Update 1.3.0 is on the horizon + a message from the devs!

[j51]

It's not like the Normans are exclusively covering the Normans who conquered England - while they definitely are included, it's also including the significant Norman conquests of southern Italy. It can cover both!

Honestly I’d rather the Norman’s were focused on France and Sicily and that there was an exploration version of England, but eh that’s how it goes.

 

[Siptah]

Honestly I’d rather the Norman’s were focused on France and Sicily and that there was an exploration version of England, but eh that’s how it goes.

In a way, I agree. As much as I like the region of Normandy in France, and how it forms the base of modern English culture, the cultural fusion they underwent with Greek, Roman, and Arabian culture in Sicily and Southern Italy always stood out most to me.

On the other hand: I think for civ terms, and especially civ 7. Normans modeled after Normandy and England seem to be the better fit. Besides clearly not being the prototypical Knights and Castles civilization in history, they are in pop culture – as their architecture and culture has been the main influence on Hollywood's view of the European middle ages in the past 80 or so years. If you see popular depictions of castles, it's either Norman influenced keeps (to symbolize power, defensiveness) or Rhineland Burgen (to symbolize Romanticism). And Normans cover parts of France, foreign influence and the whole of England quite well in a history-in-layers approach.

 

[j51]

Yeah that’s why I’d like a Capetian France that includes uniques from cadet branches for exploration instead.

 

[marius_kaparius]

Just sharing this from the October update article. It looks like the way that Treasure Convoys work are changing:

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Well, yeah. I personally would have shuffled some of the Civs around (I would have done Franks instead of Normans, which would somewhat justify Britain base & Prussia DLC, while also leaving room for England), but eh. History Is Built In Layurzzz and all that.

Honestly I’d rather the Norman’s were focused on France and Sicily and that there was an exploration version of England, but eh that’s how it goes.

Better yet, just have Exploration England from the Norman Conquest through Tudor period in the base game. Then have Franks as a DLC civ that would lead into France and Prussia later.

 

[Niallism]

Making Britain a Modern Age only Civ was also an insult. All that Empire and Exploring by Drake etc was just ignored.

Once again, not an insult. Not including a country in a videogame selection is not an insult.

If anything, acting like it is it sort of insulting to every other country in the world.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

There hasn't been a civ iteration I can remember where Britain/England fans weren't vocally upset about the way their civ is, to a higher degree than others. I guess I get it, but it's always been pretty noticable (to me at least).

 

[Smegger213]

Once again, not an insult. Not including a country in a videogame selection is not an insult.

If anything, acting like it is it sort of insulting to every other country in the world.

Look mate. If I want to call it an insult, I can do so.
Britain is one of the oldest countries in the world, among with a good few other countries.
Just to include them as a Modern Civ was an insult in my book.

But this thread is supposed to be about what's coming in the next update, so lets just stick to that subject.

 

[HanNorwood]

With Tides of Power coming with a pretty hefty refinement of naval systems in CIV VII, I am really intrigued by the possibility of future DLCs being the same. I am wondering if we will see the same for mechanics like religion, colonization, ideology, etc. that seem unfinished/unpolished. Perhaps expansions will be used to primarily to introduce new systems and mechanics, and refinements to existing systems will be aligned with smaller, themed DLCs like this.

 

[Smegger213]

With Tides of Power coming with a pretty hefty refinement of naval systems in CIV VII, I am really intrigued by the possibility of future DLCs being the same. I am wondering if we will see the same for mechanics like religion, colonization, ideology, etc. that seem unfinished/unpolished. Perhaps expansions will be used to primarily to introduce new systems and mechanics, and refinements to existing systems will be aligned with smaller, themed DLCs like this.

Off course they will put stuff in a paid dlc that should be a patch for the main game.
"oh look, buy our religion dlc to get your religion overhauled" etc etc.

 

[Xandinho]

With Tides of Power coming with a pretty hefty refinement of naval systems in CIV VII, I am really intrigued by the possibility of future DLCs being the same. I am wondering if we will see the same for mechanics like religion, colonization, ideology, etc. that seem unfinished/unpolished. Perhaps expansions will be used to primarily to introduce new systems and mechanics, and refinements to existing systems will be aligned with smaller, themed DLCs like this.

That would be quite interesting. Personally, I’d like to see more technologies and civics, since the research trees feel rather bare at the moment. Expansive tech trees that gave players plenty of options on what to research were major highlights of the earlier games. Government-specific civics that unlock unique social policies would be a great refinement to the current government system.

 

[Evolena]

Off course they will put stuff in a paid dlc that should be a patch for the main game.
"oh look, buy our religion dlc to get your religion overhauled" etc etc.

I don't understand that comment?
For the case right now, all mechanics improvements are a free update, and the paid(-free-for-who-owns-the-game-now) DLC only is CIV/Leaders/Wonders content.

 

[Krikkit1]

Off course they will put stuff in a paid dlc that should be a patch for the main game.
"oh look, buy our religion dlc to get your religion overhauled" etc etc.

The naval game improvement is free it’s just got a DLC coming at the same time.

The improvements to religion will be free…just at the same time they will release the DLC civs of ?Byzantinium and Aztecs? to take advantage of it.

 

[Smegger213]

I don't understand that comment?
For the case right now, all mechanics improvements are a free update, and the paid(-free-for-who-owns-the-game-now) DLC only is CIV/Leaders/Wonders content.

Its a simple thing to understand.
What's to stop the devs making a complete religion overhaul, then sell it in paid for dlc?
You only have to look at some of the dlc for Civ 5 & 6 to see that they have done that sort of thing before. It might not be religion, but some other mechanic maybe.

 

[Gorbles]

Its a simple thing to understand.
What's to stop the devs making a complete religion overhaul, then sell it in paid for dlc?
You only have to look at some of the dlc for Civ 5 & 6 to see that they have done that sort of thing before. It might not be religion, but some other mechanic maybe.

What's to stop the devs from putting in code to make your computer catch fire?

The honest answer is nothing, and they burn goodwill on the way out. Goodwill they can't really afford to lose. The same as would happen here.

However, they haven't done that to date. And the phrasing of your post suggested they were, with Tides of Power. Can you see the problem?

If you hope they don't do that, many folks would share your hope. If you "of course they would do that", that is incorrect, so people are going to disagree. Don't change the argument.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Its a simple thing to understand.
What's to stop the devs making a complete religion overhaul, then sell it in paid for dlc?
You only have to look at some of the dlc for Civ 5 & 6 to see that they have done that sort of thing before. It might not be religion, but some other mechanic maybe.

You mean expansions? Yes, we'll eventually have expansions and they'll have mechanics unavailable without paying for them. But "that should be a patch for the main game" is a totally subjective. Why not just say "they should give me the game for free"?

 

[Smegger213]

What's to stop the devs from putting in code to make your computer catch fire?

The honest answer is nothing, and they burn goodwill on the way out. Goodwill they can't really afford to lose. The same as would happen here.

However, they haven't done that to date. And the phrasing of your post suggested they were, with Tides of Power. Can you see the problem?

If you hope they don't do that, many folks would share your hope. If you "of course they would do that", that is incorrect, so people are going to disagree. Don't change the argument.

Those are really childish comments to make.
I suggest we just keep a look out for what further dlc they announce. Be that paid or free dlc.

 

[Kwami]

What's to stop the devs making a complete religion overhaul, then sell it in paid for dlc?
You only have to look at some of the dlc for Civ 5 & 6 to see that they have done that sort of thing before. It might not be religion, but some other mechanic maybe.

No, they have not done that unless you're counting proper expansion packs as "DLC". None of the smaller DLCs made any changes to game mechanics like you're suggesting.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

I don't understand that comment?
For the case right now, all mechanics improvements are a free update, and the paid(-free-for-who-owns-the-game-now) DLC only is CIV/Leaders/Wonders content.

I think that part of the conflict here (not necessarily in regards to you specifically) is that the comment can be interpreted in two ways, depending on if "of course" is read as applying to the present situation or to the future situation. The former, "I knew this was going to happen," comes across as more sarcastic and would be based on a misunderstanding, but the latter, "we must consider that this will happen," is asserting that although some complaints with the game are going to be settled for free, there will likely be aspects that will only be "fixed" at an additional price.

I cannot speak for them, of course, but I am inclined to believe that the latter was indeed their intention, and am also sympathetic to it as an argument. After all, if we're framing patches such as this as working towards completing an unfinished game, that implies that any underbaked mechanics are owed to us in their finished state, are something we paid for but have not yet received. Thus, for a feature requiring refurbishment to only get it with an extra payment is shirking that obligation. It all comes down to something really hard to define, which is what exactly counts as "missing" from the base game.

For instance, if the current religion system is, by your personal model, less than what should be there, more should be added without an additional charge. Furthermore, if you personally hold that better naval combat as well as many other things should be there, then the addition of better naval combat is a mere step towards fulfilling a larger obligation, and if you believe that some parts of that larger obligation (again, devised by your own methods derived from your own values) are not going to be fulfilled, the situation is that you have only been given part of what you are owed and are not expecting to receive the rest, justifying a lack of celebration or optimism.

I think that is the thought process occurring here, and even though I'm not sure that I agree with it (either on the grounds of what is "owed" or on the required assumption that a large amount of current complaints will only be fixed come DLC), I think it calls attention to some very important questions regarding the treatment of additional content for Civ VII.

 

[Gorbles]

Those are really childish comments to make.
I suggest we just keep a look out for what further dlc they announce. Be that paid or free dlc.

I was being serious. I was taking your concerns as genuine. If you can't accept mild criticism when you make unsubstantiated claims, that's on you.

Tides of Power will not unlock the naval rework. It will unlock leaders and civilisations. Claiming or suggesting otherwise is wrong. There's nothing wrong with being wary of things that might happen in the future, but without evidence it's a pretty weak claim. Cheers.