No more Pangea Scripts

[Krikkit1]

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

That tech might not be the only thing you need to actually expand into the new world… settlement distance to capital could be a significant barrier (which might take multiple civics and techs and policies to work around)

Given the Mughals are Modern, it seems that you would have only just begun to colonize/conquer the coasts by the time Modern Begins.

I mean if you look at the IRL over ocean colonizers
earliest:
Norse, Polynesians
next:
Spain, Portugal
Final:
English, French, Dutch

Getting their late had a benefit (2 of the 6 could be described as major powers G7, security council, nukes, etc … and it isn’t the first two)

 

[Atlas627]

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.

I don't see why it "adds nothing". Guaranteeing that there is unexplored territory means they can add specific mechanics that actually make that unexplored territory worthwhile. That's a lot! We don't yet know which ways they'll make it worthwhile, though. Nevertheless, it doesn't prevent custom map gameplay, it would just mean the game isn't balanced for it...which is already true just by it being a custom map.

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

No, because that oceanfaring tech will be in Age 2, which you cannot reach. By the time you get to Age 2, you should have built up your empire in such a way that you'll know whether beelining for oceanfaring is a good strategy for you or not. It is definitely possible that your new civ will incentivize building up a religious base at home, rather than exploring. The only guarantee here is that choosing an exploration-based civ will at least not be a total waste of time, because there's something to discover. How good that is will be different from game to game, hopefully mostly in ways that you can determine from your home territory, so you can make this decision strategically.

 

[moysturfurmer]

That tech might not be the only thing you need to actually expand into the new world… settlement distance to capital could be a significant barrier (which might take multiple civics and techs and policies to work around)

Given the Mughals are Modern, it seems that you would have only just begun to colonize/conquer the coasts by the time Modern Begins.

I mean if you look at the IRL over ocean colonizers
earliest:
Norse, Polynesians
next:
Spain, Portugal
Final:
English, French, Dutch

Getting their late had a benefit (2 of the 6 could be described as major powers G7, security council, nukes, etc … and it isn’t the first two)

It was mentioned that the political tumult of the early 19th century was the marker they’re using for the Exploration/Modern break. Your colonial wars of independence in North & South America, popular revolutions in Europe, etc. So I’m figuring the period of Colonization is meant to have come to an end by the time the Modern Age begins.

 

[bbbt]

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.

So obligatory continents. Or obligatory pangea for multiplayer. How will that work with TSL maps? Basically no multiplayer TSL (at least with an ancient era start)? No TSL Europe/Asia/etc maps? No pangea/inland sea/highlands/etc maps?

That seems a fairly dramatic (and limiting) jump from previous versions. Hopefully it enables enough interesting mechanics to make up for the variety removed.

 

[CrackerJack45]

That seems a fairly dramatic (and limiting) jump from previous versions. Hopefully it enables enough interesting mechanics to make up for the variety removed.

I would imagine (and hope) that if they aren't doing the same variety as previous games then they'd have a large variety of new map scripts to pick from, though I don't actually know what those would look like.

 

[local_hero]

It just hit me that the expanding map opens up for some exciting changes to a scientific victory. I didn't like this victory condition very much in Civ 6, just completing several space-related objectives. But what if exploring the poles could be (the first?) part of achieving a scientific victory? I guess sending an expedition to space would still be the ultimate step but yeah.

If the arctic areas are explorable in the age of exploration, maybe you need to research some modern era techs to be able to enter the arctic coastal sea tiles, to embark etc.

Even if it's not in, I think the endeavours to reach the poles / find the nortwest passage etc were interesting periods. I mean, they are probably more likely ro retain the space race as the scientific victory conditions, but yeah... There's potential.

 

[moysturfurmer]

It just hit me that the expanding map opens up for some exciting changes to a scientific victory. I didn't like this victory condition very much in Civ 6, just completing several space-related objectives. But what if exploring the poles could be (the first?) part of achieving a scientific victory? I guess sending an expedition to space would still be the ultimate step but yeah.

If the arctic areas are explorable in the age of exploration, maybe you need to research some modern era techs to be able to enter the arctic coastal sea tiles, to embark etc.

Even if it's not in, I think the endeavours to reach the poles / find the nortwest passage etc were interesting periods. I mean, they are probably more likely ro retain the space race as the scientific victory conditions, but yeah... There's potential.

The trouble with that is, the Earths of Civ don’t have poles. The planets aren’t spheres, they’re cylinders and toroids.

Obviously the mechanic would still work, in a gameplay sense, but I would wonder if they would try to avoid highlighting an inherent weakness of the engine.

 

[local_hero]

Yeah, I realised that too, unless you have a sphere the "poles" will be a thin line at the top and the bottom.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

It just hit me that the expanding map opens up for some exciting changes to a scientific victory. I didn't like this victory condition very much in Civ 6, just completing several space-related objectives. But what if exploring the poles could be (the first?) part of achieving a scientific victory? I guess sending an expedition to space would still be the ultimate step but yeah.

If the arctic areas are explorable in the age of exploration, maybe you need to research some modern era techs to be able to enter the arctic coastal sea tiles, to embark etc.

Even if it's not in, I think the endeavours to reach the poles / find the nortwest passage etc were interesting periods. I mean, they are probably more likely ro retain the space race as the scientific victory conditions, but yeah... There's potential.

Nice idea!

Given the stated intention of reducing end game monotony, you would think (hope) that once they agreed on a three Age structure, and once they realised that they could have different systems and mechanics in each Age, that they would get creative with this. There are definitely going to be some things from past Civ games that will no longer be possible (e.g. pangea maps, very early circumnavigation) but hopefully there will be many new and interesting ways to play through each Age, and the campaign as a whole will feel fresh.

I know that people have expressed concern about forced narratives and curbing of the sandbox, but honestly I think this has potential to massively increase the various paths through the game. For all it's apparent freedom, VI always felt quite linear to me, really.

I think you've got be realistic and recognise that they're unlikely to have realised the full potential of these changes at the time of launch, but imo the potential is huge and exciting.

 

[Krikkit1]

It was mentioned that the political tumult of the early 19th century was the marker they’re using for the Exploration/Modern break. Your colonial wars of independence in North & South America, popular revolutions in Europe, etc. So I’m figuring the period of Colonization is meant to have come to an end by the time the Modern Age begins.

The Mughals are Modern…which suggests more 1700 than 1850… By 1700 or even 1770 only a small portion of the Americas were actually under the control of old world powers (as opposed to claimed by them)
Notably that portion was a lot smaller in 1850 than 1750)

 

[UWHabs]

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

I wonder if they could build in desert and jungle tiles that are impassable until the age of exploration (and block all vision), and then just set up a map script that makes sure there's a full chain of those tiles (and mountains) if you wanted a Pangaea map but still add in the expanding terrain. I'm not sure if you would want every desert and jungle to be that way, otherwise you're going to have some very weird isolated lands. But if you could create a new level of terrain that opens up in the later ages, you could still have a Pangaea-style map in the end where the major landmass is connected, but that includes lands you can't reach until the 2nd age.

 

[Krikkit1]

I wonder if they could build in desert and jungle tiles that are impassable until the age of exploration (and block all vision), and then just set up a map script that makes sure there's a full chain of those tiles (and mountains) if you wanted a Pangaea map but still add in the expanding terrain. I'm not sure if you would want every desert and jungle to be that way, otherwise you're going to have some very weird isolated lands. But if you could create a new level of terrain that opens up in the later ages, you could still have a Pangaea-style map in the end where the major landmass is connected, but that includes lands you can't reach until the 2nd age.

I could see special jungle tiles (and mountain tiles and ice tiles) being impassable until the Third Age (at least to major civs)…(mountain and ice definitely)

 

[Leyrann]

I could see special jungle tiles (and mountain tiles and ice tiles) being impassable until the Third Age (at least to major civs)…(mountain and ice definitely)

I'm actually not a fan of impassible mountains, and never have been. It's difficult to traverse mountains, yes, but even in ancient times it was by no means impossible, in particular for individuals such as scouts or occasional traders. Not to mention that this game has never properly represented mountain valleys.

I've just returned from my latest alpine holiday (a yearly tradition), and the entire Alps are crisscrossed with U-shaped, glacier-carved valleys that even a prehistoric tribe would easily have been able to enter, explore and live in. Granted, most of them eventually reach dead ends, but even that is not a constant - the Brenner Pass crosses the Alpine watershed, with the Inn (Donau) as northern basin and the Adige (Po) as southern basin, and even at it's highest point it's a U-shaped valley, easily traversable to anyone. You can walk from the Po valley to southern Germany without ever having to ascend beyond 1370 meters above sea level (about 4500 feet), or ever coming across a steep slope.

Granted, the Brenner Pass is an extreme example, and most passes are higher than that. But there are plenty of alpine valleys which end in a horseshoe shape of mountains, where the lowest pass across those mountains is merely some 2000 or so meters in height. Even without a path, if you've got a (temporary or permanent) base in that horseshoe at, say, 1500 meters, you can ascend to the pass, see if there's something interesting on the other side that you want to explore in the future, and descend back towards your base in one day. Keep in mind, also, that above a certain height (~1800 meters for the Alps), you find yourself above the treeline, pretty much guaranteeing good vision and the ability to see where you're going - or indeed which pass looks like you can get up there and check the other side.

There are exceptions (a few years ago I was in a valley that was so difficult to enter from the front (until they built a road) that it was originally settled across a pass from the back), but I'd say at least 70% of mountainous land (at least in the Alps) was accessible even in ancient times. Not all of that would be viable (let alone valuable) for settling, of course, but it's more than enough to allow you to find the bits that are useful, such as all the valleys (many of which, when U-shaped, are nearly as flat as my home country of the Netherlands...), many of the Alpine meadows higher up on the mountains, and so on.

Tl;dr bring back traversable mountains. The impassable mountain system makes no sense.

 

[Krikkit1]

I'm actually not a fan of impassible mountains, and never have been. It's difficult to traverse mountains, yes, but even in ancient times it was by no means impossible, in particular for individuals such as scouts or occasional traders. Not to mention that this game has never properly represented mountain valleys.

I've just returned from my latest alpine holiday (a yearly tradition), and the entire Alps are crisscrossed with U-shaped, glacier-carved valleys that even a prehistoric tribe would easily have been able to enter, explore and live in. Granted, most of them eventually reach dead ends, but even that is not a constant - the Brenner Pass crosses the Alpine watershed, with the Inn (Donau) as northern basin and the Adige (Po) as southern basin, and even at it's highest point it's a U-shaped valley, easily traversable to anyone. You can walk from the Po valley to southern Germany without ever having to ascend beyond 1370 meters above sea level (about 4500 feet), or ever coming across a steep slope.

Granted, the Brenner Pass is an extreme example, and most passes are higher than that. But there are plenty of alpine valleys which end in a horseshoe shape of mountains, where the lowest pass across those mountains is merely some 2000 or so meters in height. Even without a path, if you've got a (temporary or permanent) base in that horseshoe at, say, 1500 meters, you can ascend to the pass, see if there's something interesting on the other side that you want to explore in the future, and descend back towards your base in one day. Keep in mind, also, that above a certain height (~1800 meters for the Alps), you find yourself above the treeline, pretty much guaranteeing good vision and the ability to see where you're going - or indeed which pass looks like you can get up there and check the other side.

There are exceptions (a few years ago I was in a valley that was so difficult to enter from the front (until they built a road) that it was originally settled across a pass from the back), but I'd say at least 70% of mountainous land (at least in the Alps) was accessible even in ancient times. Not all of that would be viable (let alone valuable) for settling, of course, but it's more than enough to allow you to find the bits that are useful, such as all the valleys (many of which, when U-shaped, are nearly as flat as my home country of the Netherlands...), many of the Alpine meadows higher up on the mountains, and so on.

Tl;dr bring back traversable mountains. The impassable mountain system makes no sense.

If they have a height system, then passable mountains can be high altitude hills.

it may be that cliffs (and ice) will be the barrier that’s only passes in modern.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

The trouble with that is, the Earths of Civ don’t have poles. The planets aren’t spheres, they’re cylinders and toroids.

Obviously the mechanic would still work, in a gameplay sense, but I would wonder if they would try to avoid highlighting an inherent weakness of the engine.

Science victory in Civ should be related to discovering "what exists on the ends of this cylinder we inhabit?"

 

[MasterPaw]

Ed beach mentioned archipelago map where there is an ocean between archipelagos so that's probably a map type still existing

 

[Atlas627]

The Mughals are Modern…which suggests more 1700 than 1850… By 1700 or even 1770 only a small portion of the Americas were actually under the control of old world powers (as opposed to claimed by them)
Notably that portion was a lot smaller in 1850 than 1750)

My guess is, much like how the end of Antiquity will have different crises that historically occurred at different times, the crises that represent the end of Exploration will have occurred at different times. If Antiquity is the time of the old world and Exploration is the time of discovering new lands, then Modern is the time of globalization and interconnectedness. So crises should be due to the new interconnectedness that civs aren't ready for, and surviving the crisis is what directs your civ to adapt to the new Age.

So crises might be Revolutions, or the Seven Years' War (which is arguably World War Zero, since England and France fought in the Americas and India), a Succession War (a crisis a civ might be able to actually come out ahead of, if they can beat the coalition against them. Or maybe it could create some sort of team play), Severe Weather disaster (could be a famine caused by cold snap or drought, of which there were several around this time, though this one doesn't fit the theme of interconnectedness), a Pox Epidemic (Smallpox continued to ravage native communities, and there were/are other Pox viruses), an Economic Crisis (the South Sea Bubble, Mississippi Company, or Tulip Mania), or Isolationism (which would be in contrast to the upcoming Modern Age, so this would put your civ behind at the start of the next Age).

These all occurred from the late 1600s to early 1800s, and importantly all before major Industrialization, which will probably be the start of the new Age. So yeah, I agree, colonization was in full swing, but imperialism requires the technological advances in transportation, communication, and survival that come with the Industrial Revolution, which will be represented in the Modern Age.

 

[The_J]

[]...

I mean if you look at the IRL over ocean colonizers
earliest:
Norse, Polynesians
[...]

Ed beach mentioned archipelago map where there is an ocean between archipelagos so that's probably a map type still existing

Yeah, I think right now everyone is locked a bit in their thoughts on a one old-world continent, and one new-world continent.
But easy other options are:

• Old-world archipelago, new-world continent
• Old-world archipelago, new-world archipelago
• Old-world continent, new-world archipelago

In that way you still get a lot of options for early ocean-faring civs.

Not to mention: I don't think it has been said that there will be one old-world and one new-world.
There could easily be multiple new-world continents.
Or the old-world is split over multiple, which can only be reached in the 2nd age. So you get a colonized new-world, and an un-colonized new-world.
Or imagine a flat earth map, with one old-world in the west, one in the east, and the new-world in the middle.

Multiple new-worlds, potentially colonized also allows you strategic options:

• Do you load your fleet with settlers and scouts to peacefully colonize an empty continent? What if you find a full continent?
• Do you load it mixed, with military, to conquer some city states?
• Or fully with military, to conquer another old-world? But what if you don't find it fast?

And in which direction do you sail?

If you see that another civ is faster with dispatching their fleet, what do you do?

• Sail in another direction, hoping to be faster?
• Gamble on that they loaded their army in, and invade them?

There are soooo many interesting options.

It just hit me that the expanding map opens up for some exciting changes to a scientific victory. I didn't like this victory condition very much in Civ 6, just completing several space-related objectives. But what if exploring the poles could be (the first?) part of achieving a scientific victory? I guess sending an expedition to space would still be the ultimate step but yeah.

If the arctic areas are explorable in the age of exploration, maybe you need to research some modern era techs to be able to enter the arctic coastal sea tiles, to embark etc.

Even if it's not in, I think the endeavours to reach the poles / find the nortwest passage etc were interesting periods. I mean, they are probably more likely ro retain the space race as the scientific victory conditions, but yeah... There's potential.

As you mentioned, the poles might not work well, but I think that bonuses for circumnavigating the world (as in Civ3), and exploring the coast line of the new world will probably be a thing.

I'm actually not a fan of impassible mountains, and never have been. It's difficult to traverse mountains, yes, but even in ancient times it was by no means impossible, in particular for individuals such as scouts or occasional traders. Not to mention that this game has never properly represented mountain valleys.
[]...

Tl;dr bring back traversable mountains. The impassable mountain system makes no sense.

On the other hand, you need to see that Siberia was mostly empty, with very little humans, despite that there were not that many mountains.
Having a gameplay feature, which at least seems logical, to preven the colonization of the whole continent, would still be interesting.

 

[GeneralZIft]

Yeah, I think right now everyone is locked a bit in their thoughts on a one old-world continent, and one new-world continent.
But easy other options are:

• Old-world archipelago, new-world continent
• Old-world archipelago, new-world archipelago
• Old-world continent, new-world archipelago

In that way you still get a lot of options for early ocean-faring civs.

Not to mention: I don't think it has been said that there will be one old-world and one new-world.
There could easily be multiple new-world continents.
Or the old-world is split over multiple, which can only be reached in the 2nd age. So you get a colonized new-world, and an un-colonized new-world.
Or imagine a flat earth map, with one old-world in the west, one in the east, and the new-world in the middle.

Multiple new-worlds, potentially colonized also allows you strategic options:

• Do you load your fleet with settlers and scouts to peacefully colonize an empty continent? What if you find a full continent?
• Do you load it mixed, with military, to conquer some city states?
• Or fully with military, to conquer another old-world? But what if you don't find it fast?

And in which direction do you sail?

If you see that another civ is faster with dispatching their fleet, what do you do?

• Sail in another direction, hoping to be faster?
• Gamble on that they loaded their army in, and invade them?

There are soooo many interesting options.


As you mentioned, the poles might not work well, but I think that bonuses for circumnavigating the world (as in Civ3), and exploring the coast line of the new world will probably be a thing.


On the other hand, you need to see that Siberia was mostly empty, with very little humans, despite that there were not that many mountains.
Having a gameplay feature, which at least seems logical, to preven the colonization of the whole continent, would still be interesting.

One of those things that has potential but I need to see it in-game. It's not enough for it to be potentially interesting in my mind, I expect the developers to properly follow through and not half arse it you know?

 

[pokiehl]

There are soooo many interesting options.

A really great point I think people aren't realizing. Everyone seems to be assuming that the new world will just be a continent blob.

A good example of how feasible your idea is can be gleaned from what @Gedemon did for his Civ 6 YNAMP. The "new world" map options are incredibly customizable. Essentially what Gedemon did is allow both sides of the world to each spawn their own separate map scripts. So one part might be the pangea script by itself (a big landmass) and another part could be like the Continents script by itself (meaning 2 continents, potentially even separated themselves by ocean!). Or any number of other permutations like you suggested.