Polygon pre-order article includes additional information on DLC

[Thenewwwguy]

On the one hand I’m glad that the DLC contents have been revealed before release.

On the other, I feel bad for Sar and all those careful marketing plans!



I don’t think they’re being that pedantic with the names, and besides the 1800 Acts of Union were about the annexation of Ireland, something I can see Firaxis avoiding.

i also wonder if they plan on having ireland as modern celtic rep for a britons -> wales/scotland -> ireland path, so keeping ireland open is important

 

[Siptah]

I guess my main gripe with the leaders is that we already have so many leader from the 1750-1850 time frame, and adding another 3 on top instead of earlier or later ones is disappointing for me. I guess it at least indirectly relates to the age structure and the short modern age.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I'm not saying that Firaxis has imposed any requirement - clearly they haven't. But these figures are all being sold as leaders, who lead your civilisation - implying some sort of leadership capabilities or political influence. All of the other inclusions except Ada Lovelace have this.

It's also strange elevating someone like Lovelace to the status of a leader, when she's less influential or interesting than a lot of the figures listed as the equivalent of great people, whether Egypt's Tjaty, Greece's Logios, Abbasid's Alims, or France's Jacobins. Surely as a mathematician and a writer, Lovelace fits much better in a similar great person category - perhaps Britain could have had 'inventors' or 'scientists' with her, Babbage, Bell, Brunel, Darwin, Newton, etc.

I'm not sure what you mean by "instead 'old civ way.'"? I'm not against them experimenting and I like the freedom given by uncoupling civs and leaders, but for me, I think Ada Lovelace is a bad choice, especially as the only leader for England/Britain.

the point of the new leader model is to allow for scientists. ada lovelace was particularly influential—first computer scientist alongside babbage, but also one of the first celebrity scientists since she was the daughter of lord byron. also the first person to ever discover that computers could do things more complicated than math

nothing leans in to the most favorable perception of industrial era great britain than its scientists, so picking lovelace as a figurehead of the scientific advancements of industrial britain is a very good choice, and something that i had been suggesting for a while (though my choice was more in favor of a scot—no bias involved, i promise, such as fleming or bell)

i think having a scientist in the leader slot when civ 7 is explicitly about allowing for non-political leaders is very smart, and ada lovelace is potentially one of the most influential industrial scientists ever considering the importance of computer science in the modern world. had she not discovered that computers are capable of complex tasks, we wouldn’t necessarily be where we’re typing away right now.

nothing stops them from including a more traditional british choice later down the line anyway—france and america have so many leaders anyway

 

[Riconatic]

I'm not saying that Firaxis has imposed any requirement - clearly they haven't. But these figures are all being sold as leaders, who lead your civilisation - implying some sort of leadership capabilities or political influence. All of the other inclusions except Ada Lovelace have this.

It's also strange elevating someone like Lovelace to the status of a leader, when she's less influential or interesting than a lot of the figures listed as the equivalent of great people, whether Egypt's Tjaty, Greece's Logios, Abbasid's Alims, or France's Jacobins. Surely as a mathematician and a writer, Lovelace fits much better in a similar great person category - perhaps Britain could have had 'inventors' or 'scientists' with her, Babbage, Bell, Brunel, Darwin, Newton, etc.

I'm not sure what you mean by "instead 'old civ way.'"? I'm not against them experimenting and I like the freedom given by uncoupling civs and leaders, but for me, I think Ada Lovelace is a bad choice, especially as the only leader for England/Britain.

You are still missing the point.

Firaxis does not care if someone was leader at all or not. Nor they should care. These are pure what ifs and thus very refreshing.

About the "who is interesting" point. That is your opinion. My opinion is that all other in your lists are about 110 times less interesting.

 

[Uberfrog]

Bolívar is also surprising as I thought we’d filled our 18th/19th century revolutionary roster for the initial set of releases!

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Bolívar is also surprising as I thought we’d filled our 18th/19th century revolutionary roster for the initial set of releases!

bolivar is one of my favorite historical figures so i’m not complaining but bernardo o’higgins or jose de san martin would’ve been new latin liberators that would’ve been nice instead

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I'm not saying that Firaxis has imposed any requirement - clearly they haven't. But these figures are all being sold as leaders, who lead your civilisation - implying some sort of leadership capabilities or political influence. All of the other inclusions except Ada Lovelace have this.

It's also strange elevating someone like Lovelace to the status of a leader, when she's less influential or interesting than a lot of the figures listed as the equivalent of great people, whether Egypt's Tjaty, Greece's Logios, Abbasid's Alims, or France's Jacobins. Surely as a mathematician and a writer, Lovelace fits much better in a similar great person category - perhaps Britain could have had 'inventors' or 'scientists' with her, Babbage, Bell, Brunel, Darwin, Newton, etc.

I'm not sure what you mean by "instead 'old civ way.'"? I'm not against them experimenting and I like the freedom given by uncoupling civs and leaders, but for me, I think Ada Lovelace is a bad choice, especially as the only leader for England/Britain.

also, confused as to how lovelace doesn’t have the ability to lead when ibn battuta, jose rizal and machiavelli weren’t leaders either. franklin was a political figure, tbf, but he was also first and foremost a scientist

 

[Krikkit1]

Text on Steam page still lists:

I really doubt Firaxis would hide 3 wonders under "more", especially providing Right to Rule listing wonders.

So far, most convincing version to me is what we'll get all civs with associated wonders in CotW and it's just Polygon mistake. This would explain not only absence of wonders in CotW, but also their presence in RtR (it wouldn't make sense to include 4 wonders with you have Silla and Assyria which already have wonders).

With this, I guess in CotW we'll have Silla, Assyria, Nepal and Britain with Nalanda being Nepalese wonder.

That would mean that you have 14-13-12 though (Silla, Assyria, Nepal, and Carthage all Antiquity)

 

[trev1972]

the point of the new leader model is to allow for scientists. ada lovelace was particularly influential—first computer scientist alongside babbage, but also one of the first celebrity scientists since she was the daughter of lord byron. also the first person to ever discover that computers could do things more complicated than math

nothing leans in to the most favorable perception of industrial era great britain than its scientists, so picking lovelace as a figurehead of the scientific advancements of industrial britain is a very good choice, and something that i had been suggesting for a while (though my choice was more in favor of a scot—no bias involved, i promise, such as fleming or bell)

i think having a scientist in the leader slot when civ 7 is explicitly about allowing for non-political leaders is very smart, and ada lovelace is potentially one of the most influential industrial scientists ever considering the importance of computer science in the modern world. had she not discovered that computers are capable of complex tasks, we wouldn’t necessarily be where we’re typing away right now.

nothing stops them from including a more traditional british choice later down the line anyway—france and america have so many leaders anyway

I am all for a female leader, and i am personally fine with a scientific leader (although i would so much loved to have played as Nelson if given a choice of any English leader or a leader to represent the industrial revolution such as Brunel).

I thought there was controversy over how much Ada Lovelace actually contributed however? i will have to read up on her tonight after work. That is one good thing about the new choice, it has got me to read up on her

 

[untitledjuan]

The other leaders are also cool - I don't know much about Lakshmibai, but happy to find out. Genghis Khan is a must, and Bolivar makes sense for an uncoupled South American leader (though personally I would have liked to see a Leftist revolutionary figure.)

The only "leftist revolutionaries" in Latin America are relatively recent and, unfortunately, associated with groups that are still widely recognised as terrorist organizations by most democratic countries. For most Latin Americans, having a leader such as Che Guevara or Castro would be similar to having Hitler for the Germans.

Simón Bolívar is a good choice because it is a unifying figure, it has been adopted as the "mascot" of both Left-wing and Right-wing political movements (and everything in between) and much better represents Colombia/Latin America as a whole than any other 20th century leader ever could.

However, I would have loved to see other similar "unifying" figures from the independence revolutionary era back in the 19th century, such as Francisco de Paula Santander, Antonio Nariño or Policarpa Salavarrieta.

Also, various other post-independence leaders could have worked as well, such as Rafael Núñez, Tomás Cipriano de Mosquera or even Jorse Isaacs or José Eustasio Rivera.

The last two were writters and Senators of Colombia. They wrote the most important novels of the country and, in Rivera's case, he denounced the forced labour to which natives were submitted by Colombians and Peruvians, something that helped increase the rights they had back in the early 20th century.

 

[Siptah]

That would mean that you have 14-13-12 though (Silla, Assyria, Nepal, and Carthage all Antiquity)

Antiquity Nepal with Nalanda makes about zero sense anyway.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I am all for a female leader, and i am personally fine with a scientific leader (although i would so much loved to have played as Nelson if given a choice of any English leader or a leader to represent the industrial revolution such as Brunel).

I thought there was controversy over how much Ada Lovelace actually contributed however? i will have to read up on her tonight after work. That is one good thing about the new choice, it has got me to read up on her

to my understanding, a lot of it is like with rosalind franklin—her accomplishments were understated due to her gender at the time.

we know a lot more, that she was effectively a partner of babbage’s, not his assistant (at least in reality, on paper she still was)

and her contributions to programming and the basis for computer science are definitely well established, no real controversy there unless ppl are just lying to undermine her

 

[trev1972]

to my understanding, a lot of it is like with rosalind franklin—her accomplishments were understated due to her gender at the time.

we know a lot more, that she was effectively a partner of babbage’s, not his assistant (at least in reality, on paper she still was)

and her contributions to programming and the basis for computer science are definitely well established, no real controversy there unless ppl are just lying to undermine her

I can well believe her contribution may have been understated due to her gender, it will be an interesting read tonight.
I imagine most people have never heard of her to be honest but then i doubt that anyone else in the office has heard of Babbage either.

Cheers.

 

[Venceslau Pietro Pietra]

Great to see Bolivar and Genghis coming back, for Ada Lovelace... another leader fighting for the Norman spot on explorarion age, not so great.
A simple HRE dlc would help to spread out the western leaders from the Norman-France axis.
But Bulgaria is a neat newcomer

 

[Siptah]

I can well believe her contribution may have been understated due to her gender, it will be an interesting read tonight.
I imagine most people have never heard of her to be honest but then i doubt that anyone else in the office has heard of Babbage either.

Cheers.

I think she was a GP in civ VI already, aside from other pop cultural references. So, the name might have actually more recognition than Babbage.

 

[stealth_nsk]

That would mean that you have 14-13-12 though (Silla, Assyria, Nepal, and Carthage all Antiquity)

Yes. And I'm not sure if that's a problem.

Antiquity Nepal with Nalanda makes about zero sense anyway.

It's not the best fit, but still much higher than zero. As I understand, by the time of building Nalanda, Gupta controlled all the Nepal, so it could be considered a wonder of Nepal "from a certain point of view"™

 

[Hilton1]

the point of the new leader model is to allow for scientists. ada lovelace was particularly influential—first computer scientist alongside babbage, but also one of the first celebrity scientists since she was the daughter of lord byron. also the first person to ever discover that computers could do things more complicated than math

nothing leans in to the most favorable perception of industrial era great britain than its scientists, so picking lovelace as a figurehead of the scientific advancements of industrial britain is a very good choice, and something that i had been suggesting for a while (though my choice was more in favor of a scot—no bias involved, i promise, such as fleming or bell)

i think having a scientist in the leader slot when civ 7 is explicitly about allowing for non-political leaders is very smart, and ada lovelace is potentially one of the most influential industrial scientists ever considering the importance of computer science in the modern world. had she not discovered that computers are capable of complex tasks, we wouldn’t necessarily be where we’re typing away right now.

nothing stops them from including a more traditional british choice later down the line anyway—france and america have so many leaders anyway

OK, I take your point. I checked the dev diary from Firaxis and it does say: "Now, in Civilization VII, great figures of philosophy, human rights, science and more are now elevated to leader status, like Confucius and Benjamin Franklin."

If scientists are now leading civs, than I have no problem with Lovelace being the British scientist of chocie.

also, confused as to how lovelace doesn’t have the ability to lead when ibn battuta, jose rizal and machiavelli weren’t leaders either. franklin was a political figure, tbf, but he was also first and foremost a scientist

I think before I read the dev diary line above, my understanding was that the leaders had been broadened out from certified rulers to a broader definition of leaders, but still people who had political influence (including fighting for ideas) or leadership roles - which Machiavelli, Rizal and Franklin all fit the bill. Ada Lovelace doesn't (I'd forgotten about Ibn Battuta).

I would still personally prefer a British political leader, or at least having the choice of one. With the US/France leaders, Firaxis wisely allowed for choice by including several, I think because they knew the more experimental choices would be polarising (some, like Tubman, for the wrong reasons). Within Europe, Rome has Augustus, Spain has Isabella, France has Napoleon, Prussia has Friedrich, and Russia has Catherine - it feels a bit odd that Britain doesn't have an equivalent ruler. I also still think it's a missed opportunity to plug the England gap with a leader like Henry VIII or Elizabeth I as the Normans still feel partly French.

 

[queenpea]

...Ada Lovelace?

With interchangeable leaders, this might be an “elegant” way to avoid Queen Victoria of the Mughals, etc.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

I would really love if Lovelace's abilities referenced not only her work with Babbage on computers but the other influential scientists and writers she apparently corresponded with (Michael Faraday, for example). I'm not expecting a full set of Great People from her, but it would be neat if she especially benefited from the unique civilian units of civs.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I would really love if Lovelace's abilities referenced not only her work with Babbage on computers but the other influential scientists and writers she apparently corresponded with (Michael Faraday, for example). I'm not expecting a full set of Great People from her, but it would be neat if she especially benefited from the unique civilian units of civs.

A Britain of Great Engineers and Scientists would be a joy to my heart