Video transcript regarding ages, civ switching and leaders

The_J

Say No 2 Net Validations
Administrator
Supporter
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
40,566
Location
DE/NL/FR
I tried my best to transcribe what is said in the video:

In every Civilization game your empire is always represented by a single civilization. You play through the entire span of history as one civilization. This time around, we want to take you onto a new journey. For the first time ever, in Civ7, the story of your empire is not that of a single civ, but several, connected through time. At the dawn of each new age of human advancement, you'll select a new civ to represent your empire. You will build on and carry forward your previous achievements, unlocking new gameplay bonuses to reinforce or pivot your strategy. And by the end, you will have forged a unique path throug history. To show you what we mean, we will take you through the story of one such empire. [age of antiquity, Hatshepsut leading Egypt] But the challenges of this age have shaken our mighty Egyptian empire to its core. The world changes. We feel the pages of history turn, as the age of antiquity comes to close. A new age of human advancement approaches. The age of exploration. A new age brings forth new challenges and new opportunities, new technologies to research, new resources to acquire, new land to explore. If we are to take on the challenges of this new age, we must adapt and select a new Civilzation to represent our empire, one that is better equiped to take on the challenges of the exploration age. This new Civilization builds atop upon its past legacy, and our actions in this age will inevitable influence a future yet to come. As we evolve, so too do our neighbours. The stage is set. A new age begins. Will you follow a path set by history, or will you pivot and forge something anew? What kind of empire will you make? What strategies will you pursue? The future is yours to create. [...] This is made possible by our biggest new feature: Ages. Ages are inspired by a transformational idea for Civ, that history is build in layers. This idea is a way of understanding how civs have grown, changed and evolved over time. Think of the first civs of the world as creating an initial foundation. As a civ grows, new layers are added to this foundation, in a form of things like technologies, schools of thought, and cultural norms. At some point, civs face a crisis that defines there times, must evolve. When that happens, these past layers don't disappear. Instead the serve as a new foundation for the new civ. As the cycle repeats, connecting the past, present and future together. Instead of playing one civ across every age, you evolve your empire into a new civ for each age. One which is suited to take on the challenges of that time. Every age is designed to be like a historical sandbox, as a way to really immerse yourself in that time. Almost everything inside an age is exclusive to that age. This includes things like which technologies and civics you can research, which resources are available to be gained, which independent power surround you, to even things like gameplay systems, and civs, all unique to that age. Having unique civs for each age is something we are really excited about. In the past, each civ had to be balanced over a game which spans the whole history. This resulted in late era civs being strong in the late game, but weak early on. Now, we can balance around the age itself. THis means we can give every civ bonuses, units, and buildings, that are always relevant and powerful. Having exclusive civs per age is also great for historical immersion. Every age feels like an epic showdown of some of the great powers of that time. We have 3 ages for you to play. The antiquity age, when agricultural socieites being to cluster into urban centers, forming the foundations of the first civs. The exploration age, when the desire for precious commodities, from distant lands spurs empires to stretch across great oceans. And hte modern age, a period of incrediclbe tech growth and global conflict, where mankind goes from the dev of the steam engine to the splitting of the atom. Every age can be played on its own or all togther in a full campgain.
With civs being inclusive to ages, we are excited to introduce a new innovation for leaders. For the first time in franchise history, leaders are selected indepdently from civs. You can now mix and match unique parts of different civs and leaders, unlocking all new strategic combinations, staying true to civs spirit of experimentation. For players who want to stick to more historical pairings, a useful indicator will appear on the civ selection screen. We are also taking the opportunity to expand who we consider to be a leader in Civ7. We will consider to have traditional heads of state, such as Hathsepsut, but we also excited to have new leaders in areas such as philosophy, religion, science and more. Having leaders stay across the ages, helps bring a sense against who you are playing against in Civ7. It also gives you the opportunity to keep the theme of evolution going, as your empire evolves from one age to the next, it is important that your leader grows as well. All leaders now have attributes, that can further be specalized into skills. These attributes can be gained in a variety of ways, from completing narrative events, through rewards for researching certain technologies and civis. Overall, leaders are getting a huge upgrade. They are more powerful, more varied, and more strategically interesting than ever. We cannot wait for you to discover your new favourite leader in Civ7.
When one age ends, and you begin an age transition, it is an incredibly exciting moment. You will select a new civ to represent your empire in the new age, you chose parts of your past civ to carry forward into the new one, and the game map literally expands, filled with new independent powers to befriend, new resources to acquire, and new discoveries to be made. During an age transition, there are a few factors that determine which civ you can involve into. This includes any historical connections between your previous and future civs, your choice of leader, and even certain gameplay decisions which you made in the past age. Every civ plays different. Across your game, you might want to stay as true to history as possible, only selecting civs which have historic ties to each other, or you might switch to civs which fit your strategic needs. There are so many paths to explore, so many different choices you can make. The potential for strategy in Civ7 is nearly endless.

Most important points:
- Leaders are indepent of civs
- Leaders do not switch
- Leaders gain abilities and evolve
- Leaders are not necessarily historical leaders (such as Benjamin Franklin)
- There are 3 eras
- You will switch to a new civ per era
- You can play each era independent of each other, or all 3 as a "campaign
- Civs are unique to certain eras
- Civs have unique bonuses, units and buildings
- There are some connections between your current civ and the one to switch to.


Attached are relevant screenshots:
EDIT: One I stole from
Screenshot_20240820-162305_YouTube.jpg


GVdTt3bWoAEaqKh.jpeg


leaderattibutes.png


evolvingpolicies.png


civ-change.png


advancedstart.png
 
Last edited:
I transcribed the video for easier access, to have things better clarified, see https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...arding-ages-civ-switching-and-leaders.691345/ .
Leaders do NOT switch. Only civs switch. Each civ is unique to an era.
I get that - Leaders are eternal. But with the map specifically expanding at each age, "filled with new independent powers to befriend," I think it likely that, when you meet a new Civ (which will always be era-appropriate if I'm reading this correctly), that they will have their default leader. Because the alternative is pretty chaotic and immersion-breaking, it looks like. It's one thing to be exploring around in Civ6 and run into Wilfred Laurier leading Canada in the ancient era. That's immersion-breaking, but there's sort of an "it is what it is" aspect to it - if you're gonna have Canada in the game, they need to be around from the ancient era.

But with what they're doing here, where all of the Civs are age-exclusive, you evolve from one into the next, and (it appears - this actually isn't confirmed as far as I can tell) each Civ has a default leader, then the options are:

1. Have AI Civs/Leaders be totally randomized. I doubt this, and it definitely wasn't reflected in the video today (though they almost certainly chose the civs/leaders Hatshepsut would run into carefully, rather than having this just be a normal "random" run, so it's possible.
2. Have AI Civs default to their Leaders, as set for all AI Civs at the start of game. This would mean, given the system they've described and shown us, that the AI would only use Leaders from Age of Antiquity civilizations. I find this extremely unlikely.
3. Have AI Leaders default to their Civs, and set non-Antiquity AI Leaders to historical predecessors. This is very possible, and might just be the way that they end up going. It presumes that all Exploration and Modern Age Civs have predecessor civs which will unlock them as options automatically, which I don't think has been shown to be necessarily the case, but there could be other workarounds, or maybe we'll meet Genghis Khan leading Scythia in Antiquity and see him somehow not settle enough Horse resources to actually evolve into the Mongols. That could be funny. Though, again, immersion-breaking.
4. Have AI Leaders default to their Civs at the time in which the player meets them. What I've been talking about, and what I think would be the best way to handle this issue, personally.
 
I do have the feeling that it is #1, and maybe there is an option for #2.
With the expansion of the map, and what I remember from elsewhere, it seems though that totally new civs will be entering the game in the 2nd age, so that everyone will have an option of a historical representation.
 
I have taken what @The_J started, and expanded and refined it, so that we now have a complete transcription on the copy of this recording in our gallery. You can view and search it here:


Hopefully this will make it easier to cite what you heard within the video. The video and transcript are also divided into sections, so if you want to cite a precise time in the video, you'll only have to listen through a few minutes to find the exact time instead of the whole video.
 
Thank you for sharing the transcription!! I was actually going to do that tonight for a video we're going to record on this topic tomorrow, you've saved me like an hour of sleep, so I'm gonna steal right back XD
 
I do have the feeling that it is #1, and maybe there is an option for #2.
Now that we know that it was Amina in the showcase video, and that she's distinctly not an Antiquity-Age civ's leader, it seems that #1 is the way they're going, yeah. (Or, well, probably not total random chaos as in my #1 option, but rather, the AI will pick leaders and then pair them with Civs determined to be one of their "Historic Choices", or on the evolutionary line of them, most likely.
 
I don't understand all the "sky is falling" attitudes concerning "changing civs". It didn't work in HK doesn't mean it won't work in Civ7 when each age is promised to be 150-200 turns long. Also, the only thing you are changing is your set of bonuses. Does it really matter what country your chosen leader calls itself?
 
I don't understand all the "sky is falling" attitudes concerning "changing civs". It didn't work in HK doesn't mean it won't work in Civ7 when each age is promised to be 150-200 turns long. Also, the only thing you are changing is your set of bonuses. Does it really matter what country your chosen leader calls itself?
I see - you don't understand it - so let me explain - I want to play Civ game as always as a single civ (I don't care about leaders really) from the beginning to the end and now I would be forced to change my chosen civ during playthrough (forced is the key word here). I'm open for many changes but not for this one. Period.
 
I see - you don't understand it - so let me explain - I want to play Civ game as always as a single civ (I don't care about leaders really) from the beginning to the end and now I would be forced to change my chosen civ during playthrough (forced is the key word here). I'm open for many changes but not for this one. Period.
Would it solve the problem if instead of changing your civilization's name they instead offered you a choice of new unique bonuses for the new age and if you happy with your current civ name you can keep it?
 
Would it solve the problem if instead of changing your civilization's name they instead offered you a choice of new unique bonuses for the new age and if you happy with your current civ name you can keep it?
Yes, that would be a simple and elegant solution.
 
Would it solve the problem if instead of changing your civilization's name they instead offered you a choice of new unique bonuses for the new age and if you happy with your current civ name you can keep it?
would love that but I wonder if it is too late to make a change like that...
 
Thank you for sharing the transcription!! I was actually going to do that tonight for a video we're going to record on this topic tomorrow, you've saved me like an hour of sleep, so I'm gonna steal right back XD
You're welcome! It was probably two hours of sleep saved, as that's about how much time it took me, and The_J had spent some time on it before that. It's amazing how long it takes to do an accurate, high-quality transcription, I might not have embarked on that quest if I'd known how long it would take. Gives me new respect for the people who do the closed-captioning on live TV events.
 
Keeping the old civilization name would be trivial to implement, nothing has to really change in the underlying ages mechanisms, all that' required is a button added to the UI and a variable to store the civilization name (rather than read it from some sort of data table). If Firaxis really listens to the community that's something they should do because many players are attached to their civilization far more than their leader. Changing the civilization mid-game would feel like a failure. You didn't "stand the test of time" if you are forced to abandon your civilization! A forced failure no matter how you play isn't something you should implement in a game.
 
Top Bottom