Only 30 Civs in base game (+ Shawnee)

[Vincent_lacruz]

"Only" 30 civ at launch is still not bad. Vanilla Civ was always a bit "bareboned", that is to say there are mainly the core mechanisms of the game. More complexity is then reinforced with big or small DLCs, along with Civs that use those new mechanisms.

If you look at civ 6, there were 18 civs at launch. Now there are 67 of thems... So a lot of capacity to grow^^.

 

[queenpea]

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.

I was scolded specifically on these forums for worrying that we would have around 10 civs per era on launch and was also told that 45 was the working estimate.

Back to my worry beads…

 

[Kyriakos]

The more I look at the possible progressions, the more I have to fight back vomiting
But at least Shawnee is in.

 

[dagriggstar]

42 wonders on the confirmed list for 31 civilisations so 11 leftover which strikes me as a weird number. Unless the civilpedia was cut off at the top/bottom (that was our source for most of them right? Some streamers game ?)

3-4 “unassigned” per age ?

 

[Kyriakos]

Not that I would infer things on a logical basis with games, but maybe (maybe) the existence of Abbasid in the second era implies that Byzantine will be there too eventually, as Abbasid is very clearly linked to pre-discovery of the new world.
Like I said, though, I wouldn't deem that deduction as secure at all, this isn't a math system but a game company.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I suspected we would get a lower number as soon as I saw the transition screen in the Rome showcase, but 10 is a disappointing number. Yes, i KNOW it's 30 + Shawnee, but it's effectively 10.33. You + 9 opponents at best.

Oh well, at least we have an explanation why Greece => Normans. There's literally no other European Civ besides Greece and Rome in the Ancient Era. (which also lowers the odds of many more European leaders, no? You can't have a third of the leaders in the game default to one of two Ancient Era Civs.)

Assuming it's 10 per era, that would fill up our roster for Antiquity, no? Aksum, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Maurya, Khmer, Maya, Han, Persia, Mississipians?

 

[Kyriakos]

Even Greece->Spain would have made some (more) sense.

 

[Siptah]

Even Greece->Spain would have made some (more) sense.

I‘m pretty sure that Greece unlocks Spain. There‘s no evidence so far, but everything else would be a big surprise with only two European civs in the first and second age.

 

[Kyriakos]

I don't see why Norman is there, tbh. Unless the argument is purely geographic (need a civ in the northern half of Europe for era2). Then again, Civ7 created this problem, so I won't give it points for "solving it" like this.
For all the talk about including more civs outside Europe, they made sure that France/Germany/Spain/Britain would be all in the first game, let alone that the last era will have the main current markets. Isn't this "worst of both worlds"?

 

[Lord Lakely]

There won't be a single European Civ in this game that doesn't have Rome and Greece as their starting point.

Well maybe a few (Russia?) might have Persia over either , which lol.

I don't see why Norman is there, tbh. Unless the argument is purely geographic (need a civ in the northern half of Europe for era2). Then again, Civ7 created this problem, so I won't give it points for "solving it" like this.
For all the talk about including more civs outside Europe, they made sure that France/Spain/Germany/France/Britain would be all in the first game.

The Normans basically cover France, England, Italy and the Vikings in one fell swoop. If you're limiting yourself to only a handful of Civs per era upon release, you need to cover as much ground with as few Civs as possible. I expect maybe ONE more European Civ at most in the Exploration era besides the Normans and Spain (whether it'll be Slavic, Germanic, Byzantine or none at all will reveal itself in due time.)

 

[queenpea]

I suspected we would get a lower number as soon as I saw the transition screen in the Rome showcase, but 10 is a disappointing number. Yes, i KNOW it's 30 + Shawnee, but it's effectively 10.33. You + 9 opponents at best.

Oh well, at least we have an explanation why Greece => Normans. There's literally no other European Civ besides Greece and Rome in the Ancient Era. (which also lowers the odds of many more European leaders, no? You can't have a third of the leaders in the game default to one of two Ancient Era Civs.)

Assuming it's 10 per era, that would fill up our roster for Antiquity, no? Aksum, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Maurya, Khmer, Maya, Han, Persia, Mississipians?

I’m not surprised that Goths would be out for vanilla, but this would mean that the presence of many wonders in the game is not indicative of a correlated civ also being in the game.

(Referring to the tomb/mausoleum of Theodoric)

 

[Lord Lakely]

I’m not surprised that Goths would be out for vanilla, but this would mean that the presence of many wonders in the game is not indicative of a correlated civ also being in the game.

(Referring to the tomb/mausoleum of Theodoric)

I'm certainly hoping they'll be added later (same with Assyria and Babylon), but I suppose we'll have to wait for the DLC specifics. And that won't be for another 6 months, so.

 

[Siptah]

I’m not surprised that Goths would be out for vanilla, but this would mean that the presence of many wonders in the game is not indicative of a correlated civ also being in the game.

(Referring to the tomb/mausoleum of Theodoric)

The unassigned Gothic, Assyrian, Korean, and Tongan wonders might point to the first civs in the months after launch.

 

[JNR13]

this would mean that the presence of many wonders in the game is not indicative of a correlated civ also being in the game.

Mostly in antiquity, but that makes sense. The culture goal there is to build seven wonders. So the era needs a few "neutral" ones. 10 wonders are unassigned. Two will probably get assignments for the first DLC. So with 8, it's a good buffer.

I think "indefinitely neutral" wonders, i.e. those historically linked to a civ that already has another "associated" one, are currently 3, I think: Terracotta Army, Colossus, and Nalanda.

In the second era, only Notre Dame is known as apparently unassinged, but that could be used for Franks in an early DLC.

In the final era, it's even harder to make out. We know that the Red Fort and Taj Mahal are both Mughal wonders so one will also join the indefinite neutrals. The others could all come with a civ, but there's 10 of them and the Siamese wonder is yet not accounted for. So Britain, Germany, Russia, Qing - at least one has to go for launch.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Let's be frank, the Normans are there because they're cool and because Ed/design team wanted them there, not because they are the "best" choice.

And I'm totally fine with that, they are cool!

 

[queenpea]

There won't be a single European Civ in this game that doesn't have Rome and Greece as their starting point.

Well maybe a few (Russia?) might have Persia over either , which lol.



The Normans basically cover France, England, Italy and the Vikings in one fell swoop. If you're limiting yourself to only a handful of Civs per era upon release, you need to cover as much ground with as few Civs as possible. I expect maybe ONE more European Civ at most in the Exploration era besides the Normans and Spain (whether it'll be Slavic, Germanic, Byzantine or none at all will reveal itself in due time.)

Normans are there because the civ switching concept, as explained so far, has been inspired by the example of London. Rome to Norman to Britain.

And the age mechanics and civ switching have been reverse engineered based on their inclusion.

Ironically, the inclusion of the Normans, and other civilizations that have never been in the game before because of either their short lifespan or because of potential civ overlap, was meant to signal the inclusion of more civs that have never been in the game before.

However it also means that many civs may well be excluded.

 

[queenpea]

I'm certainly hoping they'll be added later (same with Assyria and Babylon), but I suppose we'll have to wait for the DLC specifics. And that won't be for another 6 months, so.

I totally get that. My concern has been a reliance on DLC since day one of civ switching being announced. Players will pay whatever so that their favorite civ can be played for 1/3 of the game playthrough.

However, how much money should we be expected to shell out for this game exactly?

 

[Kyriakos]

I suppose with mods it won't be bad, given that people can just mod the existent progressions.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

I suppose with mods it won't be bad, given that people can just mod the existent progressions.

Doesn't tend to work great for multiplayer though

 

[JNR13]

"Just" is an understatement given what adding a civ entails. Already having a wonder makes things a lot easier, but until the mod tools release, uniques won't have their own model and even with the tools, this game has so incredibly detailed art that making custom models won't be a quick undertaking.