We Know There Will Be 39 Civs for the Founders Edition, And My Guess: Mainly About Non-linear Civ Choices

gdr_willter

Korean Civ Fan
Joined
Oct 8, 2024
Messages
443
Number 39 comes from: 30 civs in base game + 1 civ in Shawnee pack + 4 civs in CotW collection + 4 civs in RtR collection.
I'm pretty sure that there will be some forks and junctions, so we can't arrange all civs in 3×13 table.

I only drew the major civ-unlock routes I considered, and there will be more minor or conditional routes.

Civ7_39civs.png
 
Last edited:
Hi! My thread was swept by spam management and now returned. :lol:
 
Ooh, could you perhaps make a version that uses colored boxes to clarify which civs have been confirmed and which are speculation? Perhaps even colored lines to again indicate confirmed historical choices?

I like the idea!
 
Ooh, could you perhaps make a version that uses colored boxes to clarify which civs have been confirmed and which are speculation? Perhaps even colored lines to again indicate confirmed historical choices?

I like the idea!

Civ7_39civs.png


Blue for confirmed civs and routes, Green for most likely civs and routes, Pink for my speculation (of course very effected from other ppl's great visions :D).

p.s. VietNam and Assyria are somewhere between most-likely and speculation, I just painted them green because of thier associated leader, unit art style, and wonder.
 
Last edited:
oof, no Germany at all anywhere, not even with the DLC?

Also:
- Mississippi not officially mentioned yet. I guess seeing an icon counts as confirmed? Devs mentioned the "Persian" city style and for them and the Inca we've seen so much, they should also count as confirmed then.
- Britain not 100% confirmed as a launch-day civ yet
 
oof, no Germany at all anywhere, not even with the DLC?

Also:
- Mississippi not officially mentioned yet. I guess seeing an icon counts as confirmed? Devs mentioned the "Persian" city style and for them and the Inca we've seen so much, they should also count as confirmed then.
- Britain not 100% confirmed as a launch-day civ yet

Yes, I know that I'm not quite good at sorting all evidence clearly and that's why I didn't colored them at first 😅
But anyway this structure is designed for full list of 39 civs for Founders edition, not 31 civs for a launch-day.


I want to hear your opinion about this structure based on the idea that the routes will be intersected along many forks and junctions, instead of 13 linear main routes.
 
Maybe we cen have HRE and Germany instead of Byzantine and Russia...
13 civs for each ages with many Native American civs unavoidably lead us to give up a room for traditional European civs.
 
I expect the civ switching mechanics to be more entangled. We will have Mongols to Mughals and Chola to Siam, maybe even Majapahit to Meiji and Persia to Spain.

Also Greece to Normans is confirmed and considering that Byzantine is unlikely in the main game, Greece will also have some other connection. Probably to Abbasids.
 
I expect the civ switching mechanics to be more entangled. We will have Mongols to Mughals and Chola to Siam, maybe even Majapahit to Meiji and Persia to Spain.

Also Greece to Normans is confirmed and considering that Byzantine is unlikely in the main game, Greece will also have some other connection. Probably to Abbasids.

Of course I'm not completely sure about my full structure itself, it maybe wrong with many things I lost.

The point is the idea of flexible routes. I've seen many ppl guess the list filling a clean 3x13 table. But I think the result will be more complicated, intersected, and quite dirty. Some branches will spread to more civs while some others joint themselves into lesser civs.
 
I want to hear your opinion about this structure based on the idea that the routes will be intersected along many forks and junctions, instead of 13 linear main routes.

That's what I'm expecting as well. Linear routes make sense for China, India and some other places, but there are no clear predecessors or continuations for civilizations like Babylon, the Hittites, the Dutch, and many more. At most you can draw a regional link, but in some cases even that is difficult.
 
That's what I'm expecting as well. Linear routes make sense for China, India and some other places, but there are no clear predecessors or continuations for civilizations like Babylon, the Hittites, the Dutch, and many more. At most you can draw a regional link, but in some cases even that is difficult.

For the Dutch I can give you a continuation (and as short as possible)
Doubt it will be implemented though, but there is a definite continuation possible in the Low Countries area.

Antiquity: In the North and North-West were the Frisians ; or
In the rest of what now is the Netherlands and Flanders the Salian Franks came to be during Roman times who were a combination of all the Germanic tribes (Salians, Batavians, Chamavians, Tubantes etc) who lived in the Area.
they would later conquer what is now known as France as the Frankian Empire but the Frankian people kept on living here in the Low Countries but stopt calling themselves the Franks later on.

Exploration: The United Provinces as they were known (there was no Netherlands yet) came into revolt as their lands fell into Habsburg hands and they revolted to form one nation
(They included Holland, Friesland, Brabant, Utrecht, Flanders, Gelre etc. The North succeded and would later become the Netherlands, and the Southern parts did stay under Habsburg rule (first Spain and later Austria) and would become later Belgium (after being reunited with the north for a while).
This is the time of Dutch Explorers, the big Trade Companies (VOC and WIC), the first proper polder makers and many well known Artists (like Rembrandt etc), and is combined known as the Dutch Golden Age.

Modern: the Netherlands proper and the building of the colonial empire (until halfway the 20th century, the big trade power and the industrial and technological revolution (especially after WW2).

In game though I only expect that in one of the expansions the Dutch area only will be represented in the Exploration age under the name of the Netherlands as they did with Spain (instead of naming them Castille in the Exploration age to keep room for Spain in the modern age).
If they do so then for the Modern age the Netherlands will have to go into the USA (the New Netherlands colony incl. New Amsterdam/New York gives a reason for that) or a Boer republic in South Africa as they were decendents of mostly dutch/flemish colonists. They even could make Belgium a modern civ to give them some ingame representation too (though that would be a bit weird as modern Netherlands has more people/land/power/higher economy etc).
 
View attachment 705938

Blue for confirmed civs and routes, Green for most likely civs and routes, Pink for my speculation (of course very effected from other ppl's great visions :D).

p.s. VietNam and Assyria are somewhere between most-likely and speculation, I just painted them green because of thier associated leader, unit art style, and wonder.

The best way to clearly visualise all civs and connections I've seen so far, I hope this style is used for some generally accessible summaries.

My personal notes
- No way we don't get Germany next to England, Russia, America and France, it's the absolute staple of the 19th and 20th century, you need it for all modern "scenarios" (Napoleonic wars, industrial revolution, colonialism, world wars and cold war). I think we got Goths to serve as German progenitor, since Rome ---> Germany feels out of place.
- For that reason I expect HRE (or whatever medieval German civ) and Germany.
- And I think the place for them shall be sadly made by the absence of prior two stages of Japan, and Japan is gonna rise from Ming - as controversial as it's going to be. Though I'd prefer full path for both Germany and Japan.
- I don't think we get both Inca and Aztec, they'd be redundant. I'd be very surprised if Firaxis went with Inca instead of the obvious Maya->Aztec->Mexico, also Aztec are staple since civ1.
- I think Safavid/Iran is quite possible alternative for era III instead of the Ottomans. It would have cultural predecessors in Achaemenids and Abbasids, whereas Ottomans should grow out of Seljuks and either ancient steppe or Hittites.
- I vaguely recall there being signs of an entire separate full Pacific line, with Tonga Hawaii etc? It could fit if we got ride of say Inca, Assyria and Vietnam.
- Signs of Vietnam and Assyria really mess with me, as they'd be really redundant at the current stage of things. Three predecessors of Abbasids??
- Another hing weirding me out is lack of Mongol progenitor. We could really use Scythians, they'd be fantastic progenitor for a lot of civs. I think we shall get Han -> Mongolia or Vietnam -> Qing or Meiji. Or even separate Vietnam -> Mongolia -> Meiji, as much as I don't like this idea.
 
Last edited:
We have seen the Brandenburg gate. Which is not very strong on its wonder-credentials only and only really makes sense if you wanted a wonder for Prussia.
it's been a wonder before, it's an iconic German landmark. Doesn't even require "Prussia".
 
That's what I'm expecting as well. Linear routes make sense for China, India and some other places, but there are no clear predecessors or continuations for civilizations like Babylon, the Hittites, the Dutch, and many more. At most you can draw a regional link, but in some cases even that is difficult.

Babylon could feasibly progress to Aturqid Seljuk territory, but outside of that there aren't really any solid options (it's the only Sunni dynasty in the Iraqi region to my knowledge, and one last lasted several centuries).

Hittites could progress to Georgia, I think, as at least a nod to coming from the Anatolia region. It's very imperfect though.

Dutch are probably just going to branch off the HRE/Franks/Carolingians, that would be easiest, but I suppose other things could happen.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 705938

Blue for confirmed civs and routes, Green for most likely civs and routes, Pink for my speculation (of course very effected from other ppl's great visions :D).

p.s. VietNam and Assyria are somewhere between most-likely and speculation, I just painted them green because of thier associated leader, unit art style, and wonder.
That seems quite reasonable to me. I just wouldn’t bet on a modern Vietnam; however, I do believe we’ll see Dai Viet. But given that Southeast Asia will already have a fairly complete historical path in the base game, I don’t think we’ll see another civ from that region in the first DLC releases.

Given some very specific wonders, I’d say Tonga, Silla, and the Goths will be in the upcoming releases. So, I’d rule out Assyria and Yamato for now. Finally, Hawaii will very likely feature somewhere in the Exploration Age.

The rest seems quite fitting to me.
 
That seems quite reasonable to me. I just wouldn’t bet on a modern Vietnam; however, I do believe we’ll see Dai Viet. But given that Southeast Asia will already have a fairly complete historical path in the base game, I don’t think we’ll see another civ from that region in the first DLC releases.

Given some very specific wonders, I’d say Tonga, Silla, and the Goths will be in the upcoming releases. So, I’d rule out Assyria and Yamato for now. Finally, Hawaii will very likely feature somewhere in the Exploration Age.

The rest seems quite fitting to me.

I wouldn't be surprised if some leaders we get have no associated civ and are just teasers for region DLC, especially regions that will naturally want three leaders but will only release with two.
 
Given some very specific wonders, I’d say Tonga, Silla, and the Goths will be in the upcoming releases. So, I’d rule out Assyria
I expect Assyria will be early DLC as well. As it stands, we have no Ancient Mesopotamian civ in the base game (and no Persia is not Mesopotamia), and we have Dur-Sharrukin--which is certainly wondrous enough to merit inclusion but probably also signals Assyrians are coming sooner than later.
 
Top Bottom