Jester's Final Prediction Thread

[JNR13]

Perhaps that screenshot with the blurred icons showing 13 civs - where the 3 icons after Rome are still undefined - might already include the DLC civs. If that’s the case, considering the undefined icons, the three new civs would come alphabetically after Rome. Based on the wonders we know of, we can speculate two of them: Tonga and Silla. But what about the third? Maybe Teotihuacan? The Visigoths? Or perhaps some other civ that hasn’t been speculated yet?

They could simply come after Rome because they are loaded after Rome. In Civ VI, the game usually orders things by their database index, not the assigned name, unless scripted so in the UI. The database index goes by content first and then alphabetically, meaning the civ list is first the base game civs in alphabetical order, then the civs of the first DLC in alphabetical order, etc.

Chances are high that at least some of the ancient DLC civs involve Assyria and/or Babylon, who would come early in the alphabet.

 

[RedCourtJester]

You mean in the base game, even though what we saw of the ancient tech tree would mean that is extremely unlikely?
By the way, I'm curious, why would you want that? we already got the release total number of civs, and when they add more civs they can always add their wonders too, so there is no need to have tons of wonders in the game already for civs only coming later on DLCs.

Yeah that's part of the craziness. Really insane idea, not even worth putting out publicly unless we start seeing a lot of oddly specific wonders.

I can't really say I want that, but I can say that the antiquity era could be argued to want a decent bulk of wonders at launch to make the 7 wonders win-con at all competitive. I would not be surprised, as a matter of aesthetic/gameplay symmetry (since we can play these eras separately), that the other two eras will have the same numbers as well.

We just don't know what that number per era might be yet.

 

[Krikkit1]

Yeah that's part of the craziness. Really insane idea, not even worth putting out publicly unless we start seeing a lot of oddly specific wonders.

I can't really say I want that, but I can say that the antiquity era could be argued to want a decent bulk of wonders at launch to make the 7 wonders win-con at all competitive. I would not be surprised, as a matter of aesthetic/gameplay symmetry (since we can play these eras separately), that the other two eras will have the same numbers as well.

We just don't know what that number per era might be yet.

That might be part of the reason for the #player limitations

Since each player will probably get their own civs wonder fairly easily, only excess wonders can be competed for.

If 1/4 of the players go for the Wonder game, then they need about 2.5 total wonders per player.

with 5 players in ancient that means that ~12 wonders
If they get 16 ancient civs and allow 16 players, then you need 30-40 wonders for the wonder game to be competitive but achievable.

 

[RedCourtJester]

That might be part of the reason for the #player limitations

Since each player will probably get their own civs wonder fairly easily, only excess wonders can be competed for.

If 1/4 of the players go for the Wonder game, then they need about 2.5 total wonders per player.

with 5 players in ancient that means that ~12 wonders
If they get 16 ancient civs and allow 16 players, then you need 30-40 wonders for the wonder game to be competitive but achievable.

3.5 wonders per player would make it competitive. So with 5 players that would be 17.5 wonders.

But then we are also looking at where those wonders might be placed in the tree and unlocks. Maybe if enough are further down and in disparate locations, that might suggest a few more.

Another option, which may be suggested by those blanks in the exploration tree, would be that, apart from universal wonders, only the civs' own wonders would be buildable in the game. That would ensure a soft lock on the wonders cap no matter how many antiquity civs they add to the game, to keep that victory path viable.

If that happened to be the case, even in my crazy model (or indeed any speculative model), the cultural victory would be competing for: Nalanda, Teotihuacan, Terracotta Army, Mausoleum of Theodoric, Petra, Colossus of Rhodes, and (I hypothesize, a revealed number 8) + the 5 civ-associated wonders being played. In that model, the total is always 13, meaning two players can reasonably compete and the race can feel tight, but only one can win.

It would also explain why (a) we've seen so many antiquity wonders but fewer later wonders (because they needed a lot of universals), and (b) why we could very easily have not seen the wonders of unrevealed antiquity civs (since they would not have been buildable in games not played with them).

 

[Krikkit1]

3.5 wonders per player would make it competitive. So with 5 players that would be 17.5 wonders.

But then we are also looking at where those wonders might be placed in the tree and unlocks. Maybe if enough are further down and in disparate locations, that might suggest a few more.

Another option, which may be suggested by those blanks in the exploration tree, would be that, apart from universal wonders, only the civs' own wonders would be buildable in the game. That would ensure a soft lock on the wonders cap no matter how many antiquity civs they add to the game, to keep that victory path viable.

If that happened to be the case, even in my crazy model (or indeed any speculative model), the cultural victory would be competing for: Nalanda, Teotihuacan, Terracotta Army, Mausoleum of Theodoric, Petra, Colossus of Rhodes, and (I hypothesize, a revealed number 8) + the 5 civ-associated wonders being played. In that model, the total is always 13, meaning two players can reasonably compete and the race can feel tight, but only one can win.

It would also explain why (a) we've seen so many antiquity wonders but fewer later wonders (because they needed a lot of universals), and (b) why we could very easily have not seen the wonders of unrevealed antiquity civs (since they would not have been buildable in games not played with them).

I don’t think they will change the wonders available based on the civs in the game, because that means you look at ghe tech/civic tree and know what civs care out there.

It does mean bigger map sizes with more antiquity players will be probably be available in a balance way when more civs are available.

Once they Do have more wonders available (more civs /more unattached. there becomes the issue with the wonder race becoming too easy)

Keeping the player:wonder ratio at least 1:~2.5~3.5 means possibly having some random wonders disabled in this game for smaller than maximum player count game maps.

Shouldn’t be the wonders of any civ in the game, but possibly randomly disabling Some of the ones currently or permanently unattached would work.

So if the Maya wonder is missing you know they aren’t in this game, but if it is in the game they might still be missing.

(that might have to be a setting though, people would not like to have wonders disabled even though there are a lot of them)

It might reasonably balance out though. If. there are fewer players, the easier wonders will be to get so more civs will go for them. (which means more of the low level Wonder Legacy earned, but maybe just as much as the high one)

 

[RedCourtJester]

I don’t think they will change the wonders available based on the civs in the game, because that means you look at ghe tech/civic tree and know what civs care out there.

It does mean bigger map sizes with more antiquity players will be probably be available in a balance way when more civs are available.

Once they Do have more wonders available (more civs /more unattached. there becomes the issue with the wonder race becoming too easy)

Keeping the player:wonder ratio at least 1:~2.5~3.5 means possibly having some random wonders disabled in this game for smaller than maximum player count game maps.

Shouldn’t be the wonders of any civ in the game, but possibly randomly disabling Some of the ones currently or permanently unattached would work.

So if the Maya wonder is missing you know they aren’t in this game, but if it is in the game they might still be missing.

(that might have to be a setting though, people would not like to have wonders disabled even though there are a lot of them)

It might reasonably balance out though. If. there are fewer players, the easier wonders will be to get so more civs will go for them. (which means more of the low level Wonder Legacy earned, but maybe just as much as the high one)

Yes, I could see a mode where you can toggle whether all civ-associated wonders are available or just those of the playing civs. But I could also se a mode where you can toggle whether you can see the other players' wonders. Or maybe you can't see/build their wonders until you meet them (which would be a nice twist on the idea of a "cultural" victory, as you are encouraged to explore and meet other cultures to accelerate your victory).

I think the default mode has to be limited to which civs are playing, though, otherwise the 7 wonders victory condition will become increasingly trivial as more antiquity civs and wonders are added to the game. More are more wonders will be available in the tech trees, and antiquity era would be over before it even started for having too many in the earlier slots. The tech tree would get overcluttered with wonders. Not to mention all the other victory conditions would be trivialized, as wonders would just be an easier/more reliable victory condition. I think the game has set a hard cap on how many wonders can be in antiquity era.

 

[Krikkit1]

Yes, I could see a mode where you can toggle whether all civ-associated wonders are available or just those of the playing civs. But I could also se a mode where you can toggle whether you can see the other players' wonders. Or maybe you can't see/build their wonders until you meet them (which would be a nice twist on the idea of a "cultural" victory, as you are encouraged to explore and meet other cultures to accelerate your victory).

I think the default mode has to be limited to which civs are playing, though, otherwise the 7 wonders victory condition will become increasingly trivial as more antiquity civs and wonders are added to the game. More are more wonders will be available in the tech trees, and antiquity era would be over before it even started for having too many in the earlier slots. The tech tree would get overcluttered with wonders. Not to mention all the other victory conditions would be trivialized, as wonders would just be an easier/more reliable victory condition. I think the game has set a hard cap on how many wonders can be in antiquity era.

Default should be all wonders are available.

I doubt we get more than 20 or so antiquity civs, (with less than 5 unattached wonders at that point) and that is fine, it just means in a 5 player game everyone can get 2-3 wonders.

 

[RedCourtJester]

Default should be all wonders are available.

I doubt we get more than 20 or so antiquity civs, (with less than 5 unattached wonders at that point) and that is fine, it just means in a 5 player game everyone can get 2-3 wonders.

True, it does depend on how many antiquity civs we start with. Though even still, that would likely increase the number of wonders by 50% or more.