• Civ7 is already available! Happy playing :).

Easy solution to calm down some of the Civ Switching Controversy (at least a little bit)?

ColtSeavers

Prince
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
310
Location
Germany
I wonder, whether there could be some sort of an easy adaptable solution, which could fix some of the controversy of this hot topic. As far as I see it, the current solution doesn't satisfy any side, perfectly. Some people like to have more freedom, and get rid of any limitations, when they or the AI select Civs for the new ages. People like me, complain that the Civ Switches are not "historial" enough, for instance when Greece turns into the Normans or Spain turns into Mexico.
Either way, it seems like a lot of people are not very happy with the currenct mechanism. So what about this simple idea: The game allows you to select, whether the AI should follow either a game unlock (using the existing criteria like 3 horses etc.), a random unlock or, the player selects fixed civs for each AI in advance, making sure, the AI selects the Civs, which he thinks are the "most historical". Furthermore, the player gets an option to select each Civ he wants, too. I see no harm, allowing players to set up their game the way they like to play it, using their unique settings. Obviously, I would have preferred to keep my existing Civ the entire game and this is not a perfect soltion, but it is better than nothing. What do you think?
 
The AI by default tries to pick the historical route according to the devs. In my opinion though Civ has always been a historical fantasy game over an alternate history one in the sense that while it portrays a world that functions like our own that things are reshuffled which leads to cultures different than what appeared in our world. Egypt never became a mounted powerhouse in our world but if it was viable and they had the resources for it they likely would've. There's plenty of games for people who more or less want to play with preestablished cultures in a near 1:1 version of history and even those generate replayability by letting you pick ahistorical routes.
 
I heard that dev will provide some option to toggle on/off the AI's historical Civ-switching, but I can't remember the source.
 
I heard that dev will provide some option to toggle on/off the AI's historical Civ-switching, but I can't remember the source.
I did not know that but thats pretty cool. I think civ switching should be focused on what a civ needs to succeed in the next age. If you have an agressive neighbor it might be more benneficial to pick China for their great walls rather than pick a historical option which makes no sense for your circumstances
 
I heard that dev will provide some option to toggle on/off the AI's historical Civ-switching, but I can't remember the source.
Well but the problem is, some of the picks, which Firaxis may consider a historical choice, might not be mine. So I would prefer, if I could setup my self, what kind of Civs the AI picks. That might not matter that much at release (since there not that many options to choose from anyway), but might become more relevant, after the first couple of DLCs are released.
 
Last edited:
Well but the problem is, some of the picks, which Firaxis may consider a historical choice, might not be mine. So I would prefer, if I could setup my self, what kind of Civs the AI pics. That might not matter that much at release (since there not that many options to choose from anyway), but might become more relevant, after the first couple of DLCs are released.
Oh no you're completely right there, like how would the Spanish become Mexico in a world where they never conquer America. The future DLC's are going to need to be very civilization focused to give some civs more paths. Humankind did this well with their region pased packs fleshing out Africa, Oceania and Latin America the only issue is that in doing so they really didn't add any Civ like Mega Expansions that add game changing mechanics like with Gathering Storm. I'm hoping that with the larger studio size they can manage both because the game needs way more civs alongside some mechanics being overhauled.
 
Well but the problem is, some of the picks, which Firaxis may consider a historical choice, might not be mine. So I would prefer, if I could setup my self, what kind of Civs the AI picks. That might not matter that much at release (since there not that many options to choose from anyway), but might become more relevant, after the first couple of DLCs are released.
Anyway I'll bet it will be modable, not only by workshop mods but also by yourself from local files.
 
There are so many problems I have with civ7, that I think Firaxis might do better by just doubling down on their choices. Even if they fixed or completely removed civ switching, I doubt I’d buy the game because of everything else they have revealed so far. They can’t satisfy everyone. I just silently hope it flops - though it most likely won’t.
 
So what about this simple idea: The game allows you to select, whether the AI should follow either a game unlock (using the existing criteria like 3 horses etc.), a random unlock or, the player selects fixed civs for each AI in advance, making sure, the AI selects the Civs, which he thinks are the "most historical". Furthermore, the player gets an option to select each Civ he wants, too.
👍 Yes for me
This should be customizable in the same way as maps.
 
The easy solution is to just suck it up and accept the system because cultures in the real world change, real civilizations collapse and that’s okay.
Doesn't make sense to compare these mechanics to the "real world", because IRL leaders don't live thousands of years and the whole Egyptian people don't turn into Amercians, either.
 
Last edited:
The easy solution is to just suck it up and accept the system because cultures in the real world change, real civilizations collapse and that’s okay.
Except that's not really what has ever happened. Civilizations have never gone through changes so rapid they've completely changed identity, and very rarely have they "collapsed". Most often what has happened, is that the various cultures around the world have been conquered, colonized, subjugated, and even then they've almost never completely disappeared the way previous civ titles have depicted the process. The Maya and Assyrians still exist, even if their empires no longer do.

Truth is that, due to the games' core premise being inherently nationalistic, the civ franchise has never accurately simulated or depicted this topic, and likely never will. If historical accuracy had ever been a serious concern, the game's time frame wouldn't have been from 4000 BCE to today, but rather the lifespan of a singular leader, and the gameplay concerns would've accordingly been a lot more short-sighted, for a lack of better words. With a name like Civilization, anachronisms are sadly inescapable
 
Except that's not really what has ever happened. Civilizations have never gone through changes so rapid they've completely changed identity, and very rarely have they "collapsed". Most often what has happened, is that the various cultures around the world have been conquered, colonized, subjugated, and even then they've almost never completely disappeared the way previous civ titles have depicted the process. The Maya and Assyrians still exist, even if their empires no longer do.

Truth is that, due to the games' core premise being inherently nationalistic, the civ franchise has never accurately simulated or depicted this topic, and likely never will. If historical accuracy had ever been a serious concern, the game's time frame wouldn't have been from 4000 BCE to today, but rather the lifespan of a singular leader, and the gameplay concerns would've accordingly been a lot more short-sighted, for a lack of better words. With a name like Civilization, anachronisms are sadly inescapable
The Maya and Assyrians still exist, but last I checked modern Maya don’t build gigantic pyramids or calculate the stars, nor do modern Assyrian people build siege towers and go conquering cities in the name of Marduk.

Yes, cultures change and this system is how you model that.
 
The Maya and Assyrians still exist
Yes to Maya, no to Assyrians. Modern Assyrians are the result of a confused Catholic missionary in the mid 20th century; Syriac is a better term and the one that was used until then. The Assyrians were absorbed into the broader Hellenized Aramaic ethnos in the Seleucid period. Many Syriacs would be genetically descended from them (as would many Muslims from northern Iraq), but not culturally.

IRL leaders don't live thousands of years
One doesn't have to assume they do in Civ, either. I've never perceived Civ leaders as literal immortal god-kings.
 
I kind of agree with the poster. The "big idea" for Civilization 7 is ages but why can I not continue with my civilization if I want to? All that would need to happen is for me to be able to choose from a menu of attributes to take forward to the new age, which would put me in control. This would be superior to choosing from a few new civilizations that I have had no affinity with. I feel that the decision to change civilization is so that we can be sold more DLC that would not be needed if we continued with the same civilization we started with.
 
The Maya and Assyrians still exist, but last I checked modern Maya don’t build gigantic pyramids or calculate the stars, nor do modern Assyrian people build siege towers and go conquering cities in the name of Marduk.

Yes, cultures change and this system is how you model that.
So if the Maya still exist in the real world why can't we play them in the modern era? :)
 
So if the Maya still exist in the real world why can't we play them in the modern era? :)
I'm hoping we get three ages of Maya because they deserve it and are probably the only viable case for a three-age civ in the New World.
 
I'm hoping we get three ages of Maya because they deserve it and are probably the only viable case for a three-age civ in the New World.
It's kind of unlikely that we'll have the Maya covered in three eras, but I'm hoping for at least one version of the Maya in Exploration. I'm also hoping for at least one more Mesoamerican civilization in Antiquity.
 
It's kind of unlikely that we'll have the Maya covered in three eras, but I'm hoping for at least one version of the Maya in Exploration. I'm also hoping for at least one more Mesoamerican civilization in Antiquity.
Yes, modern Maya is iffy (the Yucatec would work, but I'd be surprised to get it), but both the Itza Kingdom and Mayapan are right there for the taking in Exploration. And if we don't, I'm hopeful modders will look into it. I rarely used modded civs in previous games because, no matter how well made, they always stuck out, but I might be more open to it in Civ7 without the need for modded leaders.
 
Top Bottom