Why does new age bonuses require switching civs?

[Josu]

Those are requirements for choosing Songhai.

The player can *become Songhai civ* if:
>They are Egypt civ
OR
>They are Aksum civ
OR
>They are using Amina leader

We know being Egypt Civ unlocks Songhai and that a leader can unlock a specific civ thanks to this image:

Isn't this a concept taken from Humankind?

 

[notNamed]

Isn't this a concept taken from Humankind?

No, in HK you can always pick any culture of the next era on a first come, first served basis.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Also, bear in mind that the actual Civs you can turn into can still change between now and release. The core idea of Historical Link to leader/previous Age Civ OR Historical Achievement linked to the new Civ as the two defining factors for what you can transition into is what's most important here.

 

[kryat]

Well, it does not make sense not to be able to stay same Civ.

As I said, Japan and China (even today modern civs) are civs from ancient era up-to-today .... where will the put Japan, in which era??

My guess is that China and Japan (and likely others) will have different dynasties for different ages.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Well, it does not make sense not to be able to stay same Civ.

As I said, Japan and China (even today modern civs) are civs from ancient era up-to-today .... where will the put Japan, in which era??

This is assuming that Japan will be an antiquity civ, at the start of the game. I imagine it would be an Exploration one at least, considering that time period covers the Medieval up to the beginning of the Industrial.

 

[Talar]

I haven't been here for years now but this change brought me back.

Simply put I want to play as a civilization, not some immortal character. The leader focus was already too heavy in the last couple versions, but possible to ignore as you could still think of yourself as Egypt and not the leader. Switching civs feels like it crosses the line where a core concept of what the game is changes. An era mechanic would not need civ switching. It could maybe have a place, like the Vikings into Sweden example mentioned above. Europa Universalis does this (and does it the right way). But Egyptians suddenly turning into asian steppe nomads speaking an entirely different language? I will have a hard time imagining how that happened in my game world.

 

[Reckoner]

In my view, they're changing a wildly anachronistic feature (everlasting national entities & leaders) to a slightly less wildly anachronistic direction - new entities emerge from the older world. Ill just add that I'm very certain this part of the game will be very accessible for modders, so we'll get the "Real Progression Paths" packages and such almost immediately.

 

[playshogi]

I haven't been here for years now but this change brought me back.

Simply put I want to play as a civilization, not some immortal character. The leader focus was already too heavy in the last couple versions, but possible to ignore as you could still think of yourself as Egypt and not the leader. Switching civs feels like it crosses the line where a core concept of what the game is changes. An era mechanic would not need civ switching. It could maybe have a place, like the Vikings into Sweden example mentioned above. Europa Universalis does this (and does it the right way). But Egyptians suddenly turning into asian steppe nomads speaking an entirely different language? I will have a hard time imagining how that happened in my game world.

There is a simple solution: change the name of your new civilization like you can change the name of a city. But, you still get all the new bonuses AND you get to play the same civ all the way through. In fact, maybe if you start out as Korea, then all the exploration civs could be named Korea and you can pick the bonuses you prefer. It might be unpleasant for some people to start out as Korea and then have to play as Japan because Japan has the best bonuses for how they have played the game in antiquity.

 

[Krikkit1]

I'm guessing in single player game, if both the AI and human satisfy the condition for Mongolia, then human's choice trumps the AI's choice in picking the civ for the next era. Wonder what happens in a Multiplayer game? Can there be multiple Mongolia? What if all players pick Mongolia as the next civ?

My thought is it depends on some "Victory Score" in the current Age. Let each human player go in order, then let each AI go in order (unless Humans choose civs first option is unchecked)

I guess a leader exclusive to that civ would give you first choice of it though.

 

[Talar]

There is a simple solution: change the name of your new civilization like you can change the name of a city. But, you still get all the new bonuses AND you get to play the same civ all the way through.

That helps some I suppose, but I'm still not overly enthusiastic about the concept. I think it will be confusing when the AI civs change.