What Civs and Leaders do you all predict will be in VII's base game?

[IvoryPavane]

As someone who enjoys cognitive dissonance, I’m looking forward to the cross pollination of “I’m bored of (female leader) I want a less obvious choice” and “I can’t believe they went in this new direction with (female leader), it should have been the obvious choice”

(I don’t actually enjoy it! As a female playing Civ, I really enjoy the representation, and finding out the impact these ladies have made across history, but I hate the discourse that comes with it)

On the flip side, as a Scot I’m not sure how realistic I think it would be to be featured a second time, or how much I would enjoy Mary Stuart haha…..

But yay Civ!

 

[pokiehl]

They won't. That will guaranteed be a thing in the game. They will go out of their way to make sure that there is at least half female leaders. If they can fill some other quotas to when they are at it they will try to fill those to.

Civ 6 had 1/3 female leaders, not half.

If they wanted to be smart about it they would just make both a male and female leader head for each nation and then people could just chose or randomize whatever they would like. But I don't think we'll see that.

I don’t think that would be smart, considering that leaders are the most expensive and time consuming element of a civ to make. This would vastly limit the number of factions we have. Also, there simply is no female option for a lot of factions.

 

[IvoryPavane]

They won't. That will guaranteed be a thing in the game. They will go out of their way to make sure that there is at least half female leaders. If they can fill some other quotas to when they are at it they will try to fill those to.
If they wanted to be smart about it they would just make both a male and female leader head for each nation and then people could just chose or randomize whatever they would like. But I don't think we'll see that.

Is this satire? This is a game about building and exploring civilisations across the entire world? What quotas do you think they are filling?

Also, there isn’t a 50:50 gender split in any civ game, and I don’t imagine this will buck that trend

 

[pokiehl]

Is this satire? This is a game about building and exploring civilisations across the entire world? What quotas do you think they are filling?

Also, there isn’t a 50:50 gender split in any civ game, and I don’t imagine this will buck that trend

Whatever you do, avoid the Steam forums for Civ 7. It’s already nearly 100% a complete mess of extremely angry posts pre-emptively railing against women leaders, “wokeness,” etc.

We haven’t even seen the game yet. This kind of anger baffles me.

 

[IvoryPavane]

Whatever you do, avoid the Steam forums for Civ 7. It’s already nearly 100% a complete mess of extremely angry posts pre-emptily railing against women leaders, “wokeness,” etc.

We haven’t even seen the game yet. This kind of anger baffles me.

Oh fully, I haven’t gone near Steam or Reddit in a long time haha.

Honestly, the Civ forums are one of the few places I feel safe to post without being dogpiled on, but the argument is nothing new. They’ve just been given new tools and discourse to attach their anger to.

I’ll never, ever, eveeeeer, understand how a game which is supposed to celebrate all of humanity and our accomplishments can come under fire for being too “diverse” but welcome to 2024 I guess.

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to derail the thread.

Leaders… I’d be surprised if the teaser didn’t contain SOME hints about the new leaders but I’d also not be surprised if the voice actors were not part of those hints

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Spoiler Civ4 Base game civs :

America
Arabia
Aztec
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
Inca
India
Japan
Mali
Mongolia
Persia
Rome
Russia
Spain

Spoiler Civ5 base game civs :

America
Arabia
Aztec
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
India
Iroquois
Japan
Korea
Ottomans
Persia
Rome
Russia
Siam
Songhai

Spoiler Civ6 base game civs :

America
Arabia
Brazil
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
India
Japan
Kongo
Norway
Rome
Russia
Scythia
Spain
Sumeria

Civs in bold have appeared in all of the last three base games. Civ5 had two new civs in the base game making their first appearance in the series (Iroquois, Songhai) as did Civ6 (Kongo, Scythia).

 

[UWHabs]

The hardest part of a new game is going back to like 18-20 civs from the mass number we have at the end of the cycle.

What we know is there are going to be like 2-3 that practically nobody would have guessed (like your Scythia or Kongo from 6). We'll get a few civs who came in late to 6 (like Ethiopia or Mali or Phoenecia). We'll have all the main civs back, but a couple of them will have a weird leader that nobody predicted for them (Trajan, Catherine de Medici).

I wish that they could somehow figure out a way to get the leaders done cheaper but still look and act and appear as good as they do in 6 (voiced and all). Like, if they could launch the game with even 30 civs, that would be absolutely massive and help people not feel as much loss at jumping to the new version.

 

[Leyrann]

If they wanted to be smart about it they would just make both a male and female leader head for each nation and then people could just chose or randomize whatever they would like. But I don't think we'll see that.

They did that in, what was it, Civ II? Civ III? Perhaps even both of them.

The issue?

For some of the ancient civs, there literally aren't any women known that they can put into the game. They had to invent a number of leaders. And if you get to e.g. the Roman Empire, there has simply never been a woman in a genuinely powerful position, to the best of our knowledge. And, let's be real, the same holds for the United States.

Regarding leaders/diversity: For better or worse, men have been far more dominant historically, so it makes sense that most leaders are male. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that they need to be as dominant in the game as they were historically. It's usually those leaders who bucked a trend who are the most interesting, and a woman rising to power in a male-dominated world is one way of doing so. On top of that, going with somewhat more obscure choices (so long as you can still defend why you go with that choice, of course) also provides a great opportunity for people to learn about history. I loved to learn about Jadwiga thanks to Civilization, for example.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Spoiler Civ4 Base game civs :

America
Arabia
Aztec
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
Inca
India
Japan
Mali
Mongolia
Persia
Rome
Russia
Spain

Spoiler Civ5 base game civs :

America
Arabia
Aztec
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
India
Iroquois
Japan
Korea
Ottomans
Persia
Rome
Russia
Siam
Songhai

Spoiler Civ6 base game civs :

America
Arabia
Brazil
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
India
Japan
Kongo
Norway
Rome
Russia
Scythia
Spain
Sumeria

Civs in bold have appeared in all of the last three base games. Civ5 had two new civs in the base game making their first appearance in the series (Iroquois, Songhai) as did Civ6 (Kongo, Scythia).

If Civ7 base game keeps true to form, that means we know 13 civs which will appear for certain (except possibly Russia, who I have a hunch will be released as a minor DLC). That leaves 5 slots up for grabs, with at least 2 civs who've never appeared before

 

[TreVor_ish]

I would love to see Boudica

 

[conorbebe]

Somehow, Napoleon returned...

 

[Civinator]

The dialogue

"Study the past if you would define the future.
All are architects of fate, working in these walls of time.
Let us all for death prepare, or on the last great journey fare.
Let me not then die ingloriously and without a struggle, but let me first do some great thing, that shall be told among men hereafter.
Each of us shall endure this world's life until the end.
Your names shall not be lost.
So it shall be"

makes complete sense for giving a civ several different leaders during a game.

The Civ 3 mod CCM 2.5 since many years has eraspecific different leaders for a civ and with the last version of the Flintlock mod it is possible in the upcoming version CCM 3 (release in about 1 week) to give all these different leaders of a civ in the game their different names and titles (and in later versions of that mod different strength in the game).

I posted this in two Civ 7 threads, as this belongs to both threads.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Civs in bold have appeared in all of the last three base games. Civ5 had two new civs in the base game making their first appearance in the series (Iroquois, Songhai) as did Civ6 (Kongo, Scythia).

You bolded Spain even though they missed Civ 5 base game. Also, Norway was also new in Civ 6, unless you are counting that as "Vikings" from previous games, and Iroquois were in Civ 3. You probably meant Siam instead?

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

You bolded Spain even though they missed Civ 5 base game. Also, Norway was also new in Civ 6, unless you are counting that as "Vikings" from previous games, and Iroquois were in Civ 3. You probably meant Siam instead?

Yes, Spain was bolded by mistake. I'm counting Denmark in 5 and Norway in 6 as the same civ that was called 'the Vikings' in 4. Iroquois and Siam I forgot about both

 

[FishFishFish]

I would be disappointed if they didn’t include Russia ngl. I’d prefer if they put someone like Ivan III as leader to avoid connections to the ongoing war.

 

[Leyrann]

I would be disappointed if they didn’t include Russia ngl. I’d prefer if they put someone like Ivan III as leader to avoid connections to the ongoing war.

I can definitely see that, but I also think it would set a positive precedent - namely that even a civ as major as Russia can, on occasion, be left out of the base game. Even if you only leave a civ out of the base game once every six games, if you've got twelve must-have civs, that's still two slots you're opening up every base game.

And with the current situation, you do have a good excuse to introduce that precedent with less backlash than you otherwise would. If they leave Russia out this game, then with Civilization 8, they can leave out, say, Rome and America. With 9, China and France. With 10, well, you get the idea.

Obviously, all of those would then be added in in the first expansion or even DLC, but it still means you've got fewer 'locked' civs for the base game, which means you've got a bit more room to showcase a civ that wouldn't otherwise make it, but did have a big impact on history.

 

[FishFishFish]

I would love if they picked an Umayyad Caliph for Arabia.

Histories about the Umayyad dynasty, often try to frame their subject matter by repeating a quote we find in several of our primary sources; "There were 3 great Umayyad Caliphs Mu'awiya, Abd al-Malik, and Hisham". I do agree with this quote, each member of the trio redefined the caliphate during their long reign. Mu'awiya I and Abd al-Malik earned their fame by building and rebuilding their clans power from the ground up respectively, each prevailing through their own time's fitna. Hisham started from a position of power, but would prove to the most tested Caliph. He faced with an onslaught of challenges and managed to overcome them.

Of course, they probably aren't gonna pick Mu'awiya I because he is controversial (especially among Shias). But I would love if they picked Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan or Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik.

If we are going back to Abbasid Caliphs; I nominate al-Mansur or al-Mu'tadid.

 

[Pitohui]

I think think this kind of thinking is the best chance we have of guessing the "outsider" picks(like Scythia).Civilizations with a very prominent female leader.Since Boudicca is very popular and didn't appear in 6,I don't think it's unlikely that they've been saving her for the base game

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I can definitely see that, but I also think it would set a positive precedent - namely that even a civ as major as Russia can, on occasion, be left out of the base game. Even if you only leave a civ out of the base game once every six games, if you've got twelve must-have civs, that's still two slots you're opening up every base game.

And with the current situation, you do have a good excuse to introduce that precedent with less backlash than you otherwise would. If they leave Russia out this game, then with Civilization 8, they can leave out, say, Rome and America. With 9, China and France. With 10, well, you get the idea.

Obviously, all of those would then be added in in the first expansion or even DLC, but it still means you've got fewer 'locked' civs for the base game, which means you've got a bit more room to showcase a civ that wouldn't otherwise make it, but did have a big impact on history.

Russia is in a different scenario though to the others. I also can't imagine them leaving out America or China, two of the biggest gaming markets, and the former having headquarters of Firaxis.

That being said I wouldn't be surprised by the following returners:
Poland- Poland was first introduced in an expansion in Civ 5 and met with positive results, so much that it was the first DLC for Civ 6. I could possibly see Poland getting in maybe even as a "Russia" replacement.
Vietnam- I fully expect them to have a SEA civ in the base game, considering the missed opportunity last time around. Vietnam seemed to be another positive addition and I could see them being moved to the base game, or early DLC.
Canada-Not necessarily popular, at least on the forums, but makes the most sense for a second post-colonial civ if they don't decide to go for Brazil. French colonial themed Canada would be the most interesting approach.

As for the possible 2 new civs:
Angola/Ndongo: Africa is ripe for new base game civs and I wouldn't be surprised if we get Nzinga Mbande again, but with her own civ.
Italy: I've been waiting for this one. If save Spain and the Viking civ for later, I think they have a shot.

 

[FishFishFish]

I think it is more likely if they rotate the SEA spot this time. Siam could return, or Burma could finally get a spotlight.