No more Pangea Scripts

[Gedemon]

Each dev reveal is saying to me that we are replacing a sandbox with a curated forced narrative. This will likely put some restrictions on what modders can do.

Things like mandatory civ switching and era crises, as well as doing a soft restart are probably baked in pretty deep

Pretty sure the conditions to unlock a civ are not hardcoded but exposed in a database, else we (modders) would not be able to add new civs, and one of the few mentions of modding in the interviews was about adding new civs.

 

[Olleus]

You know how you keep the sandbox element and have a completely different experience?
By starting a new game
Do you know what the difference between a sandbox that lets you start in a later era and a forced narrative that does what amounts to a soft restart at era changes?
The former isn’t forced on you

But the experience I want is to be forced to adapt - or at least having to make a meaningful choice between short-term costs and long-term gains around adapting or not adapting. I'd like the game to push back against me and reject simple linear plans; I want to have to surf the tide of history, not bulldoze a straight line through it. Starting a new game doesn't offer any of that, it's just an opportunity to make a different straight path in a slightly different direction.

Does this come at the expense of sandboxiness? Sure, but there's always a tension between strategy game and a sandbox. Personally, I welcome most moves towards the former. Your opinion may vary. But it's a matter of taste, not an objective good-or-bad.

Anyway, apologies for being led somewhat off topic.

 

[brewgod]

Hello Fellow Civ Fans,

After spending millions of dollars into a game for the past 5 years, Ed Beach and Firaxis is not going to give away the game at an expo in Cologne. The demo which people got to play was most likely limited to 15 turns and one small land mass. It's all speculation at this point until the official game is launched. Also patches and updates will come shortly after release and after 12 months the game will have a whole lot more options coming from Firaxis themselves and the modding community which have made my Civ 6 game experience feel like a whole new game. Again..."You Vote With Your Wallet" if you don't like it don't buy it that simple. Firaxis and 2K is a business to employ people they are not doing this out of the kindness of their heart. They have shareholders to answer to and loans to pay back for developing Civ 7. It's called Capitalism. Don't like it then don't support Firaxis and 2K and Sony and MSFT.

I feel like the fan base here wants a head coach of a NFL team to give out their play book to all teams at the start of the season after practicing for 4 months to be prepared for the upcoming season.

My 2 Cents.

Brew God

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

Per this dev interview, “the only thing we don’t really do are Pangea maps, unless you play just one Age”, and he confirms that AI civs are playing in the background on the New World during Antiquity.

 

[Professor Phobo]

Ah! That confirms it then. Shame. Ah well, maybe they can add "The Great Desert" or something later on.

 

[Zaarin]

he confirms that AI civs are playing in the background on the New World during Antiquity.

I'd wondered about that, and that's good to know.

 

[Krikkit1]

Per this dev interview, “the only thing we don’t really do are Pangea maps, unless you play just one Age”, and he confirms that AI civs are playing in the background on the New World during Antiquity.

Well you hopefully that’s an option/map type
“New World” contains
-Any player civ (default?) new world = old world
-AI civs only (default?)
-Independent Peoples only (Terra map)

And I look forward to the “Great Deserts” map option

 

[Hajee]

This is a shame

 

[GeneralZIft]

"Uhhh yeah we don't really do any of the fun stuff from the previous games. But can we interest you in perhaps all these new monetisation techniques?"
-TakeTwo Interactive

 

[AriochIV]

I don't see the play value in having half of the map inaccessible during the first Age. What is the upside? This seems like something done to force a narrative that has nothing to do with play value. It's not even historically accurate, as there was movement between hemispheres before the Exploration Age.

 

[shaglio]

I don't see the play value in having half of the map inaccessible during the first Age. What is the upside? This seems like something done to force a narrative that has nothing to do with play value. It's not even historically accurate, as there was movement between hemispheres before the Exploration Age.

If I were a betting man, I'd gamble that it is because a lot of people say that their game-play interest wanes after the initial exploration of the world is done. So by having half of the map inaccessible, they are trying to guarantee that there is still a sense of wonder from discovering more of the map in later stages of the game. I know, from what I've read here, that a lot of players don't bother playing the second half of the game - either the game ends too early or they check out. This "map hiding" solves the latter issue. The "ends early" problem has been solved by the new 3-Era model. If you're bored 1/3 of the way through the game, just play one of the 3 Eras and everything's good. If you're bored a 2/3 of the way through the game, just play two of the 3 Eras.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I don't see the play value in having half of the map inaccessible during the first Age. What is the upside? This seems like something done to force a narrative that has nothing to do with play value. It's not even historically accurate, as there was movement between hemispheres before the Exploration Age.

I am not fully on board yet because we just haven't seen enough, but I don't mind it in principle and even quite like it as an idea.

From a gameplay perspective, I like the thinking that each Age should be different, with slightly different rules and mechanics, and even slightly different maps. I agree that the best part of the game is the early exploration and settling phase, the race for space on the map. Give me that experience twice? Sounds fun!

From a flavour perspective, I see it as a literal representation of your empire's horizons expanding, this also works fine for me.

I have some reservations. I understand that it might feel forced or artificial, but as long as it is fun and interesting then I'm probably cool with that.

We'll see, I guess!

 

[AriochIV]

If I were a betting man, I'd gamble that it is because a lot of people say that their game-play interest wanes after the initial exploration of the world is done. So by having half of the map inaccessible, they are trying to guarantee that there is still a sense of wonder from discovering more of the map in later stages of the game. I know, from what I've read here, that a lot of players don't bother playing the second half of the game - either the game ends too early or they check out. This "map hiding" solves the latter issue. The "ends early" problem has been solved by the new 3-Era model. If you're bored 1/3 of the way through the game, just play one of the 3 Eras and everything's good. If you're bored a 2/3 of the way through the game, just play two of the 3 Eras.

But we already have that experience if you choose to play a map type like Continents or Terra, and it's done organically through the inherent inability to cross oceans rather than through the hand of the developer preventing it. And the player can choose whether he wants that experience or would rather have a different experience.

This restriction takes away Pangea and Fractal and other custom map gameplay and adds nothing.

 

[BuchiTaton]

- Colonialism, for the 16th-19th colonialism we need a map that mimic historical geographic conditions. This mean have half the map for the main civs (playables) in a core comunicated continent, plus the rest occupied by minor civs (non playables) in smaller continents separated by ocean or deserts. These oversea land should also have some valuable natural resources/luxuries.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

But we already have that experience if you choose to play a map type like Continents or Terra, and it's done organically through the inherent inability to cross oceans rather than through the hand of the developer preventing it. And the player can choose whether he wants that experience or would rather have a different experience.

This restriction takes away Pangea and Fractal and other custom map gameplay and adds nothing.

Too early to say definitively that it adds nothing, we've barely seen anything about the Exploration Age.

I think there is a potential benefit to structuring this experience, rather than keeping it organic; it allows them to add/remove systems that are tailored to this phase of the game, e.g. things that incentivise further exploration and diplomacy in a way that is more difficult in the linear structure of past Civ games.

 

[Krikkit1]

Just like we have military units to help show real world conquest, as opposed to only buildings settlers and traders..

 

[Nikolai II]

and it's done organically through the inherent inability to cross oceans rather than through the hand of the developer preventing it.

Perhaps they have a similar or same limitation this time? We have yet to see much of exploration.

 

[AriochIV]

Too early to say definitively that it adds nothing, we've barely seen anything about the Exploration Age.

I think there is a potential benefit to structuring this experience, rather than keeping it organic; it allows them to add/remove systems that are tailored to this phase of the game, e.g. things that incentivise further exploration and diplomacy in a way that is more difficult in the linear structure of past Civ games.

Well, that's what I'm saying. If there's a benefit, I'm not seeing it.

 

[Hajee]

And from a game play perspective, this means bee lining to ocean tech and chosing navel civ is a must have because you know that there is a land mass out there.

This mechanic forces you into a certian play style

 

[TreVor_ish]

Well, there is another way to keep the exploration for longer - bigger maps, with more players.
Which could bring more verity of interactions. Not only in exchanging goods like strategic resources or luxuries, but maybe arms, intel, technology.
Perhaps, I could destabilize a bigger region with more players, for economic gain. Enslave, vassalize, bribe, brake apart. You know, stuff that actually happened in the world.