Eras in civilization 7

[Xandinho]

Honestly, take out the atomic era. One of the reasons the late game is boring is because almost half of the eras in the game take place in a historical period of just over 100 years (modern era, atomic era, information era and future era - all of which are like ~150 years in our real world). Take away also the future era.

Most of the game's most important and impactful decisions happen in the early era. The late game, especially how civ6 is designed, is just about passing turns.

The late game can have two eras: modern era and information era. The modern era will be the 20th century and all the great inventions and events of that era. The information era will be the final age and may have some futuristic elements without the need for another era for that.

This way, each era will be more immersive as they will be larger and involve more events. IMO, each era should have 12 technologies in a not so linear technology tree in which civilizations that are further behind are not so penalized.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

The rise of full Civilizations did begin to arise around 4000 BCE/BC. However in the game we start with individual cities. So I think it would be more historically accurate to begin the game at about 7000-6000 BCE/BC.

Why not 10,000 BC?

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

Any reason why those particular dates? As far as I'm aware many ancient civilizations started establishing technological innovations, cultural/religious institutions, and building infrastructure at the same time.

I was trying to draws out some distinctions in eras, even though as you say there's a lot in common between them. I picked the Bronze Age collapse and the Death of Alexander because the are big well know events which roughly correspond to big changes in western history.

##00 to 1200 BC = The artistic subjects are religious or a divine rulers. Architecture is fortifications, agricultural, or funerary. Written materials are inventories, list, royal decrease, or stories. Cultural exchange is accedental.
1200 to 300 BC = Post Bronze age collapse. Poltical systems change from pure force of arms to a code of laws joining different groups. The development of representational art. Writing now includes astronomy, pseudo-history, and more sophisticated literature. Architecture now include early city planning and the beginnings of cultural and scientific institutions.. Cultural exchange beings to regularly happen because of trade.
300 BC to 400 AD = Politics and bureaucracy have developed past the point of family dynasties being need to sustain a polity. Trade is now much large scale and over longer distance. Cultural exchange happens because of the wider exchange of people and trade. Architecture for industrial manufacturing and trade.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I'm the only human on earth who hates the name Early Modern??
I get if you're a history buff that that name makes sense, but this is a game, and having distinct easy names regardless of historical accuracy is more important in my opinion...

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I'm the only human on earth who hates the name Early Modern??
I get if you're a history buff that that name makes sense, but this is a game, and having distinct easy names regardless of historical accuracy is more important in my opinion...

I like it only as a replacement for "Renaissance", since it doesn't imply you are rebirthing anything.

But I agree it's pretty lame.

In fact, the folks who named 'Eras' for modern historiography and anthropology showed a distinct lack of imagination: Early Modern, Late Modern, Post Classical, Early Middle, High Middle, Late Middle - the only really distinctive name they came up with is Contemporary - Here And Now, which is pretty hard to misunderstand.

Other candidates for the period from roughly 1400 - 1500 to 1700 are:
Age of Exploration
Age of Revolution
(those two apparently being used by the new 4X game Millenia)
Age of Reason
Age of Enlightenment

But of course, while wonderfully descriptive, they all assume that you plan to explore, or revolt, or are going through the Enlightenment, which most of the world never did.

I confess, I'm leaning more and more towards a system where you'd have a choice of sorts: get the technology to build Caravels or Carracks or ocean-going Junks, and start your Age of Exploration. Start building Universities (a Medieval action) and start an Age of Reason - which, come to think of it, might devolve into an Age of Revolution if you aren't careful.
That appears to be the way the Millenia game is going, and I find the concept intriguing, if for no other reason than it allows the gamer to establish the conditions for an appropriate in-game Age of Exploration (or whatever) instead of accepting a rigid sequence of Ages that may be completely at odds with what is happening in that particular game.

 

[jsciv69]

Why not 10,000 BC?

10,000 BCE/BC would make sense if we were starting the game with towns that evolve into cities. Maybe there can be an option or scenario where that happens. I think 7,000-6,000 BCE/BC was when full cities began to emerge. So a starting point reflecting that would make more historical sense. It could depend on how the year per turn rate is considered.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Age of Enlightenment

But of course, while wonderfully descriptive, they all assume that you plan to explore, or revolt, or are going through the Enlightenment, which most of the world never did.

An Enlightenment Era I could possibly see, if they were to introduce a new era in between the Renaissance and the Industrial Era. But I don't necessarily find that name as a perfect substitute for a Renaissance Era.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

An Enlightenment Era I could possibly see, if they were to introduce a new era in between the Renaissance and the Industrial Era. But I don't necessarily find that name as a perfect substitute for a Renaissance Era.

I'd prefer either 'Gunpowder era' (Significant Proliferations of gunpowder weaponry, especially arquebuses and cannons) or 'Early Modern'.

 

[AffineConstant]

I'd prefer either 'Gunpowder era' (Significant Proliferations of gunpowder weaponry, especially arquebuses and cannons) or 'Early Modern'.

Gunpowder Era! There we go, that gives a worldwide concrete touchstone, everyone knows what that is at least, and anyone that likes history has a good idea of when that is and why it's important. "Early modern" on the other hand is just confusing, even if you do know history.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ It comes from Rise of Nations.

 

[Malexander]

Overall, I think each era could be bit longer in game turns.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'd prefer either 'Gunpowder era' (Significant Proliferations of gunpowder weaponry, especially arquebuses and cannons) or 'Early Modern'.

Well historically "Gunpowder" era would have to start in the late Medieval Era. I guess by civ logic though you don't use any "gunpowder" units until musketmen anyways, so I guess that could work.

 

[Evie]

I like Age of Discovery over Age of Exploration because while not everyone went and carried massive exploration, discovery can be taken in the broader sense of encountering parts of the world beyond your own - which pretty much everyone did when foreign explorers started showing up, and much of history for most everyone in the world is driven by action and reaction to this discovery of just what is out there in the rest in the world. Some colonized, others closed themselves up, some were conquered, others adapted and survived.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Age of Discovery does have a more 'universal' ring to it.

But I would point out that 'discoveries' have been on-going since Pre-History. The trigger for an Age of Discovery would have to be Something Special, given that back in the Bronze Age people were already trading between the Indus/India and Mesopotamia, and amber from the Baltic was already finding its way to Egypt and Greece.
Possibiities:

Exotic goods arrive from the End of the World - like Silk from Seres handed off through dozens of Middle Men across the Eurasian continent.
Invent a new ship/navigation method to extend your own travel - and that doesn't have to be Post Medieval: in the Pseudo-Historical World of Civ, the Antikythera Mechanism could be a real invention that suddenly extends the range of your classical vessels to New Lands.
Domesticate the Camel and suddenly open up routes across deserts.

Of course, the triggers for the 'real' Age of Discovery were several: the ocean-going multiple-sail rigs of the Caravels and Carracks, the much more capacious hulls of the later Naus, Carracks, Galleons, etc, the magnetic compass - they all combined with a pressing Need to find new routes to the silks and spices on the other side of Asia to send ships flying in all directions. Similarly, Song China started sending mega-Junks to Southeast Asia because of the insatiable demands for spices and aromatic woods and hardwoods from that area.

 

[Evie]

I agree that discovery had been ongoing forever (then again, so had exploration, and enlightenment...well, I can think of some eastern religions that might question the idea that enlightenment existed only in the 1700s, lol, and there were numerous renaissances, and...).

I think linking Age of Discovery to the opening of intercontinental exploration and routes via oceanic travel makes the most sense.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

10,000 BCE/BC would make sense if we were starting the game with towns that evolve into cities. Maybe there can be an option or scenario where that happens. I think 7,000-6,000 BCE/BC was when full cities began to emerge. So a starting point reflecting that would make more historical sense. It could depend on how the year per turn rate is considered.

Depends on how we define 'city', but:
Jericho had a settlement by 9500 BCE and by 8350 BCE covered a large area surrounded by an (estimated) 13 foot high stone wall, estimated population 2500 - 3000 people.
Tel Qaramel (modern name) is even earlier, in modern Syria, occupied continuously since at least 11,000 BCE, had stone towers (earliest found anywhere) by 9600 BCE, but no population estimates that I've seen.
Lahuradewa (modern name) in the upper Ganges area of India was occupied by 9000 BCE, by 7000 BCE had earliest fired ceramics in south Asia.
Pengtoushan Cuture of the central Yangtze in China shows permanent settlements by 9000 - 7500 BCE, cultivated rice by 8200 BCE, decorated pottery - all before any metal-working.
Lepenskii Vir in Serbia, occupied by 8500 BCE, monumental stone architecture and agriculture (grains)

Point being that all of these include some form of Heirarchial or defensive construction (monuments, walls, central meeting places and storage facilities) and populations of 1000 and more concentrated in one place, all before 8000 BCE.

So to get a real 'Start Date' for cities we pretty much have to start before 9000 BCE or we cut off some of the earliest city-like settlements. 10,000 is a nice round number that allows everybody on the map to start as roving bands and settle into cities as they discover ways to feed the concentrations of people - which may not be agriculture, since for instance Lepenskii Vir got at least half of its food from Danube River fishing as well as its cultivated grains, and the settlements in Mesopotamia (Jericho, Tel Qaramel) all had intensive hunting and gathering supplementing the early agricultural attempts.

 

[vorlon_mi]

While I'm interested in the names of the eras, I'm more interested by what the eras will *do* in the game. In Civ3, we had 4 eras which weren't much more than arbitary chunks of the tech tree. It was possible -- even recommended by the best players -- to stay in a government from the first age all the way until you researched Future Techs. One needed to research certain required techs to advance to the next era, though it was possible to go back to research the optional ones that were bypassed. It was/is common to have some AI players an era behind, if that have a poor starting location or no contact with others for tech trading.

Civ4 moved away from hard boundaries, allowing both "and" and "or" in the tech tree. Eras were more like labels. I don't remember particular changes in gameplay as the eras changed. Golden ages were more abstract, lasted a fixed number of turns, and could be triggered in a number of ways. With careful planning, including the generation of Great People, players could arrange for consecutive GA's or lengthen their GA's. These were not tied to a specific era, that I can recall.

Among the effects of changing eras in Civ6 is the movement points required for roads. That is, more recent roads allow faster travel. I like that approach and would like to see something like that in Civ7. Using a variable metric, like "more than half of the civs have researched tech X" to advance to the next age might be OK, again depending on what that means for the player. More than a few times I've been surprised by the popup, "Medeival Era will end in 10 turns", and I need to scramble to achieve the last 2-3 era score points. If tech trading is allowed in Civ7, that could alter the advancement of eras and increase the number of "surprise" era endings.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I agree that discovery had been ongoing forever (then again, so had exploration, and enlightenment...well, I can think of some eastern religions that might question the idea that enlightenment existed only in the 1700s, lol, and there were numerous renaissances, and...).

I think linking Age of Discovery to the opening of intercontinental exploration and routes via oceanic travel makes the most sense.

Although I think Early Modern makes the most sense, I would be open to calling it the "Discovery Era" more than any other name. Discovery could not only deal with the Age of Exploration but the name is broad enough to cover all of the ideas of the Renaissance, Scientific Revolution, and Enlightenment, which all would encompass this part of the game.

 

[Quintillus]

I agree with those who have said there are too many eras late in the game. Not just because I started with Civ III, where there's simply Modern after the Industrial Era, but because as a student of history I wouldn't argue there are so many distinctions in recent years. Industrial certainly makes sense; it was society-transforming. When does it run until? At least 1900, but I say you can make a good case of it covering up through 1918 or 1945 - the latter is pretty much where it ends in Civ3. Civ3 put everything after that into "Modern", including futuristic tech such as laser-based missile defense systems ("Star Wars" as Reagan called it). It worked well.

Civ VI vanilla, IMO, felt like it was missing that partial-era of tech that Civ III/IV included, and which VI later added in an expansion (the "Future Era"). I'd prefer not to have an empty latter part of the game tech-wise, but to have the "near future" included in the base tech tree.

The other thing I missed in Vanilla VI was that railroads played no part in the game, despite being a huge part of the Industrial Revolution. You could argue that it was implied with road upgrades, but then railroads did get added in an expansion, but only constructible by military engineers, not the commercial forces that built so much of the historical rail networks. I think railroads should be a key part of the Industrial Era in VII, as after all, it was a key differentiator in history. Industry, travel, and, yes, military planning all relied on the railroads.

As for the road auto-upgrades? If the Trade Route system is kept, I'd argue that roads/railroads should be upgraded, not just initially constructed, by traders. Perhaps being supplementable by Builders, to allow the faster build-out of improved transportation seem in recent centuries.

Names? I agree that "Early Modern" is uninspired, especially if it's followed by "Modern". At that point the question becomes, why not just have one longer "Modern" era, but to the layperson, having "Modern" cover everything from 1450/1500 to the present would not make sense. There are a number of options, all with tradeoffs, but "Early Modern" is probably my least favorite of the options.

 

[jsciv69]

Depends on how we define 'city', but:
Jericho had a settlement by 9500 BCE and by 8350 BCE covered a large area surrounded by an (estimated) 13 foot high stone wall, estimated population 2500 - 3000 people.
Tel Qaramel (modern name) is even earlier, in modern Syria, occupied continuously since at least 11,000 BCE, had stone towers (earliest found anywhere) by 9600 BCE, but no population estimates that I've seen.
Lahuradewa (modern name) in the upper Ganges area of India was occupied by 9000 BCE, by 7000 BCE had earliest fired ceramics in south Asia.
Pengtoushan Cuture of the central Yangtze in China shows permanent settlements by 9000 - 7500 BCE, cultivated rice by 8200 BCE, decorated pottery - all before any metal-working.
Lepenskii Vir in Serbia, occupied by 8500 BCE, monumental stone architecture and agriculture (grains)

Point being that all of these include some form of Heirarchial or defensive construction (monuments, walls, central meeting places and storage facilities) and populations of 1000 and more concentrated in one place, all before 8000 BCE.

So to get a real 'Start Date' for cities we pretty much have to start before 9000 BCE or we cut off some of the earliest city-like settlements. 10,000 is a nice round number that allows everybody on the map to start as roving bands and settle into cities as they discover ways to feed the concentrations of people - which may not be agriculture, since for instance Lepenskii Vir got at least half of its food from Danube River fishing as well as its cultivated grains, and the settlements in Mesopotamia (Jericho, Tel Qaramel) all had intensive hunting and gathering supplementing the early agricultural attempts.

I think it was Civ III, still my choice as the best of the entire series, that had a post- Ice Age Scenario. Where the game began around 10,000 BCE. Hunting and Gathering, and Farming were among the early techs. I wouldn't mind seeing that return. But I can see a 8,000-7,000 BCE as an ideal starting age. Especially with the year-per turn increments being about 20 years per turn(quick mode). That would certainly be reasonable to grow and develop of our Cities and Civs. And prepare better for the Eras to come.