Trying to get a nice geographic spread, so I’m missing a few staples, but I think they can wait for DLC, it’s my philosophy that diversity should be less of an afterthought 😅
Switch out Brazil for Persia, Germany/France/Spain for Mongolia (or another Central Asian or Steppe civ) and rename the Mauryans to Magadha and this is basically my list.
It’s very hard to decide which civs to leave out, though.
@actsukrit I really like your list, but I would personally make a couple of adjustments: Replace Spain with Greece, and Brazil with Mongolia.
I recognize that it makes it a bit more “conventional”, but I can far more easily justify Spain and Brazil as DLC/Expansion civs than Greece and Mongolia. And I think it’d keep that diversity you were trying to achieve.
If I could pick one more, I’d go with Babylon.
I do hope they pick their civs a bit more carefully than what they did for Civ 6, that base game roster left a lot to be desired. Its saving grace was the huge amount of DLC it got over the years…
@actsukrit Totally right, it’s incredibly hard to condense all of history to just 20 or so cultures, specially if you’re trying to juggle being geographically and culturally diverse + including all those must-have ones + having well-known ones that appeal to a wide audience + having new ones.
For all my opinion is worth, I do think you managed very well! And if your list was Civ 7’s base roster, I’d be far happier with it than I was with Civ 6’s.
I guess if there’s one wish I have regarding this, I hope they find a way to make civs and leaders cheaper/faster to make than in Civ 5 and Civ 6, so that we can have more of them overall. Those two games did reach record numbers, but for both the devs did comment on how the work/time/budget necessary to make them had ballooned compared to previous entries.
Agree on Babylon, it feels a bit weird leaving Mesopotamia empty.
I think it would be possible to have a base game without Greece if they chose the right leader for Rome. A Rome lead by someone like Hadrian or Justinian might be just Greek enough to last until DLC.
I think some of the trouble with getting a good spread is that there are four modern European powers that are basically guaranteed for every single game. After checking off the other must-haves there aren’t that many slots left.
I think my personal list would be:
Trying to get a nice geographic spread, so I’m missing a few staples, but I think they can wait for DLC, it’s my philosophy that diversity should be less of an afterthought 😅
Switch out Brazil for Persia, Germany/France/Spain for Mongolia (or another Central Asian or Steppe civ) and rename the Mauryans to Magadha and this is basically my list.
It’s very hard to decide which civs to leave out, though.
NGL, completely forgot Persia existed, there are just so many regions of the world I wanted to cover 😅
Very understable, the world is quite large.
@actsukrit I really like your list, but I would personally make a couple of adjustments: Replace Spain with Greece, and Brazil with Mongolia.
I recognize that it makes it a bit more “conventional”, but I can far more easily justify Spain and Brazil as DLC/Expansion civs than Greece and Mongolia. And I think it’d keep that diversity you were trying to achieve.
If I could pick one more, I’d go with Babylon.
I do hope they pick their civs a bit more carefully than what they did for Civ 6, that base game roster left a lot to be desired. Its saving grace was the huge amount of DLC it got over the years…
Perfectly fair, though I personally could see a Greece + Persia DLC again like they did with Macedonia + Persia this time around.
It really can be difficult covering everyone when you’ve only so many spots!
@actsukrit Totally right, it’s incredibly hard to condense all of history to just 20 or so cultures, specially if you’re trying to juggle being geographically and culturally diverse + including all those must-have ones + having well-known ones that appeal to a wide audience + having new ones.
For all my opinion is worth, I do think you managed very well! And if your list was Civ 7’s base roster, I’d be far happier with it than I was with Civ 6’s.
I guess if there’s one wish I have regarding this, I hope they find a way to make civs and leaders cheaper/faster to make than in Civ 5 and Civ 6, so that we can have more of them overall. Those two games did reach record numbers, but for both the devs did comment on how the work/time/budget necessary to make them had ballooned compared to previous entries.
Agree on Babylon, it feels a bit weird leaving Mesopotamia empty.
I think it would be possible to have a base game without Greece if they chose the right leader for Rome. A Rome lead by someone like Hadrian or Justinian might be just Greek enough to last until DLC.
I think some of the trouble with getting a good spread is that there are four modern European powers that are basically guaranteed for every single game. After checking off the other must-haves there aren’t that many slots left.