Civ7 seem to leave space for the 4th age?

[Brutus2]

The more info we have about modern civs, the more probable it looks for one of the future expansions to add 4th era. All modern civs announced so far ceased to exist in 1870-1950 period and names like Qing China or Meiji Japan suppose there is more modern (contemporary?) age for those civs. The choice of Buganda as modern civ also implies Firaxis wanted modern age civs which didn't survive by now.

For not yet announced civs, the harder one to fit into this concept is, probably USA as it went the least changed from its independence period. The rest looks quite clear:
British Empire (modern) -> Great Britain (contemporary)
Prussia (modern) -> Germany (contemporary)
Russian Empire (modern) -> Russian Federation (contemporary)
etc.

It's funny, the first time I heard the devs explain how the eras work, my first thought was there will be a "Future Era" expansion.

 

[sTAPler27]

The more info we have about modern civs, the more probable it looks for one of the future expansions to add 4th era. All modern civs announced so far ceased to exist in 1870-1950 period and names like Qing China or Meiji Japan suppose there is more modern (contemporary?) age for those civs. The choice of Buganda as modern civ also implies Firaxis wanted modern age civs which didn't survive by now.

For not yet announced civs, the harder one to fit into this concept is, probably USA as it went the least changed from its independence period. The rest looks quite clear:
British Empire (modern) -> Great Britain (contemporary)
Prussia (modern) -> Germany (contemporary)
Russian Empire (modern) -> Russian Federation (contemporary)
etc.

If you look at it in Civ 6 terms Antiquity will be like Ancient to Classical maybe Early Medieval, then the exploration will probably go up to early industrial at most, and modern will encapsulate all the eras up until the future era. After all think about how little time those last 5 eras take lasting only about 250 years. That being said I hope they really push for a more fleshed out Future era this game. Maybe they could tack on an extra century to the end game

 

[vorlon_mi]

A thought about "Future Era" civs that we could transition into.... So far, I've been impressed by the representation of Antiquity and Exploration civs that I haven't really heard of before: Aksum, Abbasid, Chola. Yes, I'll confess, I'm not nearly as much of a student of history as many of you are.

But consider the list of interesting polities / entities that exist now, or existed in the last 50 years, that could be represented as Future Era civs? They can be smaller, but still a new layer to add onto "build something you believe in": Republic of South Africa; Begium, Tajikistan, Finland, Peru, Phillippines, Nigeria, Ireland, Jordan. Yes, I can think of another list that might be politically sensitive enough to affect global sales of the game, so they would stay away from them. But given that they're casting a wide net into the past, they could cast a wide net into the present and near future.

 

[Xandinho]

But consider the list of interesting polities / entities that exist now, or existed in the last 50 years, that could be represented as Future Era civs? They can be smaller, but still a new layer to add onto "build something you believe in": Republic of South Africa; Begium, Tajikistan, Finland, Peru, Phillippines, Nigeria, Ireland, Jordan. Yes, I can think of another list that might be politically sensitive enough to affect global sales of the game, so they would stay away from them. But given that they're casting a wide net into the past, they could cast a wide net into the present and near futur

Normally, I’m not opposed to the addition of some modern nations. While I still think that historical empires are more interesting, some modern nations, like the America, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, and Argentina, have been independent for at least 200 years. These countries already existed as independent entities when some historical empires, like the Ottoman Empire or the Qing Empire, were still around and likely maintained relations with them. However, modern nations that gained independence in the 20th century - especially after the mid-20th century - don’t appeal to me at all. Many of them are even quite controversial. I think some of them might become interesting options in a few years, but for now, it’s just not the right time. This is one of the reasons I’m against Age 4 - the civilization options for that era would, for the most part, be rather unexciting.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

But consider the list of interesting polities / entities that exist now, or existed in the last 50 years, that could be represented as Future Era civs? They can be smaller, but still a new layer to add onto "build something you believe in": Republic of South Africa; Begium, Tajikistan, Finland, Peru, Phillippines, Nigeria, Ireland, Jordan.

A majority of them don't necessarily appeal to me, personally, at least not compared to their historical counterparts, except for Finland and the Philippines. As for Ireland, that's better represented by it's Medieval period.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

A majority of them don't necessarily appeal to me, personally, at least not compared to their historical counterparts, except for Finland and the Philippines. As for Ireland, that's better represented by it's Medieval period.

Modern nations probably don't need to appeal to a majority, they only need to appeal to enough casual gamers from that country to support the cost of the DLC. A Canada/Australia/New Zealand DLC might not need any sales outside of those 3 countries, other than to "completionists", and could still likely generate enough sales from them to be financially successful.

In fact, that's likely the most consumer-friendly way to offer these countries. Then people who dislike excessive modern representation can avoid those countries.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

In fact, that's likely the most consumer-friendly way to offer these countries. Then people who dislike excessive modern representation can avoid those countries.

Not sure if there would be anyway to avoid them, especially if they came in a hypothetical 4th age, unless you didn't have to switch for the last era.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Not sure if there would be anyway to avoid them, especially if they came in a hypothetical 4th age, unless you didn't have to switch for the last era.

I meant offer them as a stand-alone civ DLC. so you could buy and add the modern countries if you wanted them, or avoid it if you don't and not miss out on any other content.

 

[OzzyKP]

I don't understand what a 4th age would add to the game that couldn't also be achieved by just... adding things to the Modern age and extending the victory/legacy paths. I don't think things have changed that much since the 1950's, certainly not enough to create a whole new age with enough mechanics and civs to feel like it wasn't just tacked on. The basis of infrastructure & industry, archeology, ideological conflict, and space exploration are all still relevant to this day, and while the methods of how we've done these things has developed, things such as reusable rockets, consumer flight, the internet, satellites, propaganda methods, and alternative energies are all still recognizable enough to be included in the same age.

I've been thinking all along they'll have a 4th age. There is plenty of stuff to add.

Rail stations let you auto transport units 20 tiles away. In the 4th age there will be airports that can transport with no limit.
The 4th age will have environmental stuff. The internet, satellites, more space exploration, tourism, consumerism, and, of course, giant death robots, heh.

I think there is plenty of room for 4th age civs too. With the caveat, as someone mentioned in the live stream thread, that they let 3rd age civs stick around.

Rome -> Normans -> England -> Australia/South Africa/Canada
Goths -> Holy Roman Empire -> Prussia -> Germany
Egypt -> Abbasids -> Ottomans -> Saudi Arabia
Persia -> Mongols -> Mughals -> Pakistan

 

[gdr_willter]

The problem is the Civ list for the 4th Age, especially we already spent some iconic contemporary countries as the 3rd Age Civs.

I posted the thread with my idea about this problem, and the point is: 4th Age Civs will not be completely new Civs, but the result of your playthrough over 3 Ages.

4th Age Civs based on your game playthrough, not IRL history

I posted it at the 20th century leader/civ discussion originally. And now we saw the Modern Age live stream so I think we can really talk about this more effectively. I think the 4th Age expansion DLC will likely be there, but how? We already have America and France for 3rd Age Civs. And some of...

forums.civfanatics.com

 

[HelloIAmW]

I've been thinking all along they'll have a 4th age. There is plenty of stuff to add.

Rail stations let you auto transport units 20 tiles away. In the 4th age there will be airports that can transport with no limit.
The 4th age will have environmental stuff. The internet, satellites, more space exploration, tourism, consumerism, and, of course, giant death robots, heh.

I think there is plenty of room for 4th age civs too. With the caveat, as someone mentioned in the live stream thread, that they let 3rd age civs stick around.

Rome -> Normans -> England -> Australia/South Africa/Canada
Goths -> Holy Roman Empire -> Prussia -> Germany
Egypt -> Abbisads -> Ottomans -> Saudi Arabia

They could do that, but why bother when it would comfortably fit into the 3rd age? I think the more ages would also raise the issue of swapping civs too many times, and if suddenly this last age lets us keep Age 3 civs, well, then why not apply this same rule to every other age at that point to appease the players that want to do so?

 

[chaosprophet]

While, as I said before I was expecting and would enjoy more a 4th age that started from now/near future and went all the way futuristic, with the current confirmation of Modern Age, it made me think how a Information Age can really benefit from having it's own age separated from modern where things like Globalization, easy airplane transport, satellites, WWW, missile and drones focused combat, etc, can have it's own specific gameplay mechanics.

What I'm most divided on it is how they would handle 4th age civilizations. Very recent portrayals of likely current existent nation states are a minefield and can easily end up being too similar to a second version of the Modern civs. Albeit they could have the civ system work different on that age as people suggested in a few places.

 

[Krikkit1]

4th age would apparently be

MAD (Proxy Wars only ones allowed)
Cold War
Decolonization
UN
Green Revolution: Pop boom
Satellites
Internet/Social media
Cyber Warfare/AI
Population aging/decline
Climate change/Environmental concerns

I'd say 1960-2060

 

[chaosprophet]

+ Vtubers

 

[moondog385]

I’m fine with a fourth age if the gameplay is interesting and you keep the civs you had from the third age. I don’t find the idea of playing as current states compelling. What would America transition into, for instance?

Still, a lot of the techs and civics they’re saving for a fourth age are things that come to mind when I think of “Modern Age.” I mean, we’re currently living in the Modern era by most definitions of the word so I expected the third age to at least go up to 2000. The Cold War, the UN, satellites, Internet, tourism, etc. seems…well, modern to me.

 

[chaosprophet]

What would America transition into, for instance?

Consider pairing Arnold Schwarzenegger with Murrica in the Information age! Or, chose a different path all your own-

 

[Evie]

Crazy thougt: international blocs/organizations in the style of NATO, European Union, Commonwealth of Nations, ASEAN and similar as the fourth age civilizations. You could even have multiple civilizations evolve into teh same block and then they can vie with one another to have the greater influence over their blocs.

 

[chaosprophet]

Crazy thougt: international blocs/organizations in the style of NATO, European Union, Commonwealth of Nations, ASEAN and similar as the fourth age civilizations. You could even have multiple civilizations evolve into teh same block and then they can vie with one another to have the greater influence over their blocs.

That is a good point. If not an alternative of CIV, at least it can be the Ideology version of that age. Or maybe things like social economic models, hm.


By the way, kudos to stealth_nsk. I remember them being one of the ones most sure about where the Modern age would end and that there would likely be an eventual 4th in that way, while I strongly argued against, but I was completely wrong here.

 

[Aeon221]

I mean as I said in a post too, it was pretty obvious they were leaving space for a future age. They did after all add the information age stuff to Civ 6 quite late and it wouldn't be a modern Civ title without Giant Death Robots.

 

[Aeon221]

https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...th-speculative-wackiness.692868/post-16703102

Here you go. I also predicted a bunch of zanier ages in the future. For example I wouldn't be shocked if they offered us an "Age of Heroes" as an alternative classical or an "Age of Magic" for an alternative discovery or an "Age of Steam" with a steampunk vibe for an alternative industrial. The age system seems like a perfect opportunity to do cool weird things without impacting the base game.