Modern Age discussion/speculation

[Krikkit1]

I think there are 2 issues
“Colonial” independence in the new world (1750-1900)
and
independence of conquered peoples after WWs (1900-1980)

the first makes a good second age crisis

the second is a good 3rd age mechanic to help stop the snowball
(if you conquer a city from your enemy, liberating it is better than keeping it)..and if you’re a big conquest empire you will be struggling to stay together ….so the military victory is “liberating” other civs / IPs to accept your military bases, ideology, and support you in the UN.

 

[gdr_willter]

A special case that covers nearly the entire American continent, and the vast majority of the "early"' colonies (ie, colonies founded before the eighteenth century). It's the later colonies - the one claimed during the scrambles for India and Africa - that made up the bulk of post-World War II decolonization, and they're not relevant to the Age of Exploration.

Having a crisis involving colonial indepdendnce around the 1700-1800 time frame, when the United States, Haiti, and almost all of Latin America became independent is perfectly reasonable.

We already have this model as Civilizations themeselves (America, Mexico). So even if there is such a system in the end of Age 2, I'll call it "Splitting" rather than "Independence". Age 3 also contains the typical period of modern colonization. Flood of Independence will be more fit well in Modern Age. I still prefer this way.

 

[untitledjuan]

I doubt this, because a lot of colonies in the world were freed after the end of WW2. Independence of the states based on European settlers like USA is special case rather than the trend of the Age.

It was a general trend in all of the Americas, not just the USA. In less than 45 consecutive years, almost all of North and South America became independent.

 

[gdr_willter]

It was a general trend in all of the Americas, not just the USA. In less than 45 consecutive years, almost all of North and South America became independent.

But it mainly because of the fall of Spanish Empire, still a partial and limited event. It did not ended the colonialism, even drived it to modernized, industrialized, and imperialistic form.

 

[Nic@Melbourne]

Now that we know what the antiquity age and exploration age are about, I thought it might be fun to discuss and speculate about what the modern age will be about. What new game mechanics will we see in the modern age?

Decolonization
I think Ed mentioned that there is a loyalty-like mechanic in one of the crisis. I think the exploration age ends with a decolonization crisis where your settlements on the distant lands revolt and try to split off (like British colonies revolting and becoming the US). So I imagine the modern age will have new civs in the distant lands that represent your former colonies. It is also possible that we might see a loyalty-like mechanic in the modern age that cause settlements to form new civs, to represent the emergence of new nation-states after the world wars.

Will loyalty kick in at this age? I think it will.
Spain’s city growth on distant lands may help buffer this.

Some sort of nationalism mechanic and ideologies are likely.
Domination victory reverses from Exploration back to home lands domination (depending where your capital is now)

Factories likely to help science and economic victories, maybe even cultural

(Doubt the age will go past 1945)

 

[Krikkit1]

But it mainly because of the fall of Spanish Empire, still a partial and limited event. It did not ended the colonialism, even drived it to modernized, industrialized, and imperialistic form.

Different colonies though
the American colonies had a large population of people from the homeland.

Other colonies were more standard conquests, the locals were under a new faraway ruler.

I can see that as an increased difficulty of holding on to any conquered settlement…to the point in the late Modern age where they don’t exist. Conquerors take a chunk of your territory and either give it back to the original allied civ (possibly resurrecting them) or they split it off as a new IP.(possibly resurrecting one)

 

[stealth_nsk]

By history standards, which Civ7 seem to follow (i.e. based on civ selection), modern age starts somewhere around 1500. This makes it's a bit hard to fit things like ideologies or weapons of mass destruction here - they'd be actual at the very end of that era. That's why we have some speculations what "modern age" ends in the first half of the XX century and things like ideology wars are actually part of "contemporary age" coming in one of the expansions.

If that's the case, modern age is likely to be somehow focused on colonialism and international companies. I guess colonies would include additional relations with independent powers or other civilizations you subdue.

 

[Evie]

Given that colonizing distsnt land, settling them for rare resources, and sending treasure fleet baxk home are all mechanisms (confirmed) of the exploration age, and that there is at all an age called the exploration age (which is not a normal historical standard, and informally largely correspond to the first half of the Early Modern period), it is in fact self-evident that Civ VII does NOT follow historical standards, that the cutoff for Exploration/Modern is later than 1500, and that colonialism in the New World belong firmly to the exploration age (and thus that the loss of those colonies should be part of the age ending crisis for exploration).

 

[Siptah]

There isn‘t much correspondence between real world dates and what happens in the eras. The exploration era tech tree covers ca. 900-1500, but the era is about things that happened between 0-1700, roughly speaking. The modern era civs suggest a cutoff around 1600. But we also have examples that this not to be taken seriously. I think there is enough evidence that new world colonialism is a thing of the exploration era (and has a corresponding crisis). Yet, that doesn‘t contradict a 1500 cutoff. My guess is that turn one of the modern era is 1700 though, with industrialization techs being two techs away.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I think it's going to be tough given the time constraints of getting the game out in feb to get many new ideas in the modern age beyond perhaps corporations and monopolies.

 

[sonicmyst]

I see loyalties, ideologies and happiness make front and center of the modern era. It will make alliances more important, ushering in joint research projects, economic deals, and military blocs.

 

[Krikkit1]

By history standards, which Civ7 seem to follow (i.e. based on civ selection), modern age starts somewhere around 1500. This makes it's a bit hard to fit things like ideologies or weapons of mass destruction here - they'd be actual at the very end of that era. That's why we have some speculations what "modern age" ends in the first half of the XX century and things like ideology wars are actually part of "contemporary age" coming in one of the expansions.

If that's the case, modern age is likely to be somehow focused on colonialism and international companies. I guess colonies would include additional relations with independent powers or other civilizations you subdue.

far closer to 1700, most of those civs have their peak 1700-1900. (and steam power is mentioned as the beginning of the age)

I would put ideology starting in the middle of the Age and ramping up rapidly in importance. (ie part of say culture and domination victories)

 

[gdr_willter]

There isn‘t much correspondence between real world dates and what happens in the eras. The exploration era tech tree covers ca. 900-1500, but the era is about things that happened between 0-1700, roughly speaking. The modern era civs suggest a cutoff around 1600. But we also have examples that this not to be taken seriously. I think there is enough evidence that new world colonialism is a thing of the exploration era (and has a corresponding crisis). Yet, that doesn‘t contradict a 1500 cutoff. My guess is that turn one of the modern era is 1700 though, with industrialization techs being two techs away.

I'm not talking about dates in real world, but contexts between some huge events. Fall of the Spanish Empire in early modern days is not an inevitable situation, but the modern colonialism and its end after the great collisions of the global powers have such a reliable model for it.

 

[Evie]

So the part that interests you is an inevitable mechanism of history that should be in the genre but the part others care about that affected two entire continents is unimportant and just an accident and shouldn’t be there?

LOL.

 

[gdr_willter]

So the part that interests you is an inevitable mechanism of history that should be in the genre but the part others care about that affected two entire continents is unimportant and just an accident and shouldn’t be there?

No, I already told it we can see the Civ splitting crisis at the end of Age 2. But I'm saying it at the same time that this not means the colonialism and its end belongs to Age 2 and we still need modern colonialism in Age 3.

For reminding, we started it from this specific comment:

Independence movements in colonies seems more like a end of 2nd age crisis to me than a third age core theme.

Seeing the Age 3 which is full of the proud and ethical empires without any colony after the whole independence things overed at the end of Age 2 sounds wrong to me. Especially when we have France, Britain and Meiji in this Age.
That's why I strongly persist in the Age 3 colonialism. Division crisis of early colonial empires is surely okay with me too, but it must not be the finale of this theme.

 

[Siptah]

Seeing the Age 3 which is full of the proud and ethical empires without any colony after the whole independence things overed at the end of Age 2 sounds wrong to me. Especially when we have France, Britain and Meiji in this Age.
That's why I strongly persist in the Age 3 colonialism. Division crisis of early colonial empires is surely okay with me too, but it must not be the finale of this theme.

I mean, if we get a chance to role play as modern Algeria and help others left and right to get their independence, I wouldn‘t be opposed at all. I just don‘t see it as a focus in the base game.

There‘s so much that we all want to be going on in the last age + there is the actual run for victory, I‘m not sure warming up a topic from the previous era in the game is that appealing. The biggest mystery is whether there is a crisis at all in the modern age.

Why would you think France wouldn‘t have a colony in age 3? If you succeed in the crisis, you‘d keep all cities/towns, just as in the age 1 crisis.

 

[gdr_willter]

There‘s so much that we all want to be going on in the last age + there is the actual run for victory, I‘m not sure warming up a topic from the previous era in the game is that appealing. The biggest mystery is whether there is a crisis at all in the modern age.

Fair question, if we focused on the colony in the distant land. But settling and conquering the world is not only the theme of Age 2 and the distant land, it's ageless and worldwide. I'm sure about that the many Modern Civs will have conquest bonuses and it surely symbolize the modern colonial empires. We still have a chance to test them to stand or not, at the last spurt of the endgame.

I personally hope the last stage of Modern will be the minorly seperated era focused on "contemporary", which contains the fall of colonialism and many independent newborn states. I think this also provide the opportunity to the new form of Military Victory - not by conquering the world, but by supported by the world.

 

[Josephias]

I tend to see the modern age focused in the s.XIX "empires" more than in current countries so, while de-colonization may be included in potential ways (loyalty, foreign power conquer) I do not see it as a main topic yet. As comented in some points above, the bigger, "American" decolonization will be more part of a exploration era crisis (note it seems crisis can be of several ways and randomized each game, so I think in one game you may have colonies revolting, in other one plague spreading through your civ, in other religion wars, etc....)

Industrialization (and, I will add, Technological Progress) will be inded a theme, and I do expect several features based on it. Main one, the generation of manufactured resources (in the likes Civ VI Toys, Jeans, Perfumes..., and the spirit of Civ IV or Civ VI corporations). I expect to produce a manufactured resources you need a factory in a settlement, and two or more "base" raw resources assigned to it. The manufactured resource can then work for you and other players as an additional resource available in that settlement. Economic victory points can be awarded by:
- Manufactured resources you have access to
- Manufactured resources you are trading away (this is, trading resources gives points to the receptor -resource availability- and the trader).
- Manufactured resources you hold a monopoly position for bonus (this is, if you are the single source for a resource, more points are awarded to you).
Probaby the system must be tweaked a bit to avoid ups and downs in the victory points counter, but I expect we will be seeing somewhat similar to this.

I add Technological Progress as it is industrialization-linked and I feel will be the focus of science victory in this case. In civ'VI modern age, we are in the age were machines are revered and are expected to open multiple wonders to the world. Is the time of science fairs and world expos, and yes, it will culminate with one of the promises of all this technology: to reach the stars (space race), so science victory will probably have that, but I think, however, we can see more of these science-production races during the age, maybe linked to some wonders (so science will borrow now partly the mechanic for ancient age cultural path), and maybe linked to general town development with multiple types of buildings.or projects related to several "progress" milestones: railroads, electrification, radio,...

Tourism: Culture may be tourism-focused. Indeed in this era is when tourism and archeology make as well an important, if elitist, appearance. But elitists is not bad to consider it for victory points. - in fact, once something is popularized enough, probably would it would lose part of the "special" aura that makes it count for victory. Also, the trailer suggests works of art will be a thing, that we have not seen already, and these would fit as well in a tourism/influence - focused culture victory. Yet...

Ideology is other culture-strong focus that we expect to be added. In Civ V they managed, nevertheless to make it work hand-to-hand with tourism, but I see not both of them mixed in the cultural victory. Therefore, as some other posts suggested, ideology would be a principal contributor to military-expansionist victory, by generating blocks and benefiting the conquest of those in other ideology block (as exploration age benefits settling/conquering distant lands). You may even have a "peaceful" expansionist victory by pushing your ideology trough diplomatic actions and generating revolts. From what we have seen of governments, I do not know if it will match much with previous eras, but the fun of the system is that things can change.


UN / Cold War seem a bit late to be a major era mechanic in this scenario, but maybe a WMD-MAD crisis would work as a final climax. In the same way, post-WW2 decolonization - "peaceful" independence movements could work as a crisis. . <-- This is, Nuclear Ghandi will be the final Civ VI crisis
This does not fit the meme, but loss of economic power from states to corporations and market as well (shortage of resources, 29's crack?) could be also featured as a crisis. And of course pollution/global warning has been mentioned.

 

[stealth_nsk]

far closer to 1700, most of those civs have their peak 1700-1900. (and steam power is mentioned as the beginning of the age)

I would put ideology starting in the middle of the Age and ramping up rapidly in importance. (ie part of say culture and domination victories)

Yes, it's surely possible. But still, I think it would be too much to push all the XX-XXI things there, like aircraft, satellites, ideologies, internet, nuclear weapons, etc. - all the stuff which usually appear in civ endgame. To me putting all this in the last third/quarter of the age contradicts with the concept of ages a bit.

 

[Krikkit1]

Yes, it's surely possible. But still, I think it would be too much to push all the XX-XXI things there, like aircraft, satellites, ideologies, internet, nuclear weapons, etc. - all the stuff which usually appear in civ endgame. To me putting all this in the last third/quarter of the age contradicts with the concept of ages a bit.

I think it could be the last 1/2 ie

start at 1750 (industrialization in first column of techs/civics)
50 turns at 3 years per turn (1900) electrification in second column
25 turns at 2 years per turn (1950)
ideologies/combustion in 3rd column
nukes in 4th column
up to 125 turns at 1 year per turn (2075)
space race/computers columns 5-8

So if they expect you to win in 125-175 turns, the game ends between 2000-2050 (before you get to the final techs unless you are beelining space racing)

first 50 turns is the scramble (imperalizing all the weak civs/IPs)
but ideologies and nukes destroy that, and you shift to “liberating” them to be your allies aka corporate/military outposts
(cold war, etc….some civs get squashed but recover to strength ie irl Mughals, Qing…some get squashed but recover to low significance ie irl Buganda)