Crossroads of the World and Right to Rule DLC - themed predictions based on what we know

The game needs more Euro paths, and lacks a clear Mesopotamian Civ.

So, I'm going to guess Goths, Capetian France and Britain for 3 of the 4 Civs. The fourth Civ will be from Mesopotamia and can be Assyria or Babylon.
 
Am I the only one who can't take this debate seriously because Oxford University is a Modern Era wonder?

It has been founded in 1096, for Christ's sake. It's older than the Incan Empire, an Exploration civ. Why does Firaxis persists and doubles down on putting it in Renaissance/Modern eras? It's quintessentially medieval!

I've been quite absent from the forums for the past few months, so I think this outrage has probably already been shared, but I can't wrap my head around the argument of: "It might be Britain because of Oxford" because it's not a British wonder, it's an English one.

Aren't universities unlocked in the Exploration age btw? Why would the Oxford University be unlocked one age later?

If they put Oxford as the British wonder, I'd be irritated beyond any rational point.

As for the rest, my gut only tells me about Goths, but I couldn't think of any other civ that'd be more probable based on the other wonders (I think it's because each time I try thinking about it I think about the Modern Age medieval university wonder and my brain just shuts down from aghastness).
 
I agree; Oxford should be in the Exploration Age. Maybe it's in Modern because it allows you to build a unique Inklings Great People (I wouldn't even be mad). :mischief:
 
It's probably something like *grants three Explorers and has three Artifact slots*
 
Am I the only one who can't take this debate seriously because Oxford University is a Modern Era wonder?

It has been founded in 1096, for Christ's sake. It's older than the Incan Empire, an Exploration civ. Why does Firaxis persists and doubles down on putting it in Renaissance/Modern eras? It's quintessentially medieval!

I've been quite absent from the forums for the past few months, so I think this outrage has probably already been shared, but I can't wrap my head around the argument of: "It might be Britain because of Oxford" because it's not a British wonder, it's an English one.

Aren't universities unlocked in the Exploration age btw? Why would the Oxford University be unlocked one age later?

If they put Oxford as the British wonder, I'd be irritated beyond any rational point.

As for the rest, my gut only tells me about Goths, but I couldn't think of any other civ that'd be more probable based on the other wonders (I think it's because each time I try thinking about it I think about the Modern Age medieval university wonder and my brain just shuts down from aghastness).
If you want Oxford university as a Science booster, then it is Modern. before that it was religious/cultural (you could study theology or the classics, maybe law)

At least that seems to be a good enough justification.
 
Am I the only one who can't take this debate seriously because Oxford University is a Modern Era wonder?

It has been founded in 1096, for Christ's sake. It's older than the Incan Empire, an Exploration civ. Why does Firaxis persists and doubles down on putting it in Renaissance/Modern eras? It's quintessentially medieval!

I've been quite absent from the forums for the past few months, so I think this outrage has probably already been shared, but I can't wrap my head around the argument of: "It might be Britain because of Oxford" because it's not a British wonder, it's an English one.

Aren't universities unlocked in the Exploration age btw? Why would the Oxford University be unlocked one age later?

If they put Oxford as the British wonder, I'd be irritated beyond any rational point.

As for the rest, my gut only tells me about Goths, but I couldn't think of any other civ that'd be more probable based on the other wonders (I think it's because each time I try thinking about it I think about the Modern Age medieval university wonder and my brain just shuts down from aghastness).
Oxford University is older than the modern era, no doubt. But what civ (at least in VI) included of it both visually and as a bonus and general theme belongs to the 17th century and later. It could quite possibly be that they are going for something similar again, and then it has some sense to it to put it in the modern era instead. It also wouldn't be a great choice for an early university wonder: Paris and Bologna were much, much more important in the earlier days. Oxford is old but a bit of a late starter, so to speak. If not the super international Bologna or Paris, my left field picks would be Padua or Coimbra (the latter would look quite nice in civ, and I always liked the symbol that on top of a hill, you don't have the palace or cathedral, but the university!).

One problem, however is the lack of consistency of FXS part. They show Oxford as a 17th century university and put it there in the tech tree. But then, they include the Mausoleum of Theoderic in Antiquity - but the visual representation is that of the 18th century church that was housed in the building instead of its ancient look. So, it doesn't seem that they think too hard about such things...
 
Goths, Assyria and Burma also make sense thematically as Crossroads of the Worlds both in historical and gameplay terms. I‘m not sure whether Silla, Teotihuacan or Tonga would be the best to complete the pack.

I'd say Goths are the most probable, because their wonder is not something usually included in civ and their appearance as civilization is the most logical explanation.
The Mausoleum of Theodoric is at least not so obscure—I’m sure many here have heard of it. Haʻamonga ʻa Maui, on the other hand, is much more obscure, and I’m fairly convinced that almost no one here had heard of it before it appeared in Civ7, not to mention that it’s also not the type of wonder they usually add. There’s no other reason for them to include something so obscure in the base game unless they intended to add its civ quite early on.
 
The Mausoleum of Theodoric is at least not so obscure—I’m sure many here have heard of it. Haʻamonga ʻa Maui, on the other hand, is much more obscure, and I’m fairly convinced that almost no one here had heard of it before it appeared in Civ7, not to mention that it’s also not the type of wonder they usually add. There’s no other reason for them to include something so obscure in the base game unless they intended to add its civ quite early on.
I thought the same about Ha'amonga 'a Maui initially. But then I also thought: what if they just wanted a Polynesian wonder for Antiquity or at least as close as they could get?

I think that Dur-Sharrukin, the Mausoleum of Theodoric, and Ha'amonga 'a Maui are all surprising choices for a period that surely doesn't lack wonders globally. As I said, I can imagine more wonderful buildings from Ravenna or somewhat similar and more famous Mausoleums (Galerius, Hadrian) over Theodoric's. Hence, I believe the connection to the Goths is important. Ishtar Gate, the Walls of Uruk or several Ziggurats (Ur, Babylon) would have been more famous than Dur-Sharrukin (which I consider a fantastic choice nonetheless) for a Mesopotamian wonder, so I believe the connection to the Assyrians is important. For Ancient Polynesia, I don't really know alternatives, because I'm not familiar with the region's history. Is it the same? Or could it be that the desire to spread out the unassociated wonders led to the Burden of Maui?

Emille Bell is a bit different imho. It's a more unique choice to me, and as it relates to a civ VI leader, I can imagine that it's not there because of Silla.
 
Perhaps not the most famous, but in terms of architectural splendor I think Dur-Sharrukin is a splendid choice--though it's a shame we can't see the gorgeous reliefs at Civ's scale. (It's also interesting because it was not the primary residence of most Assyrian kings...except for the paranoid Esarhaddon. :mischief: )
 
For Oxford I believe they're using it to represent its reforms and shift to sciences in the Modern age. Besides, it's possible it wouldn't be the furthest wonder from it's origin, since Serpent Mound could have been made in 800 BC to 100 AD which keeps it right in Antiquity, even though it's built in Exploration
 
Perhaps not the most famous, but in terms of architectural splendor I think Dur-Sharrukin is a splendid choice--though it's a shame we can't see the gorgeous reliefs at Civ's scale. (It's also interesting because it was not the primary residence of most Assyrian kings...except for the paranoid Esarhaddon. :mischief: )
It's a great choice. I didn't want to downplay the palace - I still remember how I amazed I was by the things I saw at the Louvre. What I meant is that if the task was foremost to include a Mesopotamian wonder to represent the region (and that would look good on a tile in civ 7), I think some other choices would have been more obvious than this Assyrian palace. But if the task was to include a wonder for Assyria, it suddenly becomes more likely. And I'm really hopping for Assyria to be included fast - and hopefully with a nod to old Assyria and a unique merchant than can create a Karum improvement in a foreign city.
 
I thought the same about Ha'amonga 'a Maui initially. But then I also thought: what if they just wanted a Polynesian wonder for Antiquity or at least as close as they could get?

I think that Dur-Sharrukin, the Mausoleum of Theodoric, and Ha'amonga 'a Maui are all surprising choices for a period that surely doesn't lack wonders globally. As I said, I can imagine more wonderful buildings from Ravenna or somewhat similar and more famous Mausoleums (Galerius, Hadrian) over Theodoric's. Hence, I believe the connection to the Goths is important. Ishtar Gate, the Walls of Uruk or several Ziggurats (Ur, Babylon) would have been more famous than Dur-Sharrukin (which I consider a fantastic choice nonetheless) for a Mesopotamian wonder, so I believe the connection to the Assyrians is important. For Ancient Polynesia, I don't really know alternatives, because I'm not familiar with the region's history. Is it the same? Or could it be that the desire to spread out the unassociated wonders led to the Burden of Maui?

Emille Bell is a bit different imho. It's a more unique choice to me, and as it relates to a civ VI leader, I can imagine that it's not there because of Silla.
I think you are on the right track.

Beyond that, It can be observed that the associated wonders' bonuses typically synchronize with the civ they are associated with. The Collosseum boosts happiness in the city it's built in, which meshes with Rome's Few cities-more towns design. The Gate of All Nations helps warmongering, which Persia is designed for. And Monk's Mound adds resource slots, which syncs with the Mississippians' other pro-resource bonuses.

So, what would the unassociated wonders say about the civ they would hypothetically be attached to?

Dur-Shirrukin boosts science and fortifications. That syncs pretty well with what Firaxis has done with Assyrians in the past.

Ha'amonga 'a Maui boosts culture and fishing boats, which sounds a lot like a proto-Hawai'i, and so would probably fit with a hypothetical Tonga.

Hanging Gardens boosts Food and Growth. Okay, that supports what we might expect from Babylon (as being a Science/Specialist civ). But it's less definitive.

Mausoleum of Theodoric supports pillaging and therefore warmongering. That works for what we might expect from the Goths.

But the Emile Bell is rather odd in that set. It grants the builder a whole new powerful Diplomatic Endeavor that generates Food. Maybe that works with a proto-Korea, or at least Firaxis' typical notion of Korea? It seems like that would be very powerful to have an advantage towards building. We know of no other wonder with a similar bonus. It tends to make me think it won't be associated with Silla.

Additionally, only a few wonders grant an attribute point (that we know of). None of them are associated with a civ. Emile Bell is one of them. Interestingly, so is Ha-amonga 'a Maui. Maybe Firaxis would rather not have a civ with an advantage towards nabbing an extra attribute point?

So, from this analysis, Emile Bell has a good chance of not being associated with Silla and Ha'amonga 'a Maui has a reduced chance of being associated with Tonga. Goths and Assyria still look pretty good though.
 
Dur-Shirrukin boosts science and fortifications. That syncs pretty well with what Firaxis has done with Assyrians in the past.
cries in cultural builder Assyria
 
Well, I'm torn - I want 5 civs* (Tonga, Goths, Burma, Assyria and Britain, in this order), but there are only 4 spots. If I had to guess, the most probable setup in my opinion is 3-0-1, without Burma or 3-1-0, with Britain in RtR. I'm not sure though, one of these civs could very well be Francia or French Kingdom instead of Burma, but I expect RtR to have 2 exploration civs based on the name, and the three DLC batches to place us at 13 civs per age.

*I'd also love the Nabateans, but I find them extremely unlikely for now and so they are out of this equation.
Well, you could still get you wish if Britain is in Right to Rule instead. In my opinion I think it could go in either pack.
Am I the only one who can't take this debate seriously because Oxford University is a Modern Era wonder?

It has been founded in 1096, for Christ's sake. It's older than the Incan Empire, an Exploration civ. Why does Firaxis persists and doubles down on putting it in Renaissance/Modern eras? It's quintessentially medieval!

I've been quite absent from the forums for the past few months, so I think this outrage has probably already been shared, but I can't wrap my head around the argument of: "It might be Britain because of Oxford" because it's not a British wonder, it's an English one.

Aren't universities unlocked in the Exploration age btw? Why would the Oxford University be unlocked one age later?

If they put Oxford as the British wonder, I'd be irritated beyond any rational point.

As for the rest, my gut only tells me about Goths, but I couldn't think of any other civ that'd be more probable based on the other wonders (I think it's because each time I try thinking about it I think about the Modern Age medieval university wonder and my brain just shuts down from aghastness).
It was an Industrial Era wonder in Civ 6, so it's not exactly like they are doing something new.
That being said I agree that it would be weird if they would make it Modern Britain's associated wonder. I'd much rather Big Ben. But if Oxfords ability is to grant explorer units and artifacts slots, I could see why they would make it the British one.
 
But if Oxfords ability is to grant explorer units and artifacts slots, I could see why they would make it the British one.
If this is the ability, there is a better choice for a British wonder than Oxford imho. Two actually: British Museum & Royal Society (the latter could as well be an ability, as the building isn't that special).
 
But the Emile Bell is rather odd in that set. It grants the builder a whole new powerful Diplomatic Endeavor that generates Food. Maybe that works with a proto-Korea, or at least Firaxis' typical notion of Korea? It seems like that would be very powerful to have an advantage towards building. We know of no other wonder with a similar bonus. It tends to make me think it won't be associated with Silla.
Curiously, I find the choice of Emile Bell quite unique, but I'd prefer to have Hwangnyongsa as Silla's wonder. To me, it is far more impressive. I hope they consider Hwangnyongsa when thinking about including Silla.
 
If this is the ability, there is a better choice for a British wonder than Oxford imho. Two actually: British Museum & Royal Society (the latter could as well be an ability, as the building isn't that special).
Big Ben was so fun to build in VI and will look so good on the VII map. I want Big Ben for aesthetic purposes only.
 
Curiously, I find the choice of Emile Bell quite unique, but I'd prefer to have Hwangnyongsa as Silla's wonder. To me, it is far more impressive. I hope they consider Hwangnyongsa when thinking about including Silla.
Absolutely. I don't feel as strongly about Hwangnyongsa as I do about Hanging Gardens not being Babylon's wonder, but Hwangnyongsa would be an inspired choice for Silla.
 
But the Emile Bell is rather odd in that set. It grants the builder a whole new powerful Diplomatic Endeavor that generates Food. Maybe that works with a proto-Korea, or at least Firaxis' typical notion of Korea? It seems like that would be very powerful to have an advantage towards building. We know of no other wonder with a similar bonus. It tends to make me think it won't be associated with Silla.

That's why I relocated the ability toward the Goryeo wonder Manwoldae in my Civ design idea. The flavor and historical inspiration of the Emile Bell in the base game seems come from mainly Goryeo.

I don't think this is the evidence of the Antiquity Goryeo, because FXS already showed their judgment about Korean history with IPs: the Three Kingdoms of Korea in the Antiquity Age, and Goryeo dynasty in the Exploration Age. I rather consider that it means we may get those Korean Civ(s) much later than the expectation around the CotW collection. If they planned to release Silla so soon with the associated wonder Emile Bell, they would design the wonder match well with Silla more than now. It now looks like a general representation of entire Korean history.
 
Big Ben was so fun to build in VI and will look so good on the VII map. I want Big Ben for aesthetic purposes only.
It could be the whole Palace of Westminster this time though, not just the clock tower with a bit of an appendix.
But I think it depends a bit in which direction the British civ will go: economic, cultural or industrial powerhouse.
The Palace of Westminster or Big Ben are excellent choices for economic.
The British Museum is an excellent choice for culture.
Battersea Power Station or St. Pancras are a good choices for industrial.
For scientific, I'm thinking less of a wonders, but unique buildings or a quarter (e.g., Red Brick University).
 
Back
Top Bottom