New Civ Game Guide: Persia

[Zaarin]

Yeah, but lions did exist in Ancient Greece, Rome, while lions and bears did not.

Greece, yes, but not in Rome--pretty sure lions were extinct everywhere in Europe except the Balkans by the time Rome was traditionally said to be founded, and even in the Balkans by the Roman period (or not long after). But I see your point--a creature of memory rather than far-off lands. (Doesn't stop Medieval illustrations of lions from far off lands from being hilarious, though.)

 

[Jkchart]

Yet Chola is just Chola, not Chola India.

Actually they’re being inconsistent on their own website

If you open the Chola page, the top of that civ game guide says Chola India

 

[pokiehl]

Great to see Persia but I’m disappointed in a couple aspects:

1. I’d rather have a unique quarter for Persia: “Satrap’s Court.” The governance innovations of Persia are entirely unexplored in Civ, and Civ 7’s renewed focus on diplomacy via Influence was a great opportunity to get into this design space for Persia.

Here, we have the pairidaeza again, which is nice, but I don’t like how the architecture and decorations don’t feel Achaemenid.

2. It’s a bummer the unique civilian unit isn’t the Satrap in the same vein as the unique units for Egypt, Greece, and Han China. There’s a list of historical Achaemenid satraps a mile long.

As it stands, the design kind of feels like a retread of Civ 6 Persia.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

1. I’d rather have a unique quarter for Persia: “Satrap’s Court.” The governance innovations of Persia are entirely unexplored in Civ, and Civ 7’s renewed focus on diplomacy via Influence was a great opportunity to get into this design space for Persia.

As it stands, we have the pairidaeza again, which is nice, but I don’t like how the architecture and decorations don’t feel Achaemenid.

2. It’s a bummer the unique civilian unit isn’t the Satrap in the same vein as the unique units for Egypt, Greece, and Han China. There’s a list of historical Achaemenid satraps a mile long.

I feel like the Pairidaeza is too beautiful to take away. It's probably my favorite thing about the civ.

I agree about having a unique Satrap though, over another commander.

 

[Zaarin]

I feel like the Pairidaeza is too beautiful to take away. It's probably my favorite thing about the civ.

I agree about having a unique Satrap though, over another commander.

Could still give it to Sassania, where it might even fit better. (Though after seeing Abbasids get a mosque...I think Sassanids definitely need a darb-e mehr/atashgah as a unique building.)

 

[dagriggstar]

Trying to play through all the civilizations in VI made me realise a key reason I generally avoided straight military civilizations in the past - the lack of an science/culture bonus puts you behind to the point where you might be unlocking your UU way too late (Genghis Khan Mongolia for example). Scythia was the only like straight military civilization I felt like I ever got going really well in part due to double production light cavalry pillage army.

With that in mind this take on Persia gives me a similar vibe, it's just the Pairidaeza helping you progress, so much will depend on when you can unlock that. Achaemenid tier 1 specifies civilization so I'm guessing you can't capture the independent peoples to try get your ball rolling.

Trung Trac is only good if her start bias (tropical) overwrites Persias and the Pairidaeza can be built on tropical terrain. Alternatively maybe Augustus is sneaky good as you pick off a soft-target town from each of your neighbours.

In VI if you pick an early warfare civilization you have decent odds of finding a good target (anyone without bonuses in the ancient era basically). In VII, the only easy target is probably Aksum (Naval UU, no land unit help in their kit). Persia itself might even be the next easiest target, because they don't have as much help on defence and are more likely to be behind in the tech/culture races.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Ah, but if Alexander had lived but a few years longer, his next projects were the circumnavigation of the Arabian Peninsula and the conquest of western North Africa (Seleucid Carthage?) and Italy (Rome the Bactria of the Middle Ages?), which would have laid any future Roman Empire in the ground, not the groundwork . . .

This means Greater Helenic States would instead replace Romans and Pezhetairoi pikemen would became standard military unit instead of Roman Legion?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

This means Greater Helenic States would instead replace Romans and Pezhetairoi pikemen would became standard military unit instead of Roman Legion?

Supposedly, Alexander was already contemplating changing the organization of the Pezhetairoi to combine them with Persian archers in the units. The proposal (which may or may not be true, it is mentioned exactly once after Alexander died, and never followed up on by his Successors) was to have ranks of archers in the rear of ranks of pikes, so they could provide supporting fire as the unit advanced or defended. This shows that he was not 'welded' to the pike phalanx as the main combat infantry force, so who knows what he and his successors might have fielded 100 - 200 years later.

Again, flash forward to the late Medieval/early Renaissance, and European armies used pikes (Swiss and Flemings), pikes with halberds or halberds only (early Swiss), half-pikes (the Scots at Bannockburn) and later, of course, combined them with crossbows and muskets/arquebusses in the first 'pike and shot' formations. In a period of near-continuous warfare against opponents as different as Carthaginians, Romans, Gauls, and possibly the Lusitanian/Celtiberian groups, who knows what the original Macedonian phalanx, backed by near-infinite resources, might have turned into?

 

[Fummy]

Personally I feel like the Civic Spada is a bit odd. They made it so that the reduced maintenance is the temporary thing and the increased unit production is the tradition when I think it should be the other way around. Losing the reduced maintenance cost when you progress to the exploration age could mean a heavy economic hit assuming you haven't lost your grand army, which you shouldn't have. On the other hand increased production to units seems like the sort of thing that should have been confined to the ancient era, when Persia actually made these large armies. As it is you can keep the tradition to turn out units faster later in the game but suffer the regular maintenance cost. Better would be to spin out as many units as you can while you still have the Kara civic and then use the reduced maintenance to maintain this force for the rest of the game.

Basically economic stuff should be tied to a tradition so you can have stable transitions without necessarily going backwards, military stuff can be lost because you can already keep your old units.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Could still give it to Sassania, where it might even fit better. (Though after seeing Abbasids get a mosque...I think Sassanids definitely need a darb-e mehr/atashgah as a unique building.)

As long as it stays in the game, I don't care which Persia it goes too. You are right that since religion won't come until the second age, and there most likely aren't any more universal worship buildings, they would need a fire temple.

 

[The Fanatical]

Greece, yes, but not in Rome--pretty sure lions were extinct everywhere in Europe except the Balkans by the time Rome was traditionally said to be founded, and even in the Balkans by the Roman period (or not long after). But I see your point--a creature of memory rather than far-off lands. (Doesn't stop Medieval illustrations of lions from far off lands from being hilarious, though.)

That might not be true. Etruscan art depicted them heavily after the date of Rome's foundation. I think the most safe bet for the extinction of lions in Italy is the date of the first recorded Venatio in the 2nd century BC, and definitely not before the founding of the Republic in 509 BC. Will the Etruscans supposedly get another lion symbol if they appear in the game then? The answer is yes. The more lions the merrier, since I am a fan.

675-650 BC parade fibula with lions

6th century BC lion and leopard hunting scene

Late 6th century BC lion (left) and leopard (right) from the Tomb of the Jugglers

 

[Zaarin]

Will the Etruscans supposedly get another lion symbol if they appear in the game then?

I'd happily give them Rome's slot.

 

[The Fanatical]

I'd happily give them Rome's slot.

Both is good.

 

[Zaarin]

Both is good.

TBF I'd happily give just about anyone Rome's slot. Corded Ware Culture? Give 'em Rome's slot. Pollux from accounting? Give him Rome's slot. The New California Republic? They can have Rome's slot. The Most Serene Republic of San Marino? Sure, why not Rome's slot?

 

[Navelgazer]

Wow, this one looks exciting to me, which is wild because I generally don't enjoy warmongering civs (in previous games, at least) but the bonuses here just make it appear fun in a way that going militaristic usually doesn't for me. That said, it's similar to Civ6 Persia to a degree that I'm not sure any of the other Civ7 builds we've seen so far have been, and I love playing as Persia in Civ6 even without pushing for a domination victory. I like how Xerxes' personae both compliment it well in very different ways, too, and it seems like Persia is likely to be a powerhouse to go up against. I'm still probably going for Aksum for my first game, but this is the first Civ I've seen that is making me question that.

Also, from what we know about Amina's bonuses so far (+1 resource capacity in cities, +1 gold for each resource assigned to cities, +5 combat strength on all units in plains and desert), she looks like a very strong leader for Persia as well.

As for the Hazarapatis, I can't remember what we know about Commanders vis-a-vis new ages - do they stick around? Can they be killed? i.e., given that what makes the Hazarapatis unique is its free promotion, is that a bonus which will, in a sense, last the whole game as long as long as you keep that Commander?

 

[thecrazyscot]

I'd be cool with the Republic of Rome being given Rome's slot...why does the empire get all the attention??

 

[Zaarin]

As for the Hazarapatis, I can't remember what we know about Commanders vis-a-vis new ages - do they stick around? Can they be killed?

Yes, commanders stick around, though unique commanders become ordinary commanders. They can be killed, but they can be "revived," I believe.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Yes, commanders stick around, though unique commanders become ordinary commanders. They can be killed, but they can be "revived," I believe.

"Old soldiers never die, they just go back in the build queue."

 

[The Fanatical]

I'd be cool with the Republic of Rome being given Rome's slot...why does the empire get all the attention??

The leader could have been changed this time. It's always Julius Caesar or Octavian Augustus. Scipio Africanus (the man who defeated Hannibal Barca) is just as interesting and would have unearthed more the Republican era of Rome.

 

[Zaarin]

The leader could have been changed this time. It's always Julius Caesar or Octavian Augustus. Scipio Africanus (the man who defeated Hannibal Barca) is just as interesting and would have unearthed more the Republican era of Rome.

This made me realize...for a long time I've wanted Septimius Severus for the irony of a Carthaginian leading Rome. In Civ7, eventually, maybe, I can have Hannibal Barca lead Rome.