I don't mind if the civs+leaders end in 1918, as long as the mechanics/tech/civics become modern. The Mughals need to be able to become communist and build ICBMsOn the other hand it would feel very strange if civilization game essentially ended on 1918 with its civilizations and historical leaders, avoiding last one hundred years of history (particularly most of 20th century) entirely
I don't want for the modern era to turn into some fin de siecle ancien regime 19th century colonial empires galore, I wanna see something from the interwar period and yes post ww2 era - Konrad Adenauer and his reborn peaceful German democracy, Dwight Eisenhower, Czechoslovakia, elements of the 20th century Polish history, modern India, anticolonial leaders etc.
Civ VII Weekly Reveal Guessing Thread
- Thread starter RedCourtJester
- Start date
untitledjuan
Warlord
However, even if some in-game "Modern Era" civilizations don't exist in the present as the same specific political entity, I bet they do exist as a pretty much direct political and cultural successor.
Sure, the "French Empire" is no longer a monarchy led by the Napoleonic dynasty, but it pretty much is the same nation and culture as the current French Republic. Of course, with the differences that 200 years of history imply, but still a representation of the "French Nation".
Same with Buganda. It might not be an independent sovereign nation in the present, but lots of people in Uganda still identify with the idea of Buganda and the "Kingdom of Buganda" pretty much exists to the present within Uganda as a "sub-national kingdom".
Presumably Meiji Japan will at least represent Japan through WWII. At least I think we've seen Zero fighters.On the other hand it would feel very strange if civilization game essentially ended on 1918 with its civilizations and historical leaders, avoiding last one hundred years of history (particularly most of 20th century) entirely
I don't want for the modern era to turn into some fin de siecle ancien regime 19th century colonial empires galore, I wanna see something from the interwar period and yes post ww2 era
TheGhostEnthusiast
Prince
I think at the moment it HAS to be Prussia instead of Germany if it’s in the base game, because Germany does not fit in the Hidden box on the Norman select screen.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
Could someone post that screenshot here to refresh our memories a bit?
TheGhostEnthusiast
Prince
I wonder if 39 or any number between 31 and 38 might have been at one point considered as a base game roster, or something close to a rudimentary selection of civs the same way I suspect that Poland was intended to be base game Civ VI at some point, as Jadwiga was on the civet chart, winged hussars were in the release trailer and Polish soundtrack and color jersey made its way to the base game files. Now we may have seen civ selection screen from a build that has placeholders for DLC civs and we may have seen a leader that fits better with a DLC civ than a base game one. If so, the upside is that the devs may have to crunch less upon the incredibly complicated civ designs and art, so I intend not to moan about the DLC monetisation schemes at all. (ironically, this post has also been cut up into two for the purpose of two different threads)
Now if we weren't there before, and because I'm currently very bored, now we're entering crackpot theory territory: I propose that neither of Britain nor Germany may be base game. A piece of evidence I put forward is the Norman civ selection screen, which most likely would have the last European civ on it obscured. To find out which one fits the most, I found the font used on the screenshot (most likely Core Sans AR 45) and recreated every piece of text on it as closely as I could. I assumed that the HIDDEN boxes obscured pretty much exactly as much as they had to, because it matches perfectly with Charlemagne's name. Red is for names that don't fit, green is for names that do:
Spoiler :
America fits perfectly (its perfect down to the last pixel - there are 4 pixels between the end of "Charlemagne" and the end of the HIDDEN box in my measurements, and there are 4 between the beginning of the second HIDDEN box and the start of hypothetical "America"), Britain a little bit is too short, Prussia is close, Russia wouldn't be there anyway and Germany has no chance to fit. Now, I have been wrong more than once about civ selection screens, so take it with an abnormally big grain of salt. To summarise, I don't know if we've learned anything from my experiment. Maybe except that we probably aren't getting another Norman leader.
I fiddled with the kerning in my Photoshop, I think that Germany is maaaaaaybe still possible if the game renders the space before capital "G" and after "y" differently than my software. We can rule out German Empire though (which I think may be a likelier name than just "Germany" looking at France) and we can rule out British Empire (towards which I have the same suspicion). Right now the only European civs I'd bet on is Russia, considering we have probably identified the architectural style of a city hall building. Looking only at this graphic, it's still most likely that the only Norman unlocks are France and America.
Spoiler :
I've got to say though, finding the font and making those graphics has been some of the best fun I've had civvestigating. (The second best is trying to lipsync unused leader heads from Civ VI and failing miserably) I need more material to research!!!
Guandao
Rajah of Minyue and Langkasuka
What do you think the first Modern Civ revealed will be? Qing? Mughals? France? America? Meiji Japan? Buganda?
What leaders will they pair up with Qing and Mughals in the same week? I assume European ones.
What leaders will they pair up with Qing and Mughals in the same week? I assume European ones.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,519
I expect Franklin and America first, just to give us an idea for how Modern civs will be depicted.
Kind of sad that they choose Mexico over Brazil or some other country that hasn't been a trainwreck for its entire modern existence. Granted that there aren't a lot of great choices in the region, but...
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,519
And notably, no leader First Look to coincide with Mexico.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
You don't know that.
Could be an Aztec leader loosely affiliated with Mexico (Monty), if not an outright Mexican leader (Benito Juarez?)
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,519
If there was a First Look, it would say so.
Cuauhtémoc's Rage
Viviendo en la Ciudad de México
I personally think that it's about time that Mexico received the attention it deserves, seeing the new game guide over the horizon. Much of Mexico's failures and shortcomings as a country can be attributed to either poor leadership or the constant imperialism of their neighbor, the United States. Hoping for it to be a culturally and agriculturally focused civ, a design which I don't think we've seen too many of before. And the notion that Mexico is a "sad" choice is based off American rhetoric that Mexico is a lawless land filled with cartels and people living in extreme poverty. For those who still hold to their beliefs that Mexico is the weakest or worst civ choice of the era, more LATAM civs will arrive in due time with how long 2K and Firaxis are looking to support VII.
Nic@Melbourne
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 109
Hopefully Frida Kahlo, arguably the best known Mexican globally. We have had an author and explorer, so an artist for some culture boosts?!
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
Civ Reveals tend to happen on Monday while First Looks tend to happen on Thursday, so that's a moot point. In fact, Pachacuti was revealed about an hour ahead of the Inca, so if we get a leader + civ combo on the same day, I'd expect to get the leader first.
But most likely we're looking at Mexico on Monday, and then the first Modern Civ-associated leader on Thursday (Napoleon, Franklin or a meso-american leader).
We've already had a topic about Kahlo, and I think most of us concluded she would be a fairly bad choice.
That is at this point impossible to say for sure. I have hope for a leader.
Willie5000
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2016
- Messages
- 144
You say this as if Brazil hasn’t also been a train wreck for its entire modern existence.
Hosting the World Cup and the Olympics were an exception, not the rule, for Brazil’s history. And also like the only reason Brazil was in the last two games at all.
