Only 30 Civs in base game (+ Shawnee)

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Each will have at least a unique military unit and a unique civilian unit, confirmed tonight in Australia. They also will have unique or semi-unique visuals for standard units, as shown in this still from tonight's presentation.

Humankind also had depictions of standard units that varied by culture. I forgot about the unique civilian units, though.

 

[notNamed]

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.

Well the game adopted Humankind's formula (which also had unique districts, unit graphics, leader graphics, soundtrack for each of them AND more historically accurate across the board compared to Civ7, which means even more work) and that launched with 60 civs. They certainly could have had at least 1-2 more per era.

 

[Zaarin]

Well the game adopted Humankind's formula (which also had unique districts, unit graphics, leader graphics, soundtrack for each of them AND more historically accurate across the board compared to Civ7, which means even more work) and that launched with 60 civs. They certainly could have had at least 1-2 more per era.

Though hopefully Civ7 will be a good game.

 

[pokiehl]

Well the game adopted Humankind's formula (which also had unique districts, unit graphics, leader graphics, soundtrack for each of them AND more historically accurate across the board as far as details are concerned) and that launched with 60 civs. They certainly could have had at least 1-2 more per era.

The Civ designs for Civ 7 have many more gameplay components, music, and graphics necessary than Humankind’s factions which are very basic for the most part.

It’s also an unfair comparison because Humankind has no leaders.

 

[AntSou]

Civ switching is the central innovation in Civ VII. It doesn't make a lot of sense to sabotage it by not having enough options at release.

"Here's what you'll be able to do with the new system... eventually."

 

[Xandinho]

I’m one of those who was expecting something between 36-45 civilizations, but looking at it from another perspective, although it’s really frustrating, having fewer civilizations than expected in the base game might indicate that they have a lot to explore with additional content for years to come. I believe it’s difficult for them to design such a large number of civilizations all at once, so they obviously need more time for research, design, and everything else.

 

[JNR13]

Civ switching is the central innovation in Civ VII. It doesn't make a lot of sense to sabotage it by not having enough options at release.

_"Here's what you'll be able to do with the new system... eventually."_

"Pay $130 on release for the intended launch-state experience!"

 

[AlexByrde]

I was expecting the total to be in the 30s, so I'm not surprised by the total, although it was at the low end of my guess. Not disappointed except that I would always want more. The outside chance at 45 was exciting.

Getting 8 more as dlc in the months after release gets us to 39, and I hope they can keep a good cadence of releases after. The more the merrier.

 

[notNamed]

The Civ designs for Civ 7 have many more gameplay components, music, and graphics necessary than Humankind’s factions which are very basic for the most part.

What? No.

EVERY SINGLE HUMANKIND CIV has unique unit and building graphics, soundtrack, leader clothes, city name list, quotes, inheritable bonuses, modified drawings of each single unit, a unique district and some more I'm forgetting.
The ONLY THING they don't have is that special tech tree but since that amounts to a simple +1 culture on X these are not exactly groundbreaking in design.

I can accept an argument like "Well we want to playtest the hell out of these to make sure they are at least somewhat balanced and prevent a similar situation to Humankind's broken launch balance." but the assets? Absolutely not. Civ 7 has almost the exact same asset needs for HALF the civs and unlike Humankind these assets are superbly ahistorical. Like look at the new "Han China" graphics they just spat out with circular gates, red lanterns, upturned eaves, stone walls, etc. This is the most generic Ming dynasty building one has ever seen and the reason for that is it's ridiculously cheap to make assets like that. Rather than putting in the effort to look for actual Han period architecture and using that.
And that's everything in Civ 7. Where Humankind spent extra time to even redo models and drawings that were pointed out as wrong, here you get the Google Images first result treatment.
There's nothing wrong with that as long as it works, looks pretty and people enjoy it but for the love of God stop even suggesting it's more effort than what Humankind's team did on their side. Because it is not. No matter how you look at it.

 

[JNR13]

It's also a bit of a shame that extending the roster by 50% will leave areas without representation that have been in the base game before or one of the earliest DLC. Central and Eastern Europe together might just have a single civ, Brazilians might be out again, ancient Mesopotamia seems to be out completely and both Byz and Ottomans are highly questionable at this point. Polynesia might have to do without a civ again as well.

 

[notNamed]

Though hopefully Civ7 will be a good game.

Possibly only 3 years into the future when subsequent DLCs and expansions fix it. It's not like Civ has a good track record on this point and people here were also hopeful and excited after playing the game during its development as seen here: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...mankind-beta-testers-from-civfanatics.672448/

I hope the game comes out well and succeeds just as I did with Humankind. But apart from having a famous IP attached to it, it's far too early to tell how it will end up. Much less to use it as an insult to someone else's work.

 

[FishFishFish]

So is it confirmed each era will have 10 civs, or could some eras have more civs than others?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

So is it confirmed each era will have 10 civs, or could some eras have more civs than others?

The only thing confirmed is 30(+1)

 

[AriochIV]

So is it confirmed each era will have 10 civs, or could some eras have more civs than others?

It's not confirmed, but given the list of what we know it certainly looks that way.

And since it sounds like civilizations can't be duplicated among players (otherwise the devs wouldn't have mentioned the issue of choice priority), it wouldn't make sense to imbalance the number of civs per Age. (Shawnee being the exception.)

 

[Krikkit1]

So is it confirmed each era will have 10 civs, or could some eras have more civs than others?

Some could have more
Confirmed civs are
8.7.7 so 8 more civs to place

 

[Zaarin]

Possibly only 3 years into the future when subsequent DLCs and expansions fix it. It's not like Civ has a good track record on this point

Civ6 was good on launch.

people here were also hopeful and excited after playing the game during its development as seen here: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...mankind-beta-testers-from-civfanatics.672448/

I was there. I was hopeful because I enjoyed Amplitude's previous games (at least Endless Space and Endless Space 2; Endless Legends was okay), but I don't think I've ever found a game more utterly disappointing--and I played Starfield. And unlike Civ5, Humankind never got a redemption arc.

But apart from having a famous IP attached to it

And a lead designer with a proven track record.

Much less to use it as an insult to someone else's work.

There's no nice way to say HK compares badly to just about anything you want to compare it to. It was a bad game.

 

[AriochIV]

Keep in mind that your maximum number of players is going to be the number in the Age with the fewest.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It's disappointing, but it's been clear that Firaxis believes the premiere choice when starting a game is leader, not civ. And the number of base game leaders was said to exceed previous iterations in the most recent dev diary.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

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

And now we have Viet queen one of leader to choose.

I can't figure out what could be potential evolutionary path of Meiji Japan.

Persia -> Mongolia -> Meiji is very OFF to me.
it better be Han -> Ming -> Meiji. (a pun maybe? because the two late Civ shares the same chinese character (明))

 

[JNR13]

And now we have Viet queen one of leader to choose.

I can't figure out what could be potential evolutionary path of Meiji Japan.

Persia -> Mongolia -> Meiji is very OFF to me.
it better be Han -> Ming -> Meiji. (a pun maybe? because the two late Civ shares the same chinese character (明))

Mongolia, Indonesia, Ming are all decent guesses I think.