Only 30 Civs in base game (+ Shawnee)

[JNR13]

Moderator Action: Attention, the source is this video

at 31 minutes!

Not sure about you guys, but this was just revealed at PAX Australia and I'm kinda devastated. This seems to be far below any of our estimations. Looks as if the 11 pips in exploration were correct, 10 average + Shawnee.

So my guesses would be:

Mississippi	Hawaii	America
Maya	Inca	Mexico
Han	Ming	Qing
Maurya	Chola	Mughal
Khmer	Indonesia	Siam
Rome	Spain	France
Greece	Norman	Britain
Persia	Mongolia	Meiji
Egypt	Abbasids	Germany (not as Abbasid successor, this spot was just the only one left)
Aksum	Songhai	Buganda

 

[chaosprophet]

Well, I was expecting more too but it makes sense, even decoupled from leaders they're so much harder to make now with all unique stuff and, if I understand what they said correctly, even having unique building versions for all civs.

Rather than the number itself versus expectations, what I'm more worried about this information, is that it means likely the interpretation people had from a previous info is correct and there is only standard size maps at launch even at single player on pc, as the number of civs may be too small for a huge map. Maybe if it is not 10/10/10, but then we already got 8 ancient, so even then it would be 8/11/11. I guess maybe if the time it increases the civ is really modern instead of exploration like we though and it is instead something like 9/9/12 or 8/10/12, then 12 for huge would be doable.

 

[pokiehl]

That’s disappointing. I let myself get hyped up for 45. Oh well.

 

[Daniel Boone]

When Civ 6 came out there were only 18 Civs in the base game (plus the Aztecs as a preorder bonus). There’s still 12 more civs in 7’s base game than in 6’s.

 

[JNR13]

When Civ 6 came out there were only 18 Civs in the base game (plus the Aztecs as a preorder bonus). There’s still 12 more civs in 7’s base game than in 6’s.

I think the formula of civ-swapping kind of changed expectations there.

 

[bite]

"Only" come on that is more than they ever have before.

 

[Trengilly]

I'm not all that surprised. They appear to be releasing a more fully featured Civilization game . . . and future revenue will come from Civilization packs rather than lots of expansions layering on extra rules and game systems.

31 is still a lot (even broken up into Eras). And we already know we have at least 8 more Civs coming in DLC in the next 7 months.

 

[Corgiwealth]

This on top of them showing that units seem to stop at WW2-era, no cold-war or contemporary units - thus I'm assuming no cold-war or contemporary gameplay or techs is also majorly disappointing. I was weary in the beginning but fell in-love with the major gameplay differences for this iteration, but I don't like at all how it seems they've left big areas of content out for future expansions that perviously were in the base game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

"Only" come on that is more than they ever have before.

Technically, yes. But it realistically means only 10 choices per age.

 

[JNR13]

"Only" come on that is more than they ever have before.

It is meant relative to basically all conversation about the game so far, not previous games.

 

[Trengilly]

This on top of them showing that units seem to stop at WW2-era, no cold-war or contemporary units - thus I'm assuming no cold-war or contemporary gameplay or techs is also majorly disappointing. I was weary in the beginning but fell in-love with the major gameplay differences for this iteration, but I don't like at all how it seems they've left big areas of content out for future expansions that perviously were in the base game.

Yes, I think a 4th Future Era is the most likely 'big' expansion. Before then they will be filling out with DLC Civilizations.

The entire 3 ages system is MUCH harder to layer additional rules into. And Ed has talked about wanting to provide a more feature complete game.

Future Era gets to add all the new stuff and additional Civs . . . either based on actual one or create new Future civs!

 

[moondog385]

Eh, as long as we get like 80+ by the end, it's okay.

 

[Zaarin]

That’s disappointing. I let myself get hyped up for 45. Oh well.

I was cautiously hoping for 40, but clearly I was not cautious enough.

 

[Corgiwealth]

Yes, I think a 4th Future Era is the most likely 'big' expansion. Before then they will be filling out with DLC Civilizations.

The entire 3 ages system is MUCH harder to layer additional rules into. And Ed has talked about wanting to provide a more feature complete game.

Future Era gets to add all the new stuff and additional Civs . . . either based on actual one or create new Future civs!

I'm not even talking about the Future Era however I mean things like; helicopters, missile ships, nuclear submarines and modern tanks. Or for buildings and techs things like supermarkets, nuclear power, drones, the internet. If units stop at sherman tanks, monopropeller fighters and riflemen then I assume techs do as well, which explains why modern cities are very industrialization-esq in their style. Its just disappointing that 2 base game ages seem to have been entirely removed from the design.

 

[Zaarin]

We've seen rockets launching. It's safe to say the third era does not end at WW2. I also remain firmly in the "we don't need more eras" camp.

 

[chaosprophet]

I was cautiously hoping for 40, but clearly I was not cautious enough.

I was expecting a worst case scenario of 12 per age, so at least 36. So was also very wrong, even though I admit it makes sense with the effort it seems to make them as I mentioned above.

 

[moondog385]

What civs would even be in a final era? Fictional civs like the Union of North and South America or a federated European Union? Would be kind of boring. Expanding the three they have (which already cover...everything) is the way to go.

 

[Trengilly]

We've seen rockets launching. It's safe to say the third era does not end at WW2. I also remain firmly in the "we don't need more eras" camp.

I agree we don't 'Need' more Eras. Mostly I just want them to NOT keep dumping new rule systems on top of the existing game (like Civ 6).

I want the game to be solid out the gate and not require DLC to make it good (or get ruined by too many gameplay DLC in an effort to keep bringing in revenue).

The three Era system is ideal for selling lots of Civilization packs, so hopefully that is where Firaxis can get the ongoing revenue they want.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

Rome	Norman	Britain
Greece	Abbasid	France
Maya	Mongolia	USA
Han China	Chola India	Mughal India
Aksum	Songhai	Buganda
Egypt	Spain	Meiji Japan
Khmer	Ming China	Siam
Maurya India	Majapahit?	Qing China?
Mississipi/Cahokia?	Shogunate Japan?	Ottoman?
Achaemenid Persia?	Inca?	Mexico?

Does this seem reasonable given what we know? (Playing it really cautious with what I'm counting as "confirmed" to avoid getting burned)

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

On second thought, Britain might not be as guaranteed as I assumed...