Civ VII Forced Civ change in Eras?

[GIO888]

This facet of Civ VII is like Humankind, folks.

end of!

 

[President Skroob]

I'm of the opinion that it makes sense for Civilizations to evolve over time. Yet I find this new approach conflicts with the age-old tradition of picking a Civilization and leading it to stand the test of time. What changes for a Civilization over time isn't their identity/culture, but who leads them. As such I think as we move from Antiquity into Exploration and ultimately into the Modern age that our leaders, not our Culture/Civ should change. America, as an example, has had 46 Presidents and countless influential citizens in its history. If I were to pick America for Antiquity, its leader could be any one of the Founding Fathers: Washington, Adams(both John and Samuel), Jefferson, Madison or heck Monroe(Monroe Doctrine?). When we move into the Exploration age, we could get Meriwether Lewis(Lewis&Clark expedition), Andrew Jackson(responsible for Exploration Expeditions and is on our $20 bill for a reason), Abraham Lincoln(past leader) or Grant(Civil War). Once moving into the Modern age, a slew of Leaders are options: Teddy(Great White Fleet), FDR(WW2), Eisenhower, JFK, Reagan, or any recent President. Captains of Industry could also be options like Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc. I'm just saying that rather than have us move from one Civ to the next through the ages while keeping the Leader, maybe we ought to swap it around and keep the Civ but change Leaders as we advance through time. Experience Leaders earn can then be reset(to level the playing field) or carry over at a pre-determined level.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

In a much earlier post, I postulated replacing the Eras with 'Singularity Events" that would force major changes in the way Civs were played. I tried to stay in the old Civ format with as many Singularities asw there were (roughly) Eras, so had Agriculture, Metal Working, Writing, Steam Power, etc.

The Design Team, obviously, was 'way ahead of me by several years and several concepts and conclusions. They recognized that if one accepts Singularities that cause Massive Changes in thought and deed, then they cannot come too early in the game or it trivializes the early game - if everything is going to change by Turn 50, why bother playing turns 1 - 49? That eliminates Writing and early Metal-Working as Singularities, and probably places Agriculture as a Game Starting Event rather than an in-game event.

Their choice of the Post-Roman/Dark Ages/early 'Medieval" period as a Singularity Event between Antiquity and Exploration is an example of logical continuation of the concept. This doesn't really coincide with any Technological change or, except over half a millenium, any set of technological changes, but it does coincide with major intellectual/social/cultural/political changes over a great deal of the world: the rise of aggressive multi-cultural Religions, the collapse of Antiquity Empires (Roman, Tang China) the (eventual) rise of 'national' Monarchial and other governments over much of the world, etc. After some delay, technological changes like new sailing and navigation and military techniques collect into the world-girdling ships that propelled the Exploration/Exploitation of the world by Europeans - or, in game, whoever gets to those conditions First.

The one Singularity Event I postulated that remains in the game is the transition from Exploration to Modern Ages: roughly, the combination of technological and social/political events that produced Industrialization, artificial Power, and the economics required to fund all of that, which in turn resulted in whole new organizations of human populations ("Industrial Labor") and political thought that produced modern Ideologies - all attempting to deal with the new 'modern' Industrial Reality.

Note also that this conceptual framework leaves out the last of the 'world-wide revolutions' postulated: the Information Revolution brought on by the computer, electronic communications and massive spread of information systems. This leads me to suspect that one DLC/Post-Release addition will be a Near Future one, covering, roughly, the time from about 1975 to 2025+. This may include the old Science Victory extra-solar exploration/colonization and some of the speculative political changes and governments and many of the modern military developments showcased by the current conflicts.

given the tech list. it turns out that Era 2 is now Medieval and 'Renaissance Early Modern' packed in one. too many 'medieval siege engines' as separete units. something that's still off to me.
the only thing i approve is that big and small guns now activated at the same time (preferably big guns come first)

but some followups from Civ6 is that archers became crossbowmen in the middle ages just about the same timeframe as in 6.
there seems to be two tiers of knights, Early, and Late (not sure) but a cog may be mislabelled at best.
I don't understand why 'education' is still Middle Ages things and not Classical? (First Era)?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

As usual for several Civ renditions now, the Techs in many cases are simply titles with only tenuous connection to reality, and require some interpretation.

Starting with 'Machinery', which appears to include Catapults - which were invented around 400 BCE and applied to fortification defenses, siege trains, and ships before 100 BCE, or long before the Exploration Age started. Also, the basic principles of most of the 'simple machines' like ramps, pulleys, levers, etc were understood and written up at least 500 - 700 years before the only date we have for Exploration Age start (400 CE).

Cartography coming at the beginning of the Exploration Age (400 CE?) is also more than slightly out of place. Maps have been discovered dating back to Prehistory, the Babylonians had accurate land surveying in the Bronze Age, and Eratosthenes (2nd century BCE) established accurate linear measurement as a requirement for mapping - his Prime Meridian and Parallels measurements were accurate to within 0.5%, although his Prime Meridian ran through Rhodes, not Greenwich. Chinese geographies and maps also date back to at least the 5th century BCE. They may intend 'Cartography' here to represent the Arabic advances in mapping and measuring, but they all date to after 800 CE and much of their work was firmly based on the Hellenistic cartographers earlier, like Ptolemy and Marinus of Tyre.

I could go on Tech by Tech, but it's just a game of Trivial Pursuit: Civ's Tech Trees have always been Approximate, and as long as they place the Application in the game in roughly the right sequence it works.

Two types of Knights, or at least two types of Mounted Armored Troops within the era makes a certain amount of sense: the early Tang Dynasty armored lancers and earliest European knights were both armored in types of ring mail or lammellar armor, used the lance and long sword as their primary weapons, and were largely based on a fuedal-type system of recruitment. Later (13th century on) the same armored lancers were, in Europe at least, in articulated steel plate armor and largely mercenary professional soldiers either paid directly by the State or part of mercenary 'companies' (up to Corps sized!) hired by the State. - Or they could simply be jumping ahead to the post-Medieval 'Cuirassiers'.

I am more interested in the inclusion of both Guilds and Education as separate Techs, each with a Mastery following: this implies more depth to the development of Guilds and Universities both, and it will be interesting to see how and what they are modeling here. See the book from a few years ago, The Light Ages by Seb Falk for an in-depth look at just how involved medieval Universities and other institutions were in the development of both theoretical and practical scientific applications.

 

[BuchiTaton]

In reality there are not objetive distinctions for when start or end an Era/Age, same with the concepts of technology, civics and policies. But sadly for me the choices done for CIV7 are the opposite direcetion I would want.

Push Medieval into Exploration feel weird when most of the routes used on Medieval time like Central Asia and Indian Ocean Silk Routes were a significative thing since Classical times. Norse and Polynesian exploration were exceptions with limited impact, so the world changing exploration eras as something that was a real idea, technology, institution and profitable objetive was from 15th century Portuguese routes to late 19th century scramble for Africa and even polar expeditions.

Many of the names for technologies are very general concepts that would fit better in previous eras and could be divided in the specific invention of devices and techniques between those disciplines. Also many would fit better as civics/policies than could be implemented optionaly as a cultural choice instead of be a linear uprgrade.

 

[Luke1195]

I would give each civ have a clear historical path, AND they'd be able to switch if they meet conditions to do so, or you can just turn civ-switching off.
Some civs would need "flavors" to differentiate them across paths or eras.

Examples (not definitive):
Ancient Egypt --> Mamluks --> Egyptian Republic
Ancient Rome (Republic or Empire) --> Roman Empire (Western) or Papal States or Venetian --> Italy
Anglo Saxons --> English Empire (including Normans and Tudors) --> British Empire
Kievan Rus --> Russian Empire --> Soviet Russia
Nabataean Kingdom --> Arabian Caliphates --> Saudi Arabia
Celts --> Scottish Kingdom --> Ireland
Norse Tribes --> Vikings --> Swedish Empire or Kalmar/Scandinavian Union
Aksum --> Ethiopian Empire (Abyssinia) --> Ethiopian Republic
Ancient Greece --> Byzantines (Eastern Roman) --> Greece
Ancient Persia (Achaemenid, Parthian, Sasanian) --> Seljuk Empire --> Safavid Iran
Ancient India (Maurya) --> Muslim India (Delhi Sultanate and/or Mughals) --> Modern India
Tamil Tribes --> Chola Empire --> Kingdom of Kandy
Ancient Phoenicians or Canaan --> Kingdom of Jerusalem --> Israel
Ancient Iberians --> Spanish Empire --> Spain
Lusitanians --> Portuguese Empire --> Portugal
Tupi Tribes --> Brazilian Empire --> Brazil
Toltecs or Teotihuacan --> Aztecs --> Mexican Empire(s)
Olmecs --> Maya --> Republic of Yucatan or Modern Mexico
Andean Tribes or Mapuche --> Incas --> Peru or Chile
Huns --> Mongols --> Ottomans
Assyria --> Palmyrene Empire --> Syria
Woodlands Native Americans --> Mississippian --> Iroquois Confederacy
Ancestral Puebloans --> Plains Indians --> Navajo Nation
Ghana Empire --> Mali or Songhai Empire --> Republic of Mali
Frankish Tribes --> Kingdom of France --> French Empire
Germanic Tribes --> Holy Roman Empire --> German Empire
Bantu Tribes --> Kongo Kingdom --> Zulus
Ancient China (Shang) --> Imperial China --> Communist China
Ancient Japan (Yayoi) --> Shogunate Japan --> Japanese Empire
Champa --> Khmer Empire --> Siam
Sunda Kingdom --> Medieval Indonesia (Srivijaya, Majapahit) --> Republic of Indonesia
Frisian Kingdom --> Dutch Empire --> Netherlands
Tonga --> Maori --> Kingdom of Hawaii
Thirteen Colonies --> Civil War America --> United States

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

More
Roman Empire -> Italian States ->Italy
Roman Empire -> Byzantine Empire -> Italy
Roman Empire -> Byzantine Empire -> Ottoman Empire
Greece -> Byzantine Empire -> Ottoman Empire
Greece -> Byzantine Empire -> Russian Empire
Greece -> Byzantine Empire -> Austria
Dvaravati* -> Ayutthaya -> Siam/Thailand
Dvaravati* -> Hanthawaddy -> Burma
Sunda -> Siwichai League -> Siam
Sunda -> Siwichai League -> Malaysia

*I Never agree that Sukhothai should represent Medieval Siam or even the first. i'm not even sure if Dvaravati is so old but evidence of their existences as a very old empire or league are so many Roman artefacts found somewhere in Kanchanaburi Province of Thailand. one that indeed dated back as far as Old Rome. possibly sometimes before 3rd Century, back then much of Chao Phraya basin was a seabed.

I would give each civ have a clear historical path, AND they'd be able to switch if they meet conditions to do so, or you can just turn civ-switching off.
Some civs would need "flavors" to differentiate them across paths or eras.

Examples (not definitive):
Ancient Egypt --> Mamluks --> Egyptian Republic
Ancient Rome --> Western Roman Empire or Papal States or Venetian --> Italy
Anglo Saxons --> English Empire (including Normans and Tudors) --> British Empire
Kievan Rus --> Russian Empire --> Soviet Russia
Nabataean Kingdom --> Arabian Caliphates --> Saudi Arabia
Celts --> Scottish Kingdom --> Ireland
Norse Tribes --> Vikings --> Swedish Empire or Kalmar/Scandinavian Union
Aksum --> Ethiopian Empire (Abyssinia) --> Ethiopian Republic
Ancient Greece --> Byzantines (Eastern Roman) --> Greece
Ancient Persia (Achaemenid, Parthian, Sasanian) --> Seljuk Empire --> Safavid Iran
Ancient India (Maurya) --> Muslim India (Delhi Sultanate and/or Mughals) --> Modern India
Tamil Tribes --> Chola Empire --> Kingdom of Kandy
Ancient Phoenicians or Canaan --> Kingdom of Jerusalem --> Israel
Ancient Iberians --> Spanish Empire --> Spain
Lusitanians --> Portuguese Empire --> Portugal
Tupi Tribes --> Brazilian Empire --> Brazil
Toltecs or Teotihuacan --> Aztecs --> Mexican Empire(s)
Olmecs --> Maya --> Republic of Yucatan or Modern Mexico
Andean Tribes or Mapuche --> Incas --> Peru
Huns --> Mongols --> Ottomans
Assyria --> Palmyrene Empire --> Syria
Woodlands Native Americans --> Mississippian --> Iroquois Confederacy
Ancestral Puebloans --> Plains Indians --> Navajo Nation
Ghana Empire --> Mali or Songhai Empire --> Republic of Mali
Frankish Tribes --> Kingdom of France --> French Empire
Germanic Tribes --> Holy Roman Empire --> German Empire
Bantu Tribes --> Kongo Kingdom --> Zulus
Ancient China --> Imperial China --> Communist China
Ancient Japan (Yayoi) --> Shogunate Japan --> Japanese Empire
Funan Kingdom --> Khmer Republic --> Cambodia
Sunda Kingdom --> Medieval Indonesia (Srivijaya, Majapahit) --> Republic of Indonesia
Frisian Kingdom --> Dutch Empire --> Netherlands
Tonga --> Maori --> Kingdom of Hawaii
Thirteen Colonies --> Civil War America --> United States

I'm not sure when did Funan Kingdom shown up but is it one and same as Khmer Empire of the old? It is several centuries older than Ayutthaya.
and the word 'Funan' came from Chinese choronicles,. it may not be what they called themselves at that time. There's more to study when or who actually founded the first Khmer Empire

There are several 'Ancient China' (

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

As usual for several Civ renditions now, the Techs in many cases are simply titles with only tenuous connection to reality, and require some interpretation.

Starting with 'Machinery', which appears to include Catapults - which were invented around 400 BCE and applied to fortification defenses, siege trains, and ships before 100 BCE, or long before the Exploration Age started. Also, the basic principles of most of the 'simple machines' like ramps, pulleys, levers, etc were understood and written up at least 500 - 700 years before the only date we have for Exploration Age start (400 CE).

Cartography coming at the beginning of the Exploration Age (400 CE?) is also more than slightly out of place. Maps have been discovered dating back to Prehistory, the Babylonians had accurate land surveying in the Bronze Age, and Eratosthenes (2nd century BCE) established accurate linear measurement as a requirement for mapping - his Prime Meridian and Parallels measurements were accurate to within 0.5%, although his Prime Meridian ran through Rhodes, not Greenwich. Chinese geographies and maps also date back to at least the 5th century BCE. They may intend 'Cartography' here to represent the Arabic advances in mapping and measuring, but they all date to after 800 CE and much of their work was firmly based on the Hellenistic cartographers earlier, like Ptolemy and Marinus of Tyre.

I could go on Tech by Tech, but it's just a game of Trivial Pursuit: Civ's Tech Trees have always been Approximate, and as long as they place the Application in the game in roughly the right sequence it works.

Two types of Knights, or at least two types of Mounted Armored Troops within the era makes a certain amount of sense: the early Tang Dynasty armored lancers and earliest European knights were both armored in types of ring mail or lammellar armor, used the lance and long sword as their primary weapons, and were largely based on a fuedal-type system of recruitment. Later (13th century on) the same armored lancers were, in Europe at least, in articulated steel plate armor and largely mercenary professional soldiers either paid directly by the State or part of mercenary 'companies' (up to Corps sized!) hired by the State. - Or they could simply be jumping ahead to the post-Medieval 'Cuirassiers'.

I am more interested in the inclusion of both Guilds and Education as separate Techs, each with a Mastery following: this implies more depth to the development of Guilds and Universities both, and it will be interesting to see how and what they are modeling here. See the book from a few years ago, The Light Ages by Seb Falk for an in-depth look at just how involved medieval Universities and other institutions were in the development of both theoretical and practical scientific applications.

Then again. 'Catapult' as referred here should be traction trebuchet as icon now implies. rather than torsion one (Actually called 'Onager' which serves more like mortar but with much shorter range). alternatively called 'mangonel'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangonel .

The term itself is very broad. though the first type of siege unit in this game is Ballista. which does give out a good range. a large variant of big bow is called Lithobolos. big enough to shoot stones.

well hope so. but onager doesn't shoot far.

 

[Luke1195]

I'm not sure when did Funan Kingdom shown up but is it one and same as Khmer Empire of the old? It is several centuries older than Ayutthaya.
and the word 'Funan' came from Chinese choronicles,. it may not be what they called themselves at that time. There's more to study when or who actually founded the first Khmer Empire

Maybe it would be better to call it "Pre-Angkor" and combine Funan and Chenla kingdoms.

There are several 'Ancient China' (

You're right, I added it is the Shang

 

[I was NC]

I don't understand why switching isn't optional. Seems like whatever problem it creates is resolved by the antiquity civs' bonuses becoming partially, or even fully obsolete in the next era. In addition to expanding choices, it means TSL remains possible, both of which are more fun (the actual point of a game).

Will it be possible to play TSL (True Starting Locations) in Civ 7?

How wouldn't it still be a problem? 1) The people who play TSL maps expect to have the map filled with more than antiquity era civilizations. That doesn't happen if you split the overall campaign into three rounds and have era specific civilizations 2) "well they'll expand into other...

forums.civfanatics.com

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

this is the worst way to handle civ diversity

just make every civ into a bundle of traits that can be swapped in and out

 

[ShadowWarrior]

I am okay with the civ change feature if there is a gradual evolution from one culture to another. If we start as Greek, and change in one era to Rome, morph in the next era to Great Britain, and end the game as United States of America or Australia, that's awesome. Alternatively, lets say we start as Rome. In the middle of the game, Confucianism became the main religion of the Roman empire. We are offered the option in the next era of transforming our civ into China, Korea, or Japan. This is also fine with me. What I don't want to see is a swift and jarring discontinuous transformation from ancient Egypt to modern United States, without any evolution in between.

 

[GeneralZIft]

What I was happy with is the old system.
Not that the new system is necessarily bad but I mean, it loses its soul by changing this aspect of the game.

I feel like it moves from 'Civilisation' to another generic 4X strategy game.

The reason I say this is because I feel like all the stupid things in the game are like the trademark of the series.

Things like the GDR, Gandhi, having Romans in the Modern Era, builders/workers working forever, the Barbarians, the United Nations.

The more it resembles reality the less attached I become to the actual fun, and the more it feels like they're aiming to take some of that audience from games like Europa and Hearts of Iron instead of sticking to their guns about what worked.

In other words, it's like if Street Fighter decided to remove projectiles and take mechanics from Tekken to be realistic and loses what makes it SF in order to grab Tekken fans.

 

[Luke1195]

What I was happy with is the old system.
Not that the new system is necessarily bad but I mean, it loses its soul by changing this aspect of the game.

I feel like it moves from 'Civilisation' to another generic 4X strategy game.

The reason I say this is because I feel like all the stupid things in the game are like the trademark of the series.

Things like the GDR, Gandhi, having Romans in the Modern Era, builders/workers working forever, the Barbarians, the United Nations.

The more it resembles reality the less attached I become to the actual fun, and the more it feels like they're aiming to take some of that audience from games like Europa and Hearts of Iron instead of sticking to their guns about what worked.

In other words, it's like if Street Fighter decided to remove projectiles and take mechanics from Tekken to be realistic and loses what makes it SF in order to grab Tekken fans.

If you can’t have the Romans building a spaceship because they are forced to become Italy, you are saying it’s not even a Civilization game anymore.

I see your point, and I suppose it means we need to specify what “civ-switching being optional” means.

If the game implements clear paths, "optional civ-switching" could mean "optional civ-path switching", e.g. you can switch from the Romans in one era to the Songhai in the next instead of who they nornally switch to (which seems to be the Normans).

Or, if the game did what you desire, "optional civ-switching" would be truly optional, i.e. you could stay as the Romans the entire game, like all previous Civ games before.

I think you're right they aren't doing that and will force some type of switch. If they didn't, they'd potentially have to allow the Exploration and Modern Era civs to start in the Ancient Era as well.

Not that that would be difficult to do. Who knows? And even if they don't do that, maybe it will be easy to mod the game so that is possible.

Also, what is GDR? (Edit: Giant Death Robot, something in Civ6. I only have Civs 3-5)

 

[Mustakrakish]

I've seen a notion that if they (or modders) would make the switching optional, it would mean they'd need to allow modern civs to start earlier s well. I disagree with that notion. Why? For fairness sake? Are modern civs in the game gonna feel offended? People playing the game would actually care about that "unfarness"? I like the idea of distincting older civs from modern ones, and absolutely don't mnd giving them more "screentime", and why not give ancient civs the option to survive the test of time and make them more special in that sense?

Maybe I want to play as USA, so I start as whoever, then England, then USA. All is well and having fun along the way. Or maybe I want to play as Carthage and survive all the way to modern age. That is cool too! You could forego new shiny units and abilities for a more boring slightly worse passive buff or something (to make the "test of time" challenging). Or maybe I want to play as someone from act 2, so again I start as whoever and switch in act 2 to the civ I wanted, then continue as such in act 3, or not. All of those options sound cool to me. What doesn't sound cool, is NOT having an option.

We'll wait and see how it all plays, of course. Maybe I'll be like "Ok, now I totally get it". But I don't know, this seems like a very simple thing to implement, not requiring additional art or drastic changes (just give a passive buff). The art (architecture, units) is already there, whatever the closest next civ your ancient civ is supposed to morph into, is probably the right art asset set. For that reason I'm about 50% sure they'll have a toggle in advanced settings to allow that, it just won't be the default setting. If not, then with the next big patch. If not that, then eventually via expansion. Of that I'm 95% sure. But even before that, for sure via mod. I'll mod it myself if I have to