Civ Selection Criteria for an 8th civ, which may never be designed

[DynasticPlanet]

Most civs need that. The original game didn’t really go out of its way to teach about any of the civs. If you were my age you might have known about Greek Egypt, Persia Babylon, maybe Sumerian. Maybe heard the word Yamato once or twice but likely had no idea what a Hittite, Assyrian or Choson was but you enjoyed the game and tended to play those three civs a lot depending on map type. There were blurbs on history here and there but they were not required to win.

the point? The gameplay of a Hittite or Choson could be so fun you don’t care if you don’t know what it is and feel compelled to learn based on how fun it is.

So no I don’t think we need 2 years of history lesson before the next civ releases.

 

[Ardeshir]

Sweet it's great to know that Phonecia/ns is one of the possibilites!

 

[DynasticPlanet]

As much as we all want Phoenecians, we must remember there are other civs many most forget to think about as much as I want to remind them to.

My wording sounds harsh I mostly mean there are a lot of great civs with great gameplay uniqueness that only that civ can offer.

 

[Andy P XIII]

The question is which civ would be best for civ 8. Every month that drips by is further confirmation that our ability to make civs is constrained and we need to choose very carefully.

At this point I’m more interested in which civs we should rule out.

 

[gerarddepardieu1]

For me, the phoenicians can be a great idea (even if I am a proponent of thracians ...) I see a lot of Greek architecture with finishes and colors from the age 4 of the Egyptians for the phoenicians ​

 

[Andy P XIII]

If we ruled out the Phoenicians, then who would be best?

 

[DynasticPlanet]

Not that anyone thinks the way I do but it’s more important to choose based on unique gameplay potential that can only be done by a certain civilization than the name recognition itself

 

[Andy P XIII]

Running list of civs mentioned so far:

Gauls
Germanic Tribes
Thracians
Hittites
Carthaginians
Phoenicians
Nubians
Scythians
Huns
Indians
Mongols
Xiongnu
Chinese
Choson
Japanese
Olmec
Mayans

 

[DarkArrow710]

Nubians would also be nice to see. Its also related to the egyptians and romans trough a long period of time.

 

[DynasticPlanet]

Who cares if a civ has been mentioned!? Andy I know you are genuinely a smart and savvy person so to seem to befuddled by all the civ names being thrown around comes across as an act because I know you better and I normally respect you a lot.

I’m not trying to be mean or get myself banned for badmouthing someone high on the totem pole but if somebody throwing around civ names really really confuses you then maybe you need someone to assist you in this process. But I don’t honestly think you’re confused because you wouldn’t be on the team at the moment if you weren’t smart. If me speaking my mind gets me in trouble, fine I’m not trying to stir a pot and cause a ruckus just trying to pinpoint things and be honest here.

 

[Andy P XIII]

I’m playing dumb to not steer the discussion. If I narrowed in on my top three or so it would make it sound like I wasn’t interested to hear others. But I do think we can reasonably narrow in if we tried.

 

[DynasticPlanet]

Well let me help just a little bit.

Once the biggest factor being a location in the world map that connects relatively well with the other regions is out in the open, the choices really can be anything. I think Rome was not the best choice because it’s way too popular, a hill I will die on and take to my grave but I’m still excited to play a new civ provided it’s fun and balanced.

It follows most people won’t be mad about a far less popular civ being next, since it’s brand new material for all to enjoy and thus as predatory as it is to paraphrase “consume product and get excited for more product!”

The window to get a new obscure civ out there gets smaller the faster civs can get cranked out so we must think from a long term marketing standpoint and you can’t convince me that it’s wrong for me to put myself in the shoes of a marketer even in a fully free game.

Anyway that is my opinion on the matter, people want to play with new toys especially when free, regardless of if it’s a popular empire or not however the more toys the get the less power obscure toys will have.

 

[Andy P XIII]

OK. So how would you begin eliminating possibilities? Anyone else have input?

 

[DynasticPlanet]

OK. So how would you begin eliminating possibilities?

Using Your Most Updated List:
Gauls
Germanic Tribes
Thracians
Hittites
Carthaginians
Phoenicians
Nubians
Scythians
Huns
Indians
Mongols
Xiongnu
Chinese
Choson
Japanese
Olmec
Mayans

Lets start with the ones that are time displaced: Mogols come most to mind as a more Medieval power. Would be fantastic in AoKOnline but this isn't that game.
Japan, China and Choson are sadly seperatted by Asian steppes and no civ in between so they're out too. Olmecs and Mayans are a large Ocean away in either direction. With this, we have a condensed list so far:

Gauls
Germanic Tribes
Thracians
Hittites
Carthaginians
Phoenicians
Nubians
Scythians
Huns
Indians
Xiongnu

That's way better to work with but it can be further downed. We can and should combine Carthage into Phoenicia and Gauls are very Celtic, and if you really wanna go that route, we'd have Britons.

Same can be said for Xiongnu and Huns (unless you want a civ pronounced Hunu alongside Huns, which wouldn't be confusing at all.)

Germanic Tribes
Thracians
Hittites
Phoenicians
Nubians
Scythians
Huns
Indians

I've also heard tell that one of the plans is to move out of Europe so while I'd want to add Iberians to that list, I think we can eliminate European at least for civ 8. Nubian

So now...

Hittites
Phoenicians
Nubians
Scythians
Huns
Indians

Now many may not agree with me, but I think I've limited it down. So at a later point I will discuss the unique ways each of these 6 civ can thrive in unique gameplay ways and I will go over each.

However I do agree with your last point, I want to hear from others as well, which is why I'm keeping this thread alive. The majority stays too silent.

 

[Fraxure022]

I wonder what unique gameplay hooks Scythia could have? I’m not crazy familiar with their history. I feel like they’re probably the Civ that makes the most sense, closely tied with India, but I don’t know enough about them to envision them. Probably a focus on mounted warfare, I’d imagine.

 

[Andy P XIII]

I wonder what unique gameplay hooks Scythia could have? I’m not crazy familiar with their history. I feel like they’re probably the Civ that makes the most sense, closely tied with India, but I don’t know enough about them to envision them. Probably a focus on mounted warfare, I’d imagine.

There is not a ton of written history of the Scythians, and certainly not much (any?) written by them. But in broad strokes, they could represent a mobile cavalry civ from the great steppes, similar in spirit to the Huns and several others (including the Mongols, which are from all accounts of a totally separate era than AoEO). They are considered Nomadic (though they did have some cities), so they could have some kind of unique playstyle with cheap, mobile Buildings, etc. There would be lots of ways to go.

 

[DynasticPlanet]

In broad strokes yes, but again remember to plan ahead. Scythians might seem akin to Huns, but then you realize you need a civ that razes buildings and Huns are all used up in the Scythians. Or think this way: if you have a bunch of ideas that fit nomadic peoples, then you can divvy up the gameplay gimmicks between 2 civs eventually, that's just good marketing. Besides there are differences between them: Huns being nomads and possibly Xiongnu could have access to a few camels and would likely be contenders for the civ that only has 1 infantry unit. Meanwhile the Scythians were also the Amazons, had Torcs and also had female warriors. Huns would not fit having any of those criteria.

But then again, we have Celts AND Norse both heavily infantry focused so 2 steppes rider civs could work just fine although not back to back.

 

[Andy P XIII]

I don’t think we’d ever be able to balance a civ that has just one Infantry. Not sure we’d want to, either.

I don’t think we would ever reasonably expect to create both Scythians and Huns, either. It’d be cool to have someone represent that part of the map, though.

 

[Fraxure022]

I don’t think we’d ever be able to balance a civ that has just one Infantry. Not sure we’d want to, either.

I don’t think we would ever reasonably expect to create both Scythians and Huns, either. It’d be cool to have someone represent that part of the map, though.

This is important to remember. The people who develop this are unpaid volunteers. If we get an eight Civ, it’ll be a miracle. More than that will be nothing short of an act of God. The Civs would need to be chosen very carefully.

 

[Andy P XIII]

The Romans are taking us about three times as long as we first expected. We thought we would have had them out by last August. Then December. Then March. Now we have no idea except we know we are more than 10 weeks out and probably double that.

We can always tell ourselves we will be making civs for the rest of our lives and/or that it will get quicker each time, but if we decide to go to 8, we need to decide who is 8th and need to decide that in a total vacuum. So we would choose the 8th while assuming there will be no 9th. If we ever have the luxury of revisiting that fatalistic view, then we will very happily and assuredly do so. But if we went to the Steppes for 8th, it would be unrealistic to leave room for a second civ from the exact same region that, if it ever came, would be be developed 12th or 14th or something, which would be more than a decade in real years from now. We need each civ to pack as much of a punch as possible if we are ever going keep momentum going for yet another one.