The Damas river is probably the one in Eritrea and is associated with Aksum as the one in Chile is too far south to have been in the area ruled over by the Inca Empire. Willka Mayu on the other hand fits perfectly with the Inca Empire.
Civilization VII - Civilization and leader overview
- Thread starter Vahnstad
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, true it looks more the Ed-Deir than the Al-Khazneh (unless it's a stylized ceiling free version or it... Nah, who I'm kiding)
These ones I actually missed out, thanks... Since Dur-Sharrukin is confirmed that make me wonder if really we can't see Babylon and Assyria happening together on vanilla, I'll put Assyria and Nabatea as likely now for sake of consistency
Updating that spreadsheet again and editing that post in a few moments
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,928
No, Shonron and Retenu are different cities.
We've been told independent people can have more than one city, though.
RedCourtJester
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,068
I am really doubting Teotihuacan is happening.
I mostly agree with these predictions. However, I expect:
*Teotihuacan (PyroSun is likely the Aztec Wonder)
*Yamato (Confucius isn't from any of the three eras represented)
*Switzerland (that's not a Swiss flag)
*Nabataea (we already have Egypt, maybe an expansion teaser)
*Babylon (more likely than Nabataea, but if choosing between the two, Assyria is more likely based off a more specifically included wonder)
*Hawaii (betting this is saved for an expansion; plus for many reasons the Maori make more sense in the core game)
* Mississippians -> Antiquity (lack of options in America, and we do know they were doing something prior to 800 BCE)
* Hausa/Akan -> Antiquity (similar reason for both Mississippians and Yamato; we do know Hausa Kingdoms existed as early as the 800s, so similar to Mississippians)
* Khmer -> Antiquity (unfortunate but likely given the above two)
* Silla -> Exploration (rides the line, and we do need *something* to bridge to Meiji Japan--yes, I know this contradicts Khmer, not to mention the Maya)
* Guarani: I can hope, but I am dubious this will happen in core game unless they are the antiquity civ (I just struggle to see the devs giving South America more than 3 civs at launch given how they are likely treating other regions). Would be amazing if so, though.
Things we still want, for pathways to make more sense at launch:
Probably necessary
* Antiquity South American civ for Inca/Guarani to branch from, if the Guarani are not antiquity. Maybe Muisca?
* Exploration East African civ to split into Buganda and Zulu and connect back to Aksum. Swahili/Kilwa seems one of the most likely includes.
* Modern Middle Eastern civ for Abassids and friends to progress toward. The Ottomans are an obvious catch-all.
Likely necessary
* Modern West African civ for Songhai to move toward. I'm betting the return of Morocco as a catch-all for Spain and Songhai. Which would be a tad disappointing but whatever.
* Byzantium, to make Russia a little more integrated into pathways and also to just get that out of the way. Probably acts as a decent fill-in for the Teutons/HRE for now, too.
* Antiquity steppe civ. Scythia or the Huns really should return.
* Ethiopia? Possibly?
Modestly necessary
* Ideally exploration Timurids to connect India to the Middle East, although I guess in a pinch the Abassids are...fine?
* Ideally the Maori or somewhere other than...Japan...for Tonga to progress. Maori would provide better infrastructure to build out expansions.
* Portugal? I mean Brazil works fine enough without it for now if we only progress from Inca and/or Guarani.
* If not the Shawnee to bridge the Mississippians and modern American options, what would be in the base game? Iunno.
Based on the fact that I think some of these needs are more important to gameplay structure, I would bet that Hausa and Guarani are not happening yet, and the leaders are just teasers. I do think there is a greater need for an antiquity South American civ and the Ottomans.
Thus, my prediction is:
Antiquity - Aksum, Egypt, Greece, Han, Maurya, Maya, Rome, Achaemenid, Assyria/Babylon, Goth, Mississippians, Khmer, [Muisca/???], Huns/Scythia - 14 (if 15, Hausa)
Exploration - Abassid, Chola, Inca, Mongolia, Normandy, Songhai, Spain, Aztec, Majapahit, Ming, Tonga, Byzantium, Swahili/Kilwa, Silla - 14 (+ Shawnee) (if 15, Timurids, Guarani, or Portugal)
Modern - America, Britain, Buganda, France, Meiji, Mughal, Brazil, Germany/Prussia, Mexico, Siam, Qing, Russia, Ottomans, Morocco - 14 (if 15, Maori, maybe Ethiopia)
I mostly agree with these predictions. However, I expect:
*
*
*
*
*
*
* Mississippians -> Antiquity (lack of options in America, and we do know they were doing something prior to 800 BCE)
* Hausa/Akan -> Antiquity (similar reason for both Mississippians and Yamato; we do know Hausa Kingdoms existed as early as the 800s, so similar to Mississippians)
* Khmer -> Antiquity (unfortunate but likely given the above two)
* Silla -> Exploration (rides the line, and we do need *something* to bridge to Meiji Japan--yes, I know this contradicts Khmer, not to mention the Maya)
* Guarani: I can hope, but I am dubious this will happen in core game unless they are the antiquity civ (I just struggle to see the devs giving South America more than 3 civs at launch given how they are likely treating other regions). Would be amazing if so, though.
Things we still want, for pathways to make more sense at launch:
Probably necessary
* Antiquity South American civ for Inca/Guarani to branch from, if the Guarani are not antiquity. Maybe Muisca?
* Exploration East African civ to split into Buganda and Zulu and connect back to Aksum. Swahili/Kilwa seems one of the most likely includes.
* Modern Middle Eastern civ for Abassids and friends to progress toward. The Ottomans are an obvious catch-all.
Likely necessary
* Modern West African civ for Songhai to move toward. I'm betting the return of Morocco as a catch-all for Spain and Songhai. Which would be a tad disappointing but whatever.
* Byzantium, to make Russia a little more integrated into pathways and also to just get that out of the way. Probably acts as a decent fill-in for the Teutons/HRE for now, too.
* Antiquity steppe civ. Scythia or the Huns really should return.
* Ethiopia? Possibly?
Modestly necessary
* Ideally exploration Timurids to connect India to the Middle East, although I guess in a pinch the Abassids are...fine?
* Ideally the Maori or somewhere other than...Japan...for Tonga to progress. Maori would provide better infrastructure to build out expansions.
* Portugal? I mean Brazil works fine enough without it for now if we only progress from Inca and/or Guarani.
* If not the Shawnee to bridge the Mississippians and modern American options, what would be in the base game? Iunno.
Based on the fact that I think some of these needs are more important to gameplay structure, I would bet that Hausa and Guarani are not happening yet, and the leaders are just teasers. I do think there is a greater need for an antiquity South American civ and the Ottomans.
Thus, my prediction is:
Antiquity - Aksum, Egypt, Greece, Han, Maurya, Maya, Rome, Achaemenid, Assyria/Babylon, Goth, Mississippians, Khmer, [Muisca/???], Huns/Scythia - 14 (if 15, Hausa)
Exploration - Abassid, Chola, Inca, Mongolia, Normandy, Songhai, Spain, Aztec, Majapahit, Ming, Tonga, Byzantium, Swahili/Kilwa, Silla - 14 (+ Shawnee) (if 15, Timurids, Guarani, or Portugal)
Modern - America, Britain, Buganda, France, Meiji, Mughal, Brazil, Germany/Prussia, Mexico, Siam, Qing, Russia, Ottomans, Morocco - 14 (if 15, Maori, maybe Ethiopia)
Last edited:
The wonder was shown in the Antiquity Tech tree at Mathematics though. So, if it is the Aztecs then they would have to be an Antiquity Age civ, which I feel is unlikely. That would mean that Teotihuacan is in, or it's just an unassociated wonder.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 18,928
1) Pyramid of the Sun in an Antiquity Wonder. It's unlocked at Mathematics. If it's associated with anyone, it's not the Aztecs
2) I don't see what Confucius has to do with the Yamato. I'm somewhat dubious about Japan having 3 eras in the base game, so I have my own misgivings about the Yamato, but tying them to Confucius is odd.
3) It's a Swiss flag. There's no mistake. The real question is why. I don't buy the "reversed Red Cross" theory.
4) Nabataea. Agreed. Petra is a Civ regular, it doesn't implicate an associated civ.
5) Babylon. I agree here as well. The Assyrian wonder does more to implicate Assyria than the Hanging Garden does to implicate Babylon, as the HG is a series regular Wonder.
6a) Hawaii. We have seen a unit wearing Mahiole hats. They are exclusive to Hawaii, as far as I can tell. However, I think Hawaii will be a Modern civ.
6b) Tonga is likely in because the Burden of Maui wonder is too obscure and small not to implicate Tonga. It was seen in a Roman city, so they are Ancient. Something like the Maori will probably come between Tonga and Hawaii.
7) Mississippians. Yes. We've seen an achitectural style that too perfectly matches recreations of Mississippian buildings. However, the thing that most people think is a wonder (Monks Mound or Cahokia) isn't. It's probably a unique building in a district of very distinctive style. Cahokia would have to be a load-bearing city for the Mississippian city list, probably the capital. And the mound in the image is too low and not shaped correctly to be Monks Mound.
8) Hausa. Rather than Antiquity, I think they will be the Modern West Africa civ. They lasted until the beginning of the 1800s.
9) Khmer. Yep, Antiquity.
10) Silla. It would be odd to see their Wonder in a list of wonders that have otherwise proven to be Antiquity if they were not Antiquity as well. And the bell is too obscure a choice not to implicate an Antiquity Korea.
11) We may get an Ancient South American civ, but I wouldn't put it past Firaxis to start out with the Maya preceding both the Aztecs and the Inca. If we do get one, I'd put my money on Nazca rather than Guarani. The quote was on the Iguazu Falls because the Falls are sacred to Guarani people, no other reason.
12) Yes, I could see Swahili or Zanzibar as an Exploration East Africa
13) Yes, all logic leads to the Ottomans for the Modern Age Mideast. They aren't going to do the Saudis and Jordan doesn't seem worthwhile.
14) As stated above, I'd say Hausa is our Modern West African civ. I'm not sure who might be the Antiquity one, or if they will even bother with an Antiquity West Africa in the base game.
15) Byzantines make a lot of sense, but I can't see them throwing both the Byzantines and Ottomans into the base game. One needs to be saved for an expansion. Perhaps Poland is a Slavic Exploration civ that can lead to Modern Russia? Or the Kyivan Rus? Or just Muscovy?
16) I agree that we need an Antiquity steppe civ. Maybe they would do the Xiongnu to better tie them to the Mongols in the next Age?
17) Ethiopia seems likely as a Modern East Africa civ. And Firaxis loves to use them. I'm not sure if Firaxis will fully fill in an East African line in the base game though. Popular civs have to be saved for expansions.
18) I'd lean towards Saffarids as the Exploration civ for the greater Persianized region, but Timurids work too and can have a line to the Mughals.
19) Maori, Exploration, as stated above.
20) Portugal. Not in the base game, probably.
21) Great question! Maybe they will just leave Exploration North America awkwardly open to entice you to snag the Shawnee separately if you don't pre-order.
Good list.
I agree. Also, Babylon works very well as an additional element to boost sales.
If there is an ancient civilization in South America, I would bet on Nazca or Moche, the first one being more popular. If Guarani ever appears in the game, it will be either exploration or modern.
Maybe Hausa? Morocco could have its own historical path in the Maghreb.
If Brazil is in the base game, I believe it will come from the Incas. I don't think Portugal will appear in the game any time soon.
BackseatTyrant
Queer Anarcho-Transhumanist
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2013
- Messages
- 598
Also, imperial era Sweden was contemporary with the Mughals, meaning FXS would most likely consider it a late-game civ either way. Not that I see any chance of it showing up on launch in the first place, seeing how the game series has always prioritized depicting viking era Scandinavia
CrackerJack45
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2024
- Messages
- 42
I have not seen the Mahiole hats so my modern Hawaii dreams were previously thought to be unsubstantiated. SO excited to hear this.
RedCourtJester
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,068
1. Interesting that Pyr'o'Fun is actually unlocked in antiquity. Maybe the Aztecs aren't in base game, though that would be very weird when Mexico begs for a predecessor and it's perhaps one of the cleanest "historical" pathways available to sell the idea. Either way, I can almost guarantee that at some point the Aztecs will appear in the game, and Teotihuacan will not. Most regions of the game seem to be struggling to even get one civ per era at launch, however nonsensical they are. And I doubt the devs have more interest in representing the Aztec or Maya legacies in the same way they do with India and China. I mean, they didn't even bother to make an Olmec civ at launch to make Maya -> Aztec less offensive. Like Confucius/Himiko below, I am choosing to believe that some wonders will be universal and are just representing "different eras" that didn't merit full-blown civs. So hopefully this means the Aztecs will get their own proper wonder and we just haven't seen it yet.
2. Confucius is from the Zhao period, an era of China that does not have a civ in the game, and in all likelihood will not. Much like VI used alternate leaders to represent alternate polities, it seems for "larger" civs in VII we will be experiencing the same thing. Just because Himiko exists in game does not mean the devs will necessarily represent antiquity Japan with Yamato, or at all. Although I do think the odds of this happening down the line compared to the Zhao are better. But I do not believe leaders are a good indication of civs in the base game given Confucius and Amina.
3. I still think the Swiss flag ought to be square and this is likely a hospital. If it does appear, I am pegging it as a modern successor of the Franks/HRE, Teutons, and/or Italy. I know I want to make it the proper Helvetican successor to antiquity Gaul (which also is not confirmed to be in the base game), but Switzerland really feels like a "finished" civ that wouldn't progress anywhere else.
6. I do think Tonga is necessarily implicated by the Burden of Maui. I also have looked up the mahiole hats and I have to concur. I disagree with the choice, given that Hawaii is a "dead-end" civ with little reason to progress *from* anywhere but Tonga, whereas the Maori could more logically reach for pathways from Indonesia and/or any Australian civs that are added. I also think the Maori as a playstyle concept contrast better with Tonga than Hawaii. But if they wanted Hawaii, I guess fine they did Hawaii lol. Either way, I was expecting Hawaii to appear as an expac civ at some point in addition to the Maori.
7. Hausa could be modern as well. I would be happy with Akan antiquity and modern Hausa. Hausa are interesting though, given that they have been around long enough to be pretty flexible for their era.
10. Until we see more wonders from Korea and Japan, I am slotting Silla in exploration. Absent additional civs for Korea and Japan to progress through/from, our best and easiest "historical" path is Han -> Silla -> Meiji. It's ugly, but it's an easier picture to imagine than a second or third Korea and/or Japan civ at launch. Who knows though, maybe we will see an exploration Edo/Ainu surprise that helps bridge antiquity Silla to Meiji. Actually, I would be fine with that.
11. Ugh Maya to Aztec AND Inca? That is so gross, especially for a franchise that packed a whopping four civs into South America last time around. They can definitely do better. I think the Nazca are about as likely to happen as the Olmec, and I don't think they would add much unless exploration Muisca existed to branch to. We shall see, but already South America is going to be difficult for the devs to piece together, and I think if it is only three civs (like apparently with Mesoamerica), the Muisca feel a little more generalized for the entire region than the Nazca.
15. I do actually agree, and having looked at the exploration era civ unlocks page, I think the Byzantines may be left out for the "crossroads of the world" expac. It's highly implied that either the Byzantines or the Aztecs did not make the cut (based on alphabetical deduction), and between the two, even with the whole Teotihuacan nonsense I am still inclined to believe the Aztecs made it in to justify Mexico.
17. Maybe Ethiopia will be saved for expacs, Buganda is close enough for the Swahili and Songhai and Abassids to pivot to, I guess? It's definitely one of those civs riding the fence, and if it makes it in I think it will largely be a consequence of (a) needing modern civs and (b) specifically needing modern African civs).
18. The Safavids/Timurids/Mongols just represent one of those dissatisfying aspects of the 3 era system. They all tie back nicely to some eras/regions, but otherwise just kind of clash with each other in the exploration era. I'd be fine with either, I just have a small jonesing for a Registan wonder.
Also, given the Byzantium/Aztec hypothesis, I am actually inclined to think the Guarani are in fact more likely than Byzantium for the 14th exploration civ slot. Gives Brazil a little more depth to play with, which I guess might be justified since it hasn't really been given "predecessors" like Mexico, just neighbors. South America is going to be uggggly in any form, even if we get all buzzworthy civs: Nazca+Inca, Muisa+Gran Colombia, Tupi+Brazil, and Guarani+Mapuche+Argentina. Even with all that it would still be pretty ahistoric across the eras in every region. So I am predicting it will take a similar approach to VI which is to primarily focus on "filling in" the geographical gaps.
Last edited:
IdiotStyle
Prince
The aztecs will probably be an explo civ. Its the kind of civ that you have to put in the game, like genghis or Gandhi.
I think ottomans, byzantines and probably turks and mecedon might be the 4 in the dlc. I hope fpr ataturk to be in one day
We are apparently getting Han, Ming, and Qing China, with Confucius as the only Chinese leader, so far.
moondog385
Prince
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2024
- Messages
- 357
Your post made me so excited to play this game. So many possibilities — civs that were definite long shots or had no chance at all — have been opened up because of the age system.
RedCourtJester
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,068
That's what I mean by Confucius not belonging to any particular civ. There is no Zhao China civ. He is more of a "universal" Chinese leader, and I think an elegant choice to "represent" the Zhao without needing to make a full civ. That may be the case with Himiko and Yamato.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
All of this Guaraní discourse will have its payoff in a year from now when they're included in the first post-DLC expansion.
:walks around a pentagram mumbling "puduhepa of the hittites, puduhepa of the hittites" :
You misspelled Shutruk-Nahhunte I of Elam.
RedCourtJester
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,068
This does bring up an interesting point.
Technically, now that leaders are modularly separated from civs (Confucius, Himiko, and Amina so far), we probably could stand to have "civs" represented solely by leaders to get more representation in.
So we could see leaders like Puduhepa or Zenobia or Diyha without Hittite or Palmyra or Numidia civs. Which I think is a great way to spend resources for civs that would be reaching a bit for implementation features.
I particularly think short-lived "cults of personality" like Zenobia, Alexander, Simon Bolivar, Attila, and Napoleon are great choices for this kind of leader. Which, I'm a bit put out that modern France is effectively Napoleonic France and not a different era; the modern slot is kind of duplicative and wasted in that sense. I would have preferred modern France be pushed a little earlier to late Kingdom era, even if that might invite criticisms that it should have been exploration. Or otherwise just not included Napoleon and given us Louis/Catherine (or Eleanor!) instead.
Anyway, I hope the devs continue in that direction. I don't need civs to have corresponding leaders anymore, especially after seeing the abomination that is Ben Franklin. Use leaders to pack even more representation in for less feasible civs.
EDIT: I think we are seeing this to some degree with wonders as well. Nalanda represents the Gupta empire without needing a Gupta civ. Pyramid of the Sun represents Teotihuacan without a Teotihuacan civ. The Terracotta Army and Great Wall represent the Qing. Petra and Nabataea, etc. To some extent we saw this in prior civs, like how Civ VI had Tamil and Mughal wonders, but it might be more intentional this time around.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
