Civ VII Weekly Reveal Guessing Thread

[Krikkit1]

As I understand, the next stream is going to show deeper exploration age gameplay, so potentially we could have some exploration civ reveal now and Persia later. In this case it's probably just Normans.

That’s my guess Normans with Bill.

 

[Siptah]

But... doesn't it feel strange if they reveal 9/10 antiquity civs in alphabetical order (aside from the first batch) and then leave the last one out to continue with exploration civs?

I can see this happening with leaders though, as Ashoka probably has a second persona and they might want to keep his FL until a later time.

 

[Zaarin]

But... doesn't it feel strange if they reveal 9/10 antiquity civs in alphabetical order (aside from the first batch) and then leave the last one out to continue with exploration civs?

I can see this happening with leaders though, as Ashoka probably has a second persona and they might want to keep his FL until a later time.

I agree. They'll finish the Antiquity civs first. We already know about Normans, Abbasids, Songhay, Chola, Ming, and Shawnee in Exploration Age from official sources, which is enough to run a stream on.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

They potentially have up to 2 weeks to reveal exploration civ guides before the Exploration Livestream, and they might drop several at once like they did with Antiquity civs when they opened The Guide.

I think this week is finishing out Antiquity.

 

[guilarroyd]

What I expect:
- First Look on Ashoka will reveal he has 2 personas, one is more focused on peace/religion/happiness and is linked to the Maurya
- The other persona is more focused on war and expansion and is suggested to lead Persia

 

[Lord Lakely]

I agree. They'll finish the Antiquity civs first. We already know about Normans, Abbasids, Songhay, Chola, Ming, and Shawnee in Exploration Age from official sources, which is enough to run a stream on.

and we have enough leaders that would default to those Civilizations (respectively: Augustus, Hatshepsut, Amina, Ashoka, Kong, Tecumseh)

 

[Zaarin]

What I expect:
- First Look on Ashoka will reveal he has 2 personas, one is more focused on peace/religion/happiness and is linked to the Maurya
- The other persona is more focused on war and expansion and is suggested to lead Persia

Ashoka World Renouncer and Ashoka World Destroyer will both be connected primarily to Maurya, whose big, happy cities and terrifying war elephants will be quite well suited to go aggressive or play peacefully. I suspect India's geographical connections will look east to Khmer rather than west to Persia.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Ashoka World Renouncer and Ashoka World Destroyer will both be connected primarily to Maurya, whose big, happy cities and terrifying war elephants will be quite well suited to go aggressive or play peacefully. I suspect India's geographical connections will look east to Khmer rather than west to Persia.

I've just realized what we haven't seen Ashoka reveal yet. So it's totally possible we'll actually see Persia and Ashoka.

 

[Zaarin]

I've just realized what we haven't seen Ashoka reveal yet. So it's totally possible we'll actually see Persia and Ashoka.

I'm hoping they're withholding him to talk about personae because I want a Persian leader.

 

[guilarroyd]

I'm hoping they're withholding him to talk about personae because I want a Persian leader.

I don't think we are seeing more antiquity age related leaders

 

[Zaarin]

I don't think we are seeing more antiquity age related leaders

I will not listen to such words of ill-omened blasphemy! (You may well be right, but I'm clinging to hope until it is ripped betimes from my clutches.)

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I don't think we are seeing more antiquity age related leaders

Traditionally, Civ games have a nice bell curve of chronological distribution, with most leaders hailing from Medieval and Renaissance time periods (categorized as Exploration, here). I expect that to be the case with Civ 7. That being said, there should be at least one more leader from the Classical time period.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Traditionally, Civ games have a nice bell curve of chronological distribution, with most leaders hailing from Medieval and Renaissance time periods (categorized as Exploration, here). I expect that to be the case with Civ 7. That being said, there should be at least one more leader from the Classical time period.

We have expectations of leader to civ ratio around 1:2. That's how DLC are structured and it roughly fits our estimations of leader number based on what FXS said (15-20 leaders without personas). So if Firaxis likes beautiful numbers the same way we do, we'll have 15 leaders on release plus Tecumseh (and personas), 5 leaders per age. That way Ashoka is going to be the last antiquity leader and presenting him together with the last antiquity civ makes total sense.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

We have expectations of leader to civ ratio around 1:2. That's how DLC are structured and it roughly fits our estimations of leader number based on what FXS said (15-20 leaders without personas). So if Firaxis likes beautiful numbers the same way we do, we'll have 15 leaders on release plus Tecumseh (and personas), 5 leaders per age. That way Ashoka is going to be the last antiquity leader and presenting him together with the last antiquity civ makes total sense.

I don't believe that ratio will hold true for the base game. I'm expecting at least 18 leaders, plus Tecumseh, and around 2-4 personas. We currently have 5 Antiquity-associated leaders (and Himiko, who is Classical, but apparently associated with Meiji). So, I think it will be a 6/8/4 split, if 18 leaders.

 

[Zaarin]

If we have 15 leaders, ideally we'd have 10 Antiquity leaders, 5 Exploration leaders, and 0 Modern leaders. More seriously, I do expect an above-average number of Antiquity leaders to start out with because it will be easier for players to see the leader-to-civ connections there.

 

[chaosprophet]

As I understand, the next stream is going to show deeper exploration age gameplay, so potentially we could have some exploration civ reveal now and Persia later. In this case it's probably just Normans.

Could be too, but they may want to just finish all antiquity, then hold on civs game guides for a week or two until they release 5 or so that will be on the exploration stream when we get the stream, probably all already confirmed to exist before.

We have expectations of leader to civ ratio around 1:2. That's how DLC are structured and it roughly fits our estimations of leader number based on what FXS said (15-20 leaders without personas). So if Firaxis likes beautiful numbers the same way we do, we'll have 15 leaders on release plus Tecumseh (and personas), 5 leaders per age. That way Ashoka is going to be the last antiquity leader and presenting him together with the last antiquity civ makes total sense.

I think the better ratio, without counting personas, is to have about 2 leaders per civ line (not counting extra versions), so if we have 10/10/10 civs, so 10 "civs lines", we would have 2 leaders per each, associated with any of the civs on the line.

The reason being because they confirmed the AI, when you let it random, will chose leaders that are related to the civ or the common civ that civ can turn. So like the example they gave of Augustus and Napoleon for Rome->Norman->French Empire. If you have some lines with only one leader, then that leader will end up being picked by the AI quite more often. Likewise lines with 3+ leaders would mean each of those leaders would be picked less often.

That is all assuming there is a preferable line the AI would pick for civ evolution if the player don't "steal" their next civ from them, instead of the AI instead picking randomly between the two or more of their free unlocks.

 

[The Fanatical]

If we have 15 leaders, ideally we'd have 10 Antiquity leaders, 5 Exploration leaders, and 0 Modern leaders. More seriously, I do expect an above-average number of Antiquity leaders to start out with because it will be easier for players to see the leader-to-civ connections there.

Personally, I would prefer more Antiquity leaders than Modern ones in the base game, but that's just me.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I don't believe that ratio will hold true for the base game. I'm expecting at least 18 leaders, plus Tecumseh, and around 2-4 personas. We currently have 5 Antiquity-associated leaders (and Himiko, who is Classical, but apparently associated with Meiji). So, I think it will be a 6/8/4 split, if 18 leaders.

We have 5 personas confirmed (Napoleon, plus 2 for each DLC pack) and could have more, if Ashoka alter ego comes in base game.

Sure, there's no strict connection between leader and age (or between leader and civ) and no need to keep the ratio, so 5 antiquity leaders is something abstract. Actually, with Himiko we have 6 "antiquity" ones already...

If we have 15 leaders, ideally we'd have 10 Antiquity leaders, 5 Exploration leaders, and 0 Modern leaders. More seriously, I do expect an above-average number of Antiquity leaders to start out with because it will be easier for players to see the leader-to-civ connections there.

On the other hand, the concept of unlocking civs with leaders suggests having more leaders associated with later civs.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

We have 5 personas confirmed (Napoleon, plus 2 for each DLC pack) and could have more, if Ashoka alter ego comes in base game.

Sure, there's no strict connection between leader and age (or between leader and civ) and no need to keep the ratio, so 5 antiquity leaders is something abstract. Actually, with Himiko we have 6 "antiquity" ones already...


On the other hand, the concept of unlocking civs with leaders suggests having more leaders associated with later civs.

I don't count free offerings like Tecumseh or Napoleon as part of the base game because they are optional.

 

[SeelingCat]

Shouldn't there be at least 26 leaders - given that that was how many shipped with Civ 4? (Assuming I'm not misremembering that they said 7 would have the greatest number of leaders on release)