Is Civ7 Getting a Classic Expansion?

[Lazy sweeper]

Exploration or Conquest of the America was Civ III 2nd Expansion. That was "classical" expansion
I would release a "Glory to the Party" Expansion with CCCP, North Korea, Cuba, Maybe Imperial Japan, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. Maybe Morocco.
It would be a good time to include also a WWII scenario... Idk... of course it will never happen....

The Fall of Rome expansion would be cool... including the Gauls, maybe the Scythians, Sumer, Babylon...
Or the Fall of Babylon... with Macedonia and Alexander the Great...

Lots of possibilities... Even a good old scramble for Antarctica that never happened is open for debate...

 

[vorlon_mi]

I think Civ7 will get a combination of enhancements. I expect at least one "expansion" that changes up gameplay rules, similar to what Gods & Kings did for Civ5, Rising Tide did for BE, and Rise & Fall did for Civ6. I also expect some passes that add leaders and civ choices, similar to what we got at different points for Civ6. Combine those for a "bundle" for Christmas 2027.

For me, the big unknown is whether they will add a 4th age and where it will be placed. I could make a case for an Information Age (or some other name) that follows Modern. In that case, the legacy paths in Modern would become similar to those in Exploration, giving bonuses rather than a victory.

I could make a case for an age between Antiquity and Exploration, though I'm not sure what to do about deep oceans. The whole spirit, the whole point of Exploration is doing all of the 4x's in Distant Lands. Perhaps they squeeze in an age between Exploration and Modern.

Adding a 4th age would definitely be an expansion pack. It would up the ante for all the DLC that follows, since new civs could be created for any of the 4 ages.

 

[MutilationWave]

I think Civ7 will get a combination of enhancements. I expect at least one "expansion" that changes up gameplay rules, similar to what Gods & Kings did for Civ5, Rising Tide did for BE, and Rise & Fall did for Civ6. I also expect some passes that add leaders and civ choices, similar to what we got at different points for Civ6. Combine those for a "bundle" for Christmas 2027.

For me, the big unknown is whether they will add a 4th age and where it will be placed. I could make a case for an Information Age (or some other name) that follows Modern. In that case, the legacy paths in Modern would become similar to those in Exploration, giving bonuses rather than a victory.

I could make a case for an age between Antiquity and Exploration, though I'm not sure what to do about deep oceans. The whole spirit, the whole point of Exploration is doing all of the 4x's in Distant Lands. Perhaps they squeeze in an age between Exploration and Modern.

Adding a 4th age would definitely be an expansion pack. It would up the ante for all the DLC that follows, since new civs could be created for any of the 4 ages.

I think adding an age is necessary. As much as I would love another age of pre exploration gameplay,I think it has to be an age after modern. It would make modern so much better to have something to build towards. An idea I've talked about here before is to make the Information Age (or whatever it gets called) be a short one. Military you carry over is far more powerful than anything seen before. It could be a victory rush where your modern legacy paths have big effects. I'm not sure how I feel about the current victory projects, they should either remain and give big bonuses to the first person to complete them, or be removed. This eliminates the boredom of the current end age, and if it's done right, it should be exciting, deadly, and above all, HARD. At least if you're playing on immortal or deity.

 

[GeneralZift]

The game will need Contemporary Era (presumed name) to be complete.

Also, I'm surely not the only one who thinks this game needs... real buildable nukes to feel... Grand?

I'd also like for it to have some decent, reasonable, future futuristic content that isn't stupid or useless, but that's mostly wishful thinking.

EDIT: Fix sentence, now makes sense ^

 

[Ornen]

We don’t know yet, but I expect we will receive at least one.

I would love to see government and religion get a serious overhaul. I would like to see 12 civs added as well (4 per age), thought I think 9 is a more reasonable number and is where they will settle.

3 per age would be pitiful IMO

 

[Ornen]

they need to expand the existing ages, not add a new one. aside from 1950-2050, there's an even bigger gap 1650-1850

 

[MutilationWave]

The game will need Contemporary Era (presumed name) to be complete.

Also, I'm surely not the only one who thinks this game needs... real buildable nukes to feel... Grand?

I'd like for it to have some reasonable, decent, future content that isn't stupid or useless, but that's mostly wishful thinking.

Special forces- 4 movement, stealth, can scale cliffs and cross small rivers with no movement penalty, can move through enemy units. +50% damage to commanders.

Airdrop those bad boys behind enemy lines.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Retro is in right now!

The gamers say we're retro, which I think means old, but cool.

 

[GeneralZift]

they need to expand the existing ages, not add a new one.

Why not do both?

 

[Nikolai II]

I am sure we will get a major expansion, in some form. I suspect not exactly like in previous games though, keeping in line with 7's theme of being different.

 

[Ornen]

Why not do both?

I don’t think a 4th era really works if you think about it for 5 minutes. is another civ/era transition really a good idea? what civs are you putting in, as distinct from US/GB/Germany/etc? is it really worth a massive rework to add an era that starts at 1950?

Firaxis has also gotten increasingly shy about putting recent/contemporary civs in their games too. they’re not putting Nazi Germany or PRC or modern Iran in the game

 

[CliffCo]

I don’t think a 4th era really works if you think about it for 5 minutes. is another civ/era transition really a good idea? what civs are you putting in, as distinct from US/GB/Germany/etc? is it really worth a massive rework to add an era that starts at 1950?

Firaxis has also gotten increasingly shy about putting recent/contemporary civs in their games too. they’re not putting Nazi Germany or PRC or modern Iran in the game

The main thing i don't like about eras is that they are all over too quick so i think it would be a better idea to extend the length of all 3 of the current eras by having the antiquity era start earlier, broaden exploration, and extend the modern age.

While there are certain Leader/Civs that we will never see in a game there are plenty that were in Civ6 that haven't been included in 7 so far.

 

[MutilationWave]

I don’t think a 4th era really works if you think about it for 5 minutes. is another civ/era transition really a good idea? what civs are you putting in, as distinct from US/GB/Germany/etc? is it really worth a massive rework to add an era that starts at 1950?

Firaxis has also gotten increasingly shy about putting recent/contemporary civs in their games too. they’re not putting Nazi Germany or PRC or modern Iran in the game

My suggestion, as I outlined in detail earlier, would be that the final era be a short one, a rush to victory with bonuses from modern projects and legacy paths, which will make modern much more fun because you're building towards something.

But there was a part of that in my head that I didn't write down - you wouldn't change civs for the final era. Maybe they get a new unique unit or something but there's no sense in trying to add the EU, BRICS, or some futuristic nonsense or anything like that to go beyond what's already in modern. Any new civ design work should go towards the three ages we already have, especially antiquity and exploration.

For your final point about shyness, I think if we have the United States in, with its history of genocide and slavery, why not have USSR, Nazi Germany, Khmer Rouge, Leopold's Belgium, Islamic State? I know why they don't do it but it would be interesting.

The terrorist faction in C&C Generals was really fun to play, just saying.

Not attempting any atrocity measuring contest here. The main point of my post is above.

 

[CliffCo]

My suggestion, as I outlined in detail earlier, would be that the final era be a short one, a rush to victory with bonuses from modern projects and legacy paths, which will make modern much more fun because you're building towards something.

But there was a part of that in my head that I didn't write down - you wouldn't change civs for the final era. Maybe they get a new unique unit or something but there's no sense in trying to add the EU, BRICS, or some futuristic nonsense or anything like that to go beyond what's already in modern. Any new civ design work should go towards the three ages we already have, especially antiquity and exploration.

For your final point about shyness, I think if we have the United States in, with its history of genocide and slavery, why not have USSR, Nazi Germany, Khmer Rouge, Leopold's Belgium, Islamic State? I know why they don't do it but it would be interesting.

The terrorist faction in C&C Generals was really fun to play, just saying.

Not attempting any atrocity measuring contest here. The main point of my post is above.

I totally disagree on the addition of Nazi Germany, IS, etc being added, to me it's much to recent history to be included in any game let alone Civ, and it's not something i would enjoy playing. When you have had family members involved in these conflicts i don't think they should be taken lightly by being included.

 

[protocol7]

I feel like what’s going to happen based on everything we have seen so far is they are going to release a minimum effort expansion to public outcry, and then promise to fix it at some point in the future.

 

[MutilationWave]

I totally disagree on the addition of Nazi Germany, IS, etc being added, to me it's much to recent history to be included in any game let alone Civ, and it's not something i would enjoy playing. When you have had family members involved in these conflicts i don't think they should be taken lightly by being included.

I don't think I'd enjoy playing as Nazi Germany, but I sure would enjoy eradicating them. Could make a good scenario, it's been done before. I really wish we had scenarios right now.

 

[UWHabs]

My suggestion, as I outlined in detail earlier, would be that the final era be a short one, a rush to victory with bonuses from modern projects and legacy paths, which will make modern much more fun because you're building towards something.

But there was a part of that in my head that I didn't write down - you wouldn't change civs for the final era. Maybe they get a new unique unit or something but there's no sense in trying to add the EU, BRICS, or some futuristic nonsense or anything like that to go beyond what's already in modern. Any new civ design work should go towards the three ages we already have, especially antiquity and exploration.

For your final point about shyness, I think if we have the United States in, with its history of genocide and slavery, why not have USSR, Nazi Germany, Khmer Rouge, Leopold's Belgium, Islamic State? I know why they don't do it but it would be interesting.

The terrorist faction in C&C Generals was really fun to play, just saying.

Not attempting any atrocity measuring contest here. The main point of my post is above.

I don't think you'd need another "age" for that, though. Perhaps what should change is that when you unlock the victory condition, that should trigger the "modern age crisis", which is the race to actual victory. So once you build the Manhattan Project (or Ivy, not sure where to place the trigger), then that triggers the "modern era conquest victory crisis", with special bonuses and rules. Not sure how it would work, whether it would unlock new trees, or just be a counter to victory, or what. But I'd rather that than a full age mechanism.

I do think we'll get a full expansion overall. As mentioned, Religion is a system desperate for something new. I could also see them do an expansion that does even more to shake up the modern era. Ancient era we have a lot of fun exploring, and then in the Exploration we get a new land to explore, but the modern era everything is revealed for us. Maybe they could find a way to give us a real modern era exploration for coal, oil+gas, uranium, and other sources. Give us random oil deposits, make us fight for resources.

 

[GeneralZift]

I don’t think a 4th era really works if you think about it for 5 minutes. is another civ/era transition really a good idea? what civs are you putting in, as distinct from US/GB/Germany/etc? is it really worth a massive rework to add an era that starts at 1950?

Firaxis has also gotten increasingly shy about putting recent/contemporary civs in their games too. they’re not putting Nazi Germany or PRC or modern Iran in the game

Like Wave said, I think you simply wouldn't switch. They don't need to rework everything or add useless Civ's.

They'd a soft reset presumably into "final sprint to the finish line" type of era, with more focus on player engagement with each other (diplomatic gameplay), propaganda, internet, social media, global warming.

 

[NickTheGreek!]

Is Civ7 Getting a Classic Expansion? I would certainly hope so (ideally a couple of them). I would like a future age, CIV7 just feels incomplete now in terms of covering History. Also religion rework, as it is now, i just get as many relics as i can at age start and then ignore the whole thing (mainly because i dislike the missionary/converting "minigame"). Finally, probably not important to some but it annoys me (probably more than it should), where is my Greek leader? where is Alexander dammit

.

 

[MutilationWave]

Is Civ7 Getting a Classic Expansion? I would certainly hope so (ideally a couple of them). I would like a future age, CIV7 just feels incomplete now in terms of covering History. Also religion rework, as it is now, i just get as many relics as i can at age start and then ignore the whole thing (mainly because i dislike the missionary/converting "minigame"). Finally, probably not important to some but it annoys me (probably more than it should), where is my Greek leader? where is Alexander dammit

.

Yeah religion is tacked on nonsense. Rather than do it first, I do things I want then get around to it about 60% through the age. Doesn't matter if you're last to pick, you can always get the legacy points.