kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,710
So, I admit freely that I've been very critical about some of the design choices made for Civ 7 (and I still stand by much of this). One of the things I've spoken loudly against (as has many others) is the forced civ upgrades and the sometimes weird paths it results in. Therefore I decided I wanted to challenge myself and see: If I should pick the 30 (+1) civs going into the base game, could I come up with a better scheme than the one the developers have chosen? And I must admit, the answer to the question seems to be: Only to a certain extent.
So I think I have landed on the 30+1 civs (and their upgrade paths) that I think would be my choice. Along the way, I reached some conclusions:
1) I ended up making some of the same choices that I have criticized the developers for making, simply because they ended up being the best compromise between conflicting priorities.
2) I still think this overall design approach is bad for exactly that reason: It results in too many conflicting interests.
3) 30 civs is simply not enough to include all the important civs, if we also want to have just moderately meaningful upgrade paths (although I feel somewhat confident that the whole idea will make sense once we've had a large number of DLC/expansion civs added to fill the gap).
4) Splitting the Exploration Era into a "Medieval Era" and an "Industrial Era" would have made some of the civ designations a lot easier, as some civs like Franks, Maya and Khmer feel like they should really be Medieval, while some like Ottomans and Gran Colombia feel like they are not really Modern era.
So below an overview of my selection of 30+1 civs. Civs listed in black are civs I would include in base game. Civs listed in orange would be DLC civs planned from start but not included in base game. Civ in green would be the (+1) bonus civ. I don't think this is the perfect layout - like I said, compromises had to be made between on one hand what felt like natural upgrade paths and on the other hand civs that have made historical impact. I would also like to add that the DLC civs listed here is not meant as an exclusive list of civs for the game - but this list includes all the contenders that I had in play for base game inclusion, many of which then ended up being pushed to lower priority. So yes, I would add others civs for Africa, South America and Oceania along the way, to name some not represented here, but I had excluded these from my base game priority list from the beginning. And yes, that may make me Eurocentric, but this was the choice I made in an attempt to balance world coverage vs. historical impact.
So please, join the game and share here: Which civs would you choose as your 30+1, and based on what criteria?
So I think I have landed on the 30+1 civs (and their upgrade paths) that I think would be my choice. Along the way, I reached some conclusions:
1) I ended up making some of the same choices that I have criticized the developers for making, simply because they ended up being the best compromise between conflicting priorities.
2) I still think this overall design approach is bad for exactly that reason: It results in too many conflicting interests.
3) 30 civs is simply not enough to include all the important civs, if we also want to have just moderately meaningful upgrade paths (although I feel somewhat confident that the whole idea will make sense once we've had a large number of DLC/expansion civs added to fill the gap).
4) Splitting the Exploration Era into a "Medieval Era" and an "Industrial Era" would have made some of the civ designations a lot easier, as some civs like Franks, Maya and Khmer feel like they should really be Medieval, while some like Ottomans and Gran Colombia feel like they are not really Modern era.
So below an overview of my selection of 30+1 civs. Civs listed in black are civs I would include in base game. Civs listed in orange would be DLC civs planned from start but not included in base game. Civ in green would be the (+1) bonus civ. I don't think this is the perfect layout - like I said, compromises had to be made between on one hand what felt like natural upgrade paths and on the other hand civs that have made historical impact. I would also like to add that the DLC civs listed here is not meant as an exclusive list of civs for the game - but this list includes all the contenders that I had in play for base game inclusion, many of which then ended up being pushed to lower priority. So yes, I would add others civs for Africa, South America and Oceania along the way, to name some not represented here, but I had excluded these from my base game priority list from the beginning. And yes, that may make me Eurocentric, but this was the choice I made in an attempt to balance world coverage vs. historical impact.
Spoiler :
So please, join the game and share here: Which civs would you choose as your 30+1, and based on what criteria?
Last edited: