Update 1.2.3 is coming soon!

[stealth_nsk]

I mean it’s obvious that Tonga is going to be the Hawaiian predecessor sometime soon, or the Haʻamonga ʻa Maui probably wouldn’t have made it into the game yet.

I'm not an expert on the region, but thought Tonga is quite far and Tonga people are unrelated to Hawaii?

And yes, while Tonga is quite possible, I don't think wonder is an evidence.

 

[bluesboy67]

Still not enough change to get me to come back to VII, make civ switching an on/off option and I might come back.

 

[j51]

IIrc they said new civs will always come with new wonders, regardless of existing ones. Like how GB got Battersea even though Oxford would have worked for them

Yeah but the new wonder could be not that particular civs’ wonder. For example: The Goths’ affiliated wonder could still be the Mausoleum of Theodoric, but when they are released they could also come with the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus as an unaffiliated wonder.

 

[moondog385]

I feel the Mausoleum of Theodoric and Ha’amonga are odd choices for wonders if they aren’t associated with an upcoming civ. If Tonga and Goths need new associated wonders, that makes me doubt their inclusion a bit.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'm not an expert on the region, but thought Tonga is quite far and Tonga people are unrelated to Hawaii?

And yes, while Tonga is quite possible, I don't think wonder is an evidence.

They are both from the Polynesian culture, so yes, they are more related than any current path they have.

Yeah but the new wonder could be not that particular civs’ wonder. For example: The Goths’ affiliated wonder could still be the Mausoleum of Theodoric, but when they are released they could also come with the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus as an unaffiliated wonder.

I thought they announced that any new civ will come with a new associated wonder? If it's the above that would change things drastically.
If not, Samoa is still an option.

 

[j51]

They are both from the Polynesian culture, so yes, they are more related than any current path they have.

I thought they announced that any new civ will come with a new associated wonder? If it's the above that would change things drastically.
If not, Samoa is still an option.

I don’t remember if they said the wonder has to be associated or not. I was just being hopeful it wasn’t because why else is Theodoric’s mausoleum in the game? It’s not even the most wondrous structure in Ravenna. (But yeah in the case of an antiquity Polynesian civ, Samoa could be the choice with its own wonder.)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I don’t remember if they said the wonder has to be associated or not. I was just being hopeful it wasn’t because why else is Theodoric’s mausoleum in the game? It’s not even the most wondrous structure in Ravenna. (But yeah in the case of an antiquity Polynesian civ, Samoa could be the choice with its own wonder.)

Hopefully we'll get confirmation with the potential upcoming RtR civs such as Assyria and Silla, since they already have wonders in the game, Dur-Sharrukin and Emile Bell respectively.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Hopefully we'll get confirmation with the potential upcoming RtR civs such as Assyria and Silla, since they already have wonders in the game, Dur-Sharrukin and Emile Bell respectively.

I think it was confirmed that every civilization comes with new wonders as their preferred ones.

 

[Kwami]

That's what I remember, too.

 

[Nikolai II]

I for one hope we soon see a good chunk of new civs. The era system, which I for one like, need a lot more civs than earlier Civ games.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

I'm not an expert on the region, but thought Tonga is quite far and Tonga people are unrelated to Hawaii?

And yes, while Tonga is quite possible, I don't think wonder is an evidence.

The way I see it, antiquity Tonga would have a similar relationship to exploration Hawaii as a hypothetical exploration English to the modern Americans

 

[stealth_nsk]

The way I see it, antiquity Tonga would have a similar relationship to exploration Hawaii as a hypothetical exploration English to the modern Americans

Yeah, but here we were discussing more coherent transitions and Tonga doesn't look like much more coherent predecessor for Hawaii than SA civs.

(although I'd welcome it for regional representation)

 

[moondog385]

I for one hope we soon see a good chunk of new civs. The era system, which I for one like, need a lot more civs than earlier Civ games.

Agreed. The era system allows for a wider variety of civs (I doubt we would have seen dynastic civs like Chola or Qing under the previous paradigm and probably not "archaeological" civs like Mississippians either) but the game is still lacking in quantity.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Yeah, but here we were discussing more coherent transitions and Tonga doesn't look like much more coherent predecessor for Hawaii than SA civs.

(although I'd welcome it for regional representation)

Tonga was a literal predecessor, where SA Civs weren't is what I mean. The way the Polynesian migration worked, people inhabited Tonga almost 2000 years before Hawaii, and people from Tonga and other islands migrated onwards eventually to Hawaii. It was a precursor in almost the perfect way that Civ VII works to represent.

 

[Kwami]

Tonga was a literal predecessor, where SA Civs weren't is what I mean. The way the Polynesian migration worked, people inhabited Tonga almost 2000 years before Hawaii, and people from Tonga and other islands migrated onwards eventually to Hawaii. It was a precursor in almost the perfect way that Civ VII works to represent.

I don't think that's right.

The idea behind Civ VII isn't that people migrated from one place to another. It's that different people came to occupy the same place. In that sense, Tonga -> Hawaii doesn't really fit.

The primary example given by the developers is Britain, which went through various phases of Romans, Celts, Normans, and so on. And we see this pattern with China and India, too, which are the only two three-era examples that we have.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I think it was confirmed that every civilization comes with new wonders as their preferred ones.

From what i recall, the devs stated that the new wonders (as in the next dlc pack) may or may not be affiliated.

Ie: the pack will feature four new wonders that don't have to include the civ wonders if those wonders already exist.

So Emile Bell and Dur-Sharrukin CAN be the Silla and Assyrian wonders. And if they are, then Rise to Rule will have a wonder each for Qajar and Dai Viet, and two more which are unaffiliated.

That's how I read it, anyway.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I don't think that's right.

The idea behind Civ VII isn't that people migrated from one place to another. It's that different people came to occupy the same place. In that sense, Tonga -> Hawaii doesn't really fit.

The primary example given by the developers is Britain, which went through various phases of Romans, Celts, Normans, and so on. And we see this pattern with China and India, too, which are the only two three-era examples that we have.

Then why is Hawaii>Japan the preferred line right now? It's probably because Japanese is the second largest ethnic group in Hawaii today, and has nothing to do with them sharing the same islands. Honestly, I'm surprised that Hawaii>America isn't a thing considering it's a U.S. state.
If we are going to do it strictly off of geography, the only thing that would work is a generic Polynesian blob civ in Antiquity, because no other group other than the Hawaiians inhabited the islands. But I'd prefer it if we had the similar cultures of Tonga or Samoa progress into Hawaii, rather than the Maya or Mississippians which we have now. The Māori would also work for a Modern progression.

 

[Kwami]

Then why is Hawaii>Japan the preferred line right now? It's probably because Japanese is the second largest ethnic group in Hawaii today, and has nothing to do with them sharing the same islands. Honestly, I'm surprised that Hawaii>America isn't a thing considering it's a U.S. state.

How should I know? I'm just relaying with the developers themselves have said. The prime example of Britain, which inspired the whole thing, is obviously about different cultures settling in the same place and overbuilding what came before.

If we are going to do it strictly off of geography, the only thing that would work is a generic Polynesian blob civ in Antiquity, because no other group other than the Hawaiians inhabited the islands. But I'd prefer it if we had the similar cultures of Tonga or Samoa progress into Hawaii, rather than the Maya or Mississippians which we have now. The Māori would also work for a Modern progression.

How is something like Hawaii->Maori any better than Hawaii->Japan? Just because they're both Polynesian?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

How should I know? I'm just relaying with the developers themselves have said. The prime example of Britain, which inspired the whole thing, is obviously about different cultures settling in the same place and overbuilding what came before.

I don't agree that every example they gave is an example of overbuilding what came before. Sure Rome>Normans>Great Britain works in that regard. But it doesn't work for Inca>Mexico, or any of the Sub-Saharan African civs currently.

In that regard I don't see the problem of there being a Polynesian progression in the game, for people that want it. To me it does make more sense than anything Hawaii has currently.

 

[Kwami]

I don't agree that every example they gave is an example of overbuilding what came before. Sure Rome>Normans>Great Britain works in that regard. But it doesn't work for Inca>Mexico, or any of the Sub-Saharan African civs currently.

In that regard I don't see the problem of there being a Polynesian progression in the game, for people that want it. To me it does make more sense than anything Hawaii has currently.

But were those examples or are those just the results of limitations imposed by the current pool of civilizations? The only examples that I clearly remember are Britain, China, and India. India is a bit tricky because the three Indian civilizations in the game don't really fit the vision, either. China works better.

They also said that they weren't planning to implement a "natural" path for every civilization, though, and that they explicitly rejected that idea because it would limit which civilizations they could include in the game. Instead, they expect us to play out an alternate history in which our empire changed somewhat like Britain did, with one culture coming along and building over what a previous one had built, then doing it again.

In other words, it's not about a culture "evolving". It's about new cultures settling into your lands and blending with what came before them while introducing lots of new stuff.