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

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

Dai Viet could have one of the Imperial Citadels (Thang Long or Hue)

As someone of Viet descent, I can think of 3, each with own downside:
- Thang Long citadel
Pro: Very appropriate
Cons: We have no idea what it looked like, since it was largely destroyed, both by the Nguyen dynasty, the French and the war.
- Phu Xuan citadel / Meridian Gate of Hue
Pro: We know exactly what it looks like
Cons: Anachronistic, considering the civ is called Dai Viet, and it may look too similar to the Forbidden City (of course this can be circumvented), since it was built based on/influenced by the Forbidden City.
- My favorite: One Pillar Pagoda
Pro: I like it, unique architecture. Probably will look distinct on the map, and thanks to the reconstructed version currently still existing, we know what it looks like.
Cons: Some non-Viet may consider (and have pointed out earlier) it to be a cliche, since it is quite well known.

 

[Xandinho]

Cons: Some non-Viet may consider (and have pointed out earlier) it to be a cliche, since it is quite well known.

Most of the associated wonders are quite cliché, anyway.

 

[theadder]

What would Phoenicia get as uniques if the Cothon is taken?

The purple.

 

[RedCourtJester]

As someone of Viet descent, I can think of 3, each with own downside:
- Thang Long citadel
Pro: Very appropriate
Cons: We have no idea what it looked like, since it was largely destroyed, both by the Nguyen dynasty, the French and the war.
- Phu Xuan citadel / Meridian Gate of Hue
Pro: We know exactly what it looks like
Cons: Anachronistic, considering the civ is called Dai Viet, and it may look too similar to the Forbidden City (of course this can be circumvented), since it was built based on/influenced by the Forbidden City.
- My favorite: One Pillar Pagoda
Pro: I like it, unique architecture. Probably will look distinct on the map, and thanks to the reconstructed version currently still existing, we know what it looks like.
Cons: Some non-Viet may consider (and have pointed out earlier) it to be a cliche, since it is quite well known.

I'm predicting Tran Quoc pagoda, although I don't have any basis for that prediction other than it's pretty.

 

[Leucarum]

So we get a second Indian leader in the game before some regions or Civs have any representatives! I guess it's too expensive to record Maya or Nahuatl dialogue, etc?

While I really want to see indigenous americas fleshed out ASAP, I'll cut firaxis a lot more slack here, since (as they showed with the Shawnee) they really do take working with minority/threatened cultures very seriously. Costs probably go far beyond just language, and I'm grateful to firaxis thay they do so.

 

[ehecatzin]

While I really want to see indigenous americas fleshed out ASAP, I'll cut firaxis a lot more slack here, since (as they showed with the Shawnee) they really do take working with minority/threatened cultures very seriously. Costs probably go far beyond just language, and I'm grateful to firaxis thay they do so.

+1 count me in as well, I know I ***** and moan a lot about mesoamerica. I have hopes it will get really good representation a few dlc's down the line. (Aztecs labeled Mexica already points in the right way)

 

[Leucarum]

+1 count me in as well, I know I ***** and moan a lot about mesoamerica. I have hopes it will get really good representation a few dlc's down the line. (Aztecs labeled Mexica already points in the right way)

I really am hoping for a full chain of non-colonial civs in the americas (I play civ for Alt-History, not reenactment), but appreciating the sensitivities at play, I'm also ok with Firaxis taking their time in this instance...

On the other hand, there's so many non-controversial choices in Africa that I feel they're really looking like the most under-represented continent.

 

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

So has anyone figured out what the Unique Quarter of Britain is? You can see 2 UQs under the Oxford University and the rocket launcher in the teaser.

 

[Cooleatack]

This is Firaxis's reasoning for where each civ goes where (the comment is specifically why Khmer is in Antiquity), and I think Antiquity fits Silla most here.

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1ftrn4p/comment/lpuq5it

Great comment, u/jalapisa! On identifying Ages, we sought to capture and represent general historical trends that were happening roughly around the same time period. One thing we didn't want to do was have the events of the Mediterranean dictate a calendar for the rest of the world. So if we were to summarize some general processes within each Age:

Antiquity is characterized by competition between states and non-state regions around them – the “blank spaces” on the map. It is a time of city-building, of universalism and expansion, where states claim a mantle of absolute authority. This is the time when states claim to represent the heavens, and that their language is the one true one.

Exploration is a time of vernacularization – when these prior empires split into fragments of the former whole, and where local innovations alter what was there before. It is a time when universal religions rise to suture this gap, but where interconnections – especially global interconnections – come to define states.

Modernity is a retrenchment of empire. Here, modern and scientific thought, bureaucracy, has replaced or fused with notions of divine right, and empires are increasingly seeking to understand, catalog, control, and apportion their subjects.

This description of ages seems to follow newer historiographical theories about the ebb and flow or contraction and retraction of centralization and decentralization.

It tells me that if they do add the next contemporary/future age, it will possibly deal with the role of corporate and supranational organizations undermining national authorities. It would show a new step of decentralization that fits the pattern Sarah presents. It then probably also includes the ongoing clash between globalization and nationalism as an answer to the ‘end of history’. It would be a fitting place to have the UN play a logical role for once. The era would probably end with the obvious crises of climate change and mass migration.

A bit off-topic for this dlc thread sorry, but the comment gave me the thought.

 

[Cooleatack]

+1 count me in as well, I know I ***** and moan a lot about mesoamerica. I have hopes it will get really good representation a few dlc's down the line. (Aztecs labeled Mexica already points in the right way)

I hope they add some other mesoamerican civs beyond the Maya and Aztecs/Mexica for once. As cool as they are, they overshadow the others. I remember Civ and AOE2 being what interested me to learn more about them as a kid. By the time school touched on them, they also did not go beyond them besides mentioning Tlaxcala in Aztec and Spanish context. It would be great if this Civ could help teach kids about lesser known, but equally impressive entities like the Purepecha or Zapotecs.

On that note, I hope in the future Firaxis gives us an alternative playstyle in the exploration age, from the perspective of the colonised. Maybe as a crisis rework.

 

[Nikolai II]

This description of ages seems to follow newer historiographical theories about the ebb and flow or contraction and retraction of centralization and decentralization.

It tells me that if they do add the next contemporary/future age, it will possibly deal with the role of corporate and supranational organizations undermining national authorities. It would show a new step of decentralization that fits the pattern Sarah presents. It then probably also includes the ongoing clash between globalization and nationalism as an answer to the ‘end of history’. It would be a fitting place to have the UN play a logical role for once. The era would probably end with the obvious crises of climate change and mass migration.

A bit off-topic for this dlc thread sorry, but the comment gave me the thought.

That is an intriguing theory!

 

[8housesofelixir]

Amina - Zazzau

I am thinking that the entire Hausa people will grouped together into one civ, like how Greek city-states grouped into one Greek.

Historically, Hausa people organized into seven powerful city states located between Niger River and Lake Chad. Zazzau or Zaria is just one of the seven Hausa cities, it is not even the most powerful one - the most important Hausa city-state are Katsina and Kano.

Notably, all the Hausa cities are enclosed by a massive clay- and mudbrick-based wall, called ganuwa, and these walls are usually painted. They would be a fine UI or UB for the Hausas.

 

[Evolena]

On that note, I hope in the future Firaxis gives us an alternative playstyle in the exploration age, from the perspective of the colonised. Maybe as a crisis rework.

They seem to have introduced the monthly "Events" as a way to test new things, including some "other victories/legacy paths" that may end in the game if doing well.

 

[Archanist]

I am thinking that the entire Hausa people will grouped together into one civ, like how Greek city-states grouped into one Greek.

Historically, Hausa people organized into seven powerful city states located between Niger River and Lake Chad. Zazzau or Zaria is just one of the seven Hausa cities, it is not even the most powerful one - the most important Hausa city-state are Katsina and Kano.

Notably, all the Hausa cities are enclosed by a massive clay- and mudbrick-based wall, called ganuwa, and these walls are usually painted. They would be a fine UI or UB for the Hausas.

Yup, I thought of that right after sending (same with adding the other places Charlemagne ruled) but I just wanted to get the broad strokes to see which regions have a leader but no civ

 

[notNamed]

- My favorite: One Pillar Pagoda
Pro: I like it, unique architecture. Probably will look distinct on the map, and thanks to the reconstructed version currently still existing, we know what it looks like.
Cons: Some non-Viet may consider (and have pointed out earlier) it to be a cliche, since it is quite well known.

Kind of? It's an 1850 building that got destroyed during Indochinese Wars and rebuilt based on photos in 1955.
Hence why I call it a bad cliche (along other parts of that design). It is anachronistic (unless you are going for late Nguyen period... then shoot away ) and can easily be misinterpreted in a myriad ways (that it was one of a kind, that this is how this culture built pagodas instead of the thousands of tower pagodas all over, that it represents medieval architecture, etc).
But having said all that, I've already lamented the war on architectural history present in all of Civ7's civs, it's not really getting singled out here.

The historical reconstruction only exists in renders and related research papers, IIRC.

 

[8housesofelixir]

Hence why I call it a bad cliche (along other parts of that design). It is anachronistic (unless you are going for late Nguyen period... then shoot away ) and can easily be misinterpreted in a myriad ways (that it was one of a kind, that this is how this culture built pagodas instead of the thousands of tower pagodas all over, that it represents medieval architecture, etc).

Even if they are going for the late Nguyen period (which I think is unlikely), I feel that the Walled City of Huế (or Kinh thành Huế) would be a good wonder, as the first fully-fledged bastion fort-style fortress town in East Asia.

 

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

Kind of? It's an 1850 building that got destroyed during Indochinese Wars and rebuilt based on photos in 1955.
Hence why I call it a bad cliche (along other parts of that design). It is anachronistic (unless you are going for late Nguyen period... then shoot away ) and can easily be misinterpreted in a myriad ways (that it was one of a kind, that this is how this culture built pagodas instead of the thousands of tower pagodas all over, that it represents medieval architecture, etc).
But having said all that, I've already lamented the war on architectural history present in all of Civ7's civs, it's not really getting singled out here.

The historical reconstruction only exists in renders and related research papers, IIRC.

In case you miss it, the idea that an entire culture can somehow be represented by a few units, infrastructure or wonders is in and of itself a cliche. Certain wonders which are no longer standing have to be approximated and imagined through old documentation. Certain gaps need to be filled based on interpretations at the time. The modern renders and the Nguyen replica are different interpretations but most likely based on the same sources documented by contemporary historians, no one imagined the Nguyen tried to reconstruct it without consulting historical texts. What led you to believe modern renders are somehow more trustworthy or closer to the original than the reconstruction in the 19th century?
If you think because the first reconstruction took place during the Nguyen dynasty that the replica is somehow representative of Nguyen architecture, then I'm not sure what to tell you, besides that you're not as informed as how you believe and keep asserting.

 

[8housesofelixir]

The modern renders and the Nguyen replica are different interpretations but most likely based on the same sources documented by contemporary historians, no one imagined the Nguyen tried to reconstruct it without consulting historical texts. What led you to believe modern renders are somehow more trustworthy or closer to the original than the reconstruction in the 19th century?

Pre-modern reconstruction going wild and making a huge departure away from the original is exactly why modern reconstruction is needed. Being earlier does not necessarily make them more correct; this is very common in architectural history.

To give a very famous example - Most, if not all, of the Medieval reconstructions of the Temple of Jerusalem were wrong. This is because many Medieval and Early Modern architects and artists took the description of Ezekiel's Third Temple as Solomon's Temple.
The layout of El Escorial, Philip II's royal palace, was designed to be based on Solomon's Temple, but it was actually based on a particular interpretation of Ezekiel's Third Temple, as the designers just picked up the usual understanding of the Temple's layout at the time, which was not historically accurate. Even the largest and most fabulous palace complexes in Europe commissioned by the most powerful monarch could get the layout wrong, simply because they were not very careful when reading the original source.

 

[notNamed]

no one imagined the Nguyen tried to reconstruct it without consulting historical texts.

I never said that, though I would also love to read any source detailing any piece of that process.
Because that's interesting, seeing how people back then viewed the past. More so than scoring a society with no concept of study of architecture nor archaeology with the modern times, which, while fun, is ultimately a trip back to kindergarten's "Who would win, armed forces of the United States or Roman legions?"