Civilization VII - Civilization and leader overview

Status
Not open for further replies.
One of the early screenshots show an infantry unit wearing mahiole hats. This style of headgear seems to be endemic exclusively to Hawaii.

Furthermore, now that we know about the general balancing of regional unit designs and civ-specific costuming, and the sheer unlikelihood of a second exploration Polynesian civ at launch, that those very likely are, in fact, Hawaiian and not some other Polynesian civ because the mahiole hats are so specific to those islands.
 
A thought I've been having is that if one of the unique Modern Age systems is similar to Ideology from V, we might see some unit skins corresponding to that. For instance, certain units for Civs following the "Autocracy" equivalent might have appearances based on early 20th century Germany. Very large stretch, but it's the first reason for visually distinct Panzers but no Germany I could think of.

That would be nice! I can see how the artists had fun coming up with what a native-American knight could have looked like, but I struggle to imagine how anyone might decide what distinctly Bugandan tank should look like.
 
Furthermore, now that we know about the general balancing of regional unit designs and civ-specific costuming, and the sheer unlikelihood of a second exploration Polynesian civ at launch, that those very likely are, in fact, Hawaiian and not some other Polynesian civ because the mahiole hats are so specific to those islands.
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where it's not possibly Khmer>Hawaii>America, for the base game, and I can't.

On the flipside, Trung Trac can become leader of America that way, and it would give the Vietnam War a whole new meaning. :lol:
 
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where it's not possibly Khmer>Hawaii>America, for the base game, and I can't.

Silla/Yamati -> Hawaii -> America!

Or even better, circle the globe: Aksum -> Hawaii -> Britain!
 
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where it's not possibly Khmer>Hawaii>America, for the base game, and I can't.
It's incredibly bad, but par for the course for base game civ connections.
 
I'm most hopeful for the modern era to be unstable and pretty violent, honestly.
Only if I can be Switzerland.

Eiffel Tower? Statue of Liberty? Golden Gate Bridge?
Meh, meh, and meh. Bunch of steel monstrosities. :p TBH having an entire third of the game devoted to modernity is already challenging my interest, saved only by the fact that it seems to include the 18th century (also know as the last interesting period in human history before it all sucks* :p ).
*Aesthetically I do really love the first two decades of the 20th century in the visual arts. It did have a few literary merits as well--Edith Wharton, Mark Twain, Edna St. Vincent Millay...WW1 killed all the pretty things. WW2 killed anything beautiful that survived WW1.

Sydney Opera House
This one's pretty. It was also rescued from a trash bin. I do love Art Nouveau, though.
 
It's incredibly bad, but par for the course for base game civ connections.
I'd rather they just wait and save them for a Polynesian DLC pack, then put one in the base game.
 
I guess in reality it probably looks like a T55 or a T90 or any of the other (mostly Russian-built) tanks employed by the Ugandan People’s Defence Force!
Yeah, that's pretty much my point. Which is why I think @TheGhostEnthusiast 's idea above was so good. For units that are just machinery in the modern era, replace a geography-based localisation of art assets with an ideology-based one.
 
I'd rather they just wait and save them for a Polynesian DLC pack, then put one in the base game.
I imagine Tonga will be in one of the early DLCs coming after launch. That should shore up the Antiquity side of things. Hawaii>America will still be there and bothersome to anyone who knows about the Bayonet Constitution.
 
I imagine Tonga will be in one of the early DLCs coming after launch. That should shore up the Antiquity side of things. Hawaii>America will still be there and bothersome to anyone who knows about the Bayonet Constitution.

Yeah, in general I am not unhappy about civ-switching as a concept, but if we lack a non-colonial modern civ for the Americas and Oceania it’s not going to feel great.
 
I'd rather they just wait and save them for a Polynesian DLC pack, then put one in the base game.
I absolutely agree on this point, but may be disregarded if we are getting a disparate assembly of "as many diverse things as we could put into base game."
 
Yeah, in general I am not unhappy about civ-switching as a concept, but if we lack a non-colonial modern civ for the Americas and Oceania it’s not going to feel great.
There are a lot of routes they can take for modern indigenous civs in both regions so let’s hope that’s not the case for long (though I certainly expect it to be in the base game).
 
Hawaii would work just as well for the Modern Era. It's definitely the best option for this era in Oceania. I know there are Maori, but Hawaii works best for Modern, while Maori for Exploration. I'm inclined to think that we may not even see Maori someday, perhaps Australia will be the transition from Hawaii in the future.
 
Hawaii would work just as well for the Modern Era. It's definitely the best option for this era in Oceania. I know there are Maori, but Hawaii works best for Modern, while Maori for Exploration. I'm inclined to think that we may not even see Maori someday, perhaps Australia will be the transition from Hawaii in the future.
I think it's possible we could see the Maori in DLC. They are still an extant culture, even today, and could be Modern. They might also be a secondary Exploration Polynesian civ someday.

As for Modern Age Polynesians, Tahiti also looks promising.
 
Hawaii would work just as well for the Modern Era. It's definitely the best option for this era in Oceania. I know there are Maori, but Hawaii works best for Modern, while Maori for Exploration. I'm inclined to think that we may not even see Maori someday, perhaps Australia will be the transition from Hawaii in the future.

I can see the logic of (in a complete version of Polynesia, whenever we get it), Hawaii being exploration and Maori being modern.

1. They reflect the order of Polynesian expansion, suggesting that narrative as connecting the Polynesian heritage.

2. Hawaii really struggles for wonders generally that aren't colonial in nature. If we wanted a native Hawaiian wonder, exploration offers some better heiau options. Conversely, Maori don't have many exploration structures of note but are phenomenal modern architects (seriously look up Maori architecture, it's mind-blowingly beautiful).

3. I can see why the devs would want to create a "wall" that Maori cannot cross to progress into Australia, by making both civs modern era. Whereas I can see a bit more flexibility in allowing an exploration Hawaii or Rapa Nui civ to progress to America or South America, respectively. So prospectively they may be maintaining that design space for those paths.
 
I can see why the devs would want to create a "wall" that Maori cannot cross to progress into Australia
In an ideal world, we just don't get Australia. :mischief:
 
In an ideal world, we just don't get Australia. :mischief:

In an ideal world, we get "Macro-Pama-Nyungan" as represented by three civs, where only the modern civ is nominally Australia but really just a collection of independent powers. Led by Pokare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom