Reverse engineering likely Civs based on “Associated Wonders.”

[Boris Gudenuf]

I don't know in which thread/stream that was, but we have seen celtic/gaulic looking units when Augustus with Rome was on the screen, as his units.

Not saying Gauls are completely out as a possible Civ, but Gaulic troops with their distinctive "Theuros" oval shields with the prominent metal 'boss' in the middle were auxiliary or mercenary troops for Rome, Carthage, Egypt and a number of Greek city states. The Classical version of the "Universal Soldier" so to speak.

 

[RedCourtJester]

View attachment 703168

I know this is not about wonders, but, since this channel is about speculation about likely civs, what do you guys think of these Celtic looking units? Gauls/Celts will be in the game?

I am still dubious the Gauls/Celts are even happening in base game, based off of what we have seen in antiquity era screenshots (although, by all means Firaxis, put more than 14 civs per era in the base game).

But I do wonder, if maybe assets are already planned and being used by existing civs or independent powers until they will be properly utilized by DLC/expac civs. Might imply that we aren't necessarily getting a Hawaiian civ on launch, either.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I am still dubious the Gauls/Celts are even happening in base game, based off of what we have seen in antiquity era screenshots (although, by all means Firaxis, put more than 14 civs per era in the base game).

But I do wonder, if maybe assets are already planned and being used by existing civs or independent powers until they will be properly utilized by DLC/expac civs. Might imply that we aren't necessarily getting a Hawaiian civ on launch, either.

I believe only Civ2 had celts as starting civ. They also don't fit the alphabetic icons order we have. So yep, most likely they don't come in base game this time either, but they are very highly probable to come later

 

[RedCourtJester]

I believe only Civ2 had celts as starting civ. They also don't fit the alphabetic icons order we have. So yep, most likely they don't come in base game this time either, but they are very highly probable to come later

Given that the Celts have appeared in some form since Civ 2, I wouldn't worry about getting a Celtic civ at some point.

The Civ franchise really doesn't *cut* civs very often. They may get replaced or refined with an equivalent, but by my record:

* Civ 1 -> 2: Nothing
* Civ 2 -> 3: Nothing (Sioux replaced with "Native American")
* Civ 3 -> 4: Hittites (Iroquois replaced with "Native American," Austria replaced with HRE)
* Civ 4 -> 5: Nothing (Khmer replaced with Indonesia, HRE replaced with Austria, Mali replaced with Songhai, Native Americans replaced with Iroquois, Sumeria replaced by Assyria, Viking replaced with Denmark)
* Civ 5 -> 6: Morocco and Venice (Austria replaced with Hungary, Denmark replaced with Norway, Polynesia replaced with Maori, Celts replaced with Gaul, Huns replaced by Scythia, Carthage replaced by Phoenicia, Iroquois replaced by Cree, Shoshone replaced by Mapuche, Assyria replaced by Sumeria, Songhai replaced by Mali)

Overall, that's only three civs in the entire history of the franchise that were outright dropped (and not replaced) from one installment to the next. And even that is maybe being overly critical, as Morocco was incorporated into Mali and the Ottomans, and a VI version of Venice's playstyle was effectively assigned to Portugal. So neither was totally lost.

 

[Zaarin]

Native Americans replaced with Iroquois

Sad Shoshone noises.

 

[BK_PEARL]

So in Civ VII it seems like all the civs have “Associated Wonders” that they get bonuses to building. With that in mind, what are some likely inclusions of civs based on revealed or almost-guaranteed wonders?

Revealed

Statue of Liberty - America
Eiffel Tower - France
Hanging Gardens - Babylon
Brandenberg Gage - Germany
Oracle - Greece
Colossus - Greece
Dur Sharrukin - Assyria
Borobudur - Java
Forbidden City - Ming/Qing China
Great Wall - Qin China
Petra - Bedouin Arabia?
Tower of London - Normans
Machu Pichu - Inca
Palacio des Bellas Artes - Mexico

Gotta be in at some point

Stonehenge - Celts/Iceni?
Big Ben - Britain
Cristo Redentor - Brazil

love that idea, its makes the civs more connected to the wonders and gives them a real point of difference.

 

[OzzyKP]

I added rough dates and separated them out into eras.

-----Ancient -------
Pyramids (2500 BC) - Egypt - Confirmed
Dur-Sharrukin (706 BC) - Assyria
Oracle (800 BC?) - Mycenaean Greece - Confirmed
Hanging Gardens (600 BCish) - Babylon
Gate of All Nations (465 BC) - Achaemenid Persia
Petra (400 BC?) - Nabataeans
Sanchi Stupa (300 BC) - Maurya India - Confirmed
Colossus (280 BC) - Greece? Rhodes?
Terracotta Army (210 BC) - Qin China
Weiyang Palace (200 BC) - Han China - Confirmed
Colosseum (80 AD) - Rome - Confirmed
Mundo Perdido (100ish AD) - Maya - Confirmed
Pyramid of the Sun (200 AD) - Teotihuacan?
Great Stele (450ish AD) - Aksum - Confirmed

---- Exploration -----
Nalanda (427 AD) - Gupta Empire
Borobudur (450 AD) - Mataram
Mausoleum of Theodoric (520 AD) - Ostrogoth
Emile Bell (771 AD) - Silla
House of Wisdom (820ish AD) - Abbasid - Confirmed
Brihadisvara Temple (1010 AD) - Chola - Confirmed
Tower of London (1066 AD) - Normans - Confirmed
Angkor Wat (1150 AD) - Khmer
Ha'amonga 'A Maui (1200 AD) - Tonga
Serpent Mound (1200 AD) - Shawnee - Confirmed
Notre Dame Cathedral (1260 AD) - Exploration France
Forbidden City (1420 AD) - Ming China - Confirmed
Machu Picchu (1450ish AD) - Inca
Tomb of Askia (1500 AD) - Songhai Empire - Confirmed
El Escorial (1584 AD) - Spain
Erdene Zuu Monastery (1585 AD) - Mongolia - Confirmed

------ Modern ----
Red Fort (1639 AD) - Mughals
Taj Mahal (1648 AD) - Mughals
Oxford University (1749 AD) - British Empire?
Summer Palace (1764 AD) - Qing China
Hermitage (1766 AD) - Modern Russia?
Brandenburg Gate (1791 AD) - Prussia/Germany
Kasubi Tombs (1882 AD) - Buganda - Confirmed
Statue of Liberty (1886 AD) - United States
Eiffel Tower (1889 AD) - Modern France
Dogo Onsen (1899 AD) - Meiji Japan - Confirmed
Palacio De Bellas Artes (1934 AD) - Modern Mexico

Cahokia?

With Ming now confirmed, this list is coming along nicely.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

Stonehenge - Celts/Iceni?

Oh, HUGE stretch to say the Celts had anything to do with Stonehenge. Last I checked, the consensus was that it was built by a pre-historic people who spoke a language and practised customs that are since long dead & forgotten

 

[stealth_nsk]

Oh, HUGE stretch to say the Celts had anything to do with Stonehenge. Last I checked, the consensus was that it was built by a pre-historic people who spoke a language and practised customs that are since long dead & forgotten

Yep. As I understand, the latest stonehenge constructions were built around 2200BC, while the origin of Celts is about 1500-1200BC.

I believe at the time proto-indo-europeans started their expansion on horses and carts, stonehenge was already near completion.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Yep. As I understand, the latest stonehenge constructions were built around 2200BC, while the origin of Celts is about 1500-1200BC.

I believe at the time proto-indo-europeans started their expansion on horses and carts, stonehenge was already near completion.

Britain went through several near-extinctions of population/cultures.

The original hunter-gatherer groups were largely displaced by agriculturalists that migrated up the Danube Valley from Anatolia after about 65-6200 BCE and reached the British Isles in the next 1000 years. The new peoples were still pre-Indo-European speakers, but settled farmers and villagers.

The 'Indo-European' migrations of pastoral herders around 3600 - 2600 BCE also brought the earliest evidence of Plague (found in skeletal remains of the period) which wiped out much of the original European farming population: agriculture declines sharply all over Europe and` all indications of cereal agriculture in Britain virtually disappear by 3350 BCE and don't re-appear until about 1500 BCE.

BUT Stonehenge started as a wooden construction about 8000 BCE: possibly a calender to keep track of migrations by wild herds for the hunter-gatherers, similar to other wooden constructions found in Scandinavia at about the same time. The current stone construction is dated to between 3000 and 1600 BCE, with the major work between 2600 and 2400 BCE. In other words, it was started by one group, but continued and finished by 'proto-Indo-European' Bell Beaker peoples with DNA from the Pontic-Caspian Steppes - the Yamnaya migration result.

The earliest archeological evidence of 'Celts' in Britain (as of 2021, anyway) indicates they migrated in from the continent (probably from northern France) about 1300 to 800 BCE. In other words, Stonehenge is Pre-Celtic and was used as a sacred and burial site for at least 6000 years before anything Celtic or anybody speaking anything resembling Celtic arrived on the island.

 

[gdr_willter]

Given their avoidance of modern nation states and the beginning of Modern in the 18th century, I'm expecting Silla > Goryeo > Joseon--though perhaps not as a complete chain on release.

As Korean, I'm not sure about Korean gamers may give a second chance to Civ 7 when we got the uncompleted version of Korean civs.

The game without Korean civ is completely okay, but the game with One or Two Korean civs which must be Japan or China will cause serious backlash.

If Civ7 can't have 3 Korean civs at start, I would rather wish there isn't any of them. It will be better option that those 3 come with the same expansion DLC.

 

[Zaarin]

As Korean, I'm not sure about Korean gamers may give a second chance to Civ 7 when we got the uncompleted version of Korean civs.

The game without Korean civ is completely okay, but the game with One or Two Korean civs which must be Japan or China will cause serious backlash.

If Civ7 can't have 3 Korean civs at start, I would rather wish there isn't any of them.

Believe me, I know. I've lived in South Korea and know and understand the Koreans' sentiments about Japan well. I was very surprised when I found that it looks like Korea > Japan or China will be a thing on launch.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

As Korean, I'm not sure about Korean gamers may give a second chance to Civ 7 when we got the uncompleted version of Korean civs.

The game without Korean civ is completely okay, but the game with One or Two Korean civs which must be Japan or China will cause serious backlash.

If Civ7 can't have 3 Korean civs at start, I would rather wish there isn't any of them. It will be better option that those 3 come with the same expansion DLC.

This also makes sense from a marketing perspective, too. A Korea-focused DLC would be a big seller, I would expect.

 

[RedCourtJester]

I think the only reason we have good odds of seeing Silla -> Kamakura, other than the Emile Bell, is so that Himiko has a different starting leader path than the "full Japan" path leader that will come with that region's DLC. I think every leader, other than bonus cases like Napoleon, will permute two different antiquity and exploration civs.

The other, potential system, would be Himiko leads Yamatai -> Kamakura -> Meiji and the second leader leads Yamatai -> Ainu -> Meiji, with no Korea in base game. I think both stand about equal odds, maybe even this more because of the unlikelihood of the antiquity Japan path being anything but Yamatai.