all of them, with just one of those per age, I think it would be fine.

I sort of agree with this. I think the Goths and Rus' could be considered their own thing and not part of the primary Scandinavian path. At least I'd put the Rus' as part of a branching Scandinavian/Slavic route. Because if we were to include the Rus', then we should include the Normans in the same list, which are already in the game, as I think they would also come from the Norse.