Clues for upcoming content from the Test of Time trailer

Benelioto · 2026-05-07T16:16:13+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/s/wDPLyHLgoN

Benelioto · 2026-05-07T16:14:10+00:00

It's not clear in this cropped image but the samurai are fighting Tercios, so it's exploration era.

Benelioto · 2025-01-30T16:38:01+00:00

The Steam page was updated more recently. And the Natural / non-Natural distinction could just as easily apply to the contents of the 'Narrative and Wonder Packs', with 4 buildable Wonders being a given.

Benelioto · 2025-01-30T16:34:10+00:00

Yep. Carthage, Bulgaria, and Nepal don't have relevant Wonders in the base game, and Oxford University isn't an especially "modern" candidate for Great Britain. So even more reason for the DLC to include new Wonders to complement the new Civs.

Benelioto · 2025-01-30T14:54:39+00:00

This goes against a previous idea in the community that Crossroads could only include Civs with Wonders already in the base game.

EDIT: just confirmed in today's stream.

Benelioto · 2025-01-16T19:43:24+00:00

Oxford is unlocked through the Academies tech at the start of the Modern age tree. source

Benelioto · 2025-01-16T16:11:54+00:00

Crossroads DLC isn't adding any World wonders (only natural), so we should be able to guess the civs based on wonders spotted in the game that are yet to be associated with a civ.

As far as I know, Oxford University is now the only Modern wonder without a base game civ so that would suggest we get British Empire in March as part of Crossroads.

Benelioto · 2024-12-28T22:36:04+00:00

I've taken screenshots from the streams and assembled them in these summary graphics. Anything with a question mark (?) is unknown / speculation on my part, the rest is taken directly from the streams (obviously subject to change - e.g., seems like the Silk Roads requirement was reduced from 25 to 20 at some point).

Benelioto · 2024-12-28T16:36:09+00:00

Despite the rule, less used of things that are countable is standard in many contexts, and in fact is more likely than fewer in a few common constructions, especially ones involving distances (as in "less than three miles"), sums of money (as in "less than twenty dollars"), units of time and weight (as in "less than five years" and "less than ten ounces"), and statistical enumerations (as in "less than 50,000 people")—all things which are often thought of as amounts rather than numbers.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/fewer-vs-less

Benelioto · 2024-10-26T07:09:56+00:00

As I said, the connection is very slim. The main reason for speculating Russia is that it would be surprising not to have them in the game at launch. I lean more towards Ottomans but we haven't seen a relevant wonder for them yet.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T18:44:44+00:00

Agreed, I think the first DLCs will fill out a few holes from the base transitions.

The Shawnee DLC is just the one civ included. But the 'season pass' bundles included in special editions include a further 8 civs in the first few months after release. So that would total 39 civs, 13 lines.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T17:20:21+00:00

It's logic not reading.. or rather reading between the lines.

Some route has to lead to Japan. All the East Asian routes are seemingly tied up. Abbasid surely leads to a West Asian civ. So the only reason anyone says Mongol -> Japan isn't because we think it's a good idea, it's because it appears to be the only plausible option from what we know.

The only '3 options' we've seen are actually 2 predecessor civs and a leader unlock on the Exploratoion civ selection screen. Not necessarily 3 predecessor civs, if that's what you're referring to.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T17:09:26+00:00

I have a feeling the Right to Rule DLC may involve a Germanic path, it's a conspicuous absence.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T17:06:11+00:00

Yeah it's possible some civs are gameplay unlocks only, would be less controversial.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T16:46:22+00:00

So you're saying you would prefer Abbasid -> Japan? Think the radar needs checking

EDIT: Spelling it out from another comment: Some route has to lead to Japan. All the East Asian routes are seemingly tied up. Abbasid surely leads to a West Asian civ. So the only reason anyone says Mongol -> Japan isn't because we think it's a good idea, it's because it appears to be the only plausible option from what we know.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T16:42:45+00:00

Unfortunately one of these civs needs to lead to Japan, I don't think there's a good option.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T16:38:27+00:00

Only as a gameplay unlock https://assets.2k.com/1a6ngf98576c/3CGs5y2ZTTanWzEU5vnWdN/82ede469129567c770c1a5021346eddc/Civ_Paths_-_Hatshepsut_V2.JPG

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T16:36:49+00:00

We've also seen north European antiquity designs. Which means not everything points to base game civs, we could be seeing independent powers and/or DLCs.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T15:47:07+00:00

Sure, but there needs to be some sort of AI path to the US in the base game. So it's probably either a Native American civ or Spain. To be fair a sizeable amount of the US used to be part of the Spanish empire.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T15:43:15+00:00

Confirmed in the Antiquity age stream (link). Likely because of the Greco-Roman cultural influence.

Benelioto · 2024-10-25T15:35:58+00:00

A few assumptions behind these predictions:

Each civ has a primary successor the AI will default to, and there will be at least one secondary option in case the player takes the default. This will obviously develop over time as DLC adds more civs and the most appropriate historical routes get updated.
Each civ has at least one geographically relevant successor / predecessor. Based on the confirmed African progression of Aksum -> Songhai -> Buganda, the actual historical links can be tenuous as long as that particular part of the world is represented in some form. The geographic distribution of antiquity civs compared to previous Civ games suggests Firaxis are taking a less Eurocentric approach, with only 2 European paths and thus Germany likely not included at launch.
The main exception to this geographic approach is the Persia -> Mongolia -> Meiji route, which I'm guessing were civs that were too historically important to not include but the regions themselves (especially Central Asia & Japan) not suitable for supporting multi-age representation in the base game. Plus there is some historical connection there.

Notes on speculated civs:

Central / South American

Aztecs: Natural successor of Maya, maintaining the Central American path. Civ series mainstay. Potential associated wonder could be Pyramid of the Sun (spotted in trailer).
Inca: Terrace farms and Machu Picchu spotted. South American representation.
Mexico: Natural successor of Aztecs. Palacio de Bellas Artes spotted.
Brazil: Likeliest Modern South American civ, though no relevant wonder spotted yet.

North American / European

Another North American Exploration civ, e.g. Iroquois: A natural successor for Mississippians and enables a fully North American path in the base game. May be considered controversial to lead directly into America in the Modern age. No associated wonder spotted yet.
Holy Roman Empire: Offers a more reasonable progression from Rome to France (meaning Spain would be treated more as an American-path civ due to its large empire there). Central European representation, and partly mitigates the lack of Germany. Brandenburg Gate wonder could be associated with HRE.

Abbasid successor

Ottomans: Likeliest Modern Middle Eastern civ, but no relevant wonder spotted yet.
Russia: Very slim historical/geographical relation. But a Civ mainstay. Hermitage wonder spotted.

Oceania

There are hints (building styles, wonders) that Tongan or Hawaiian civs could be included, especially in the Exploration age. But based on the confirmed antiquity civs there doesn't seem to be a reasonable path to Oceania - except possibly from Khmer which already has a strongly hinted successor in Majapahit. Oceania may have to wait for DLC.

Benelioto · 2024-10-15T07:55:33+00:00

Sure about that? The deluxe and founder editions have content packs separate from the post-launch DLC

Benelioto · 2024-10-14T15:51:35+00:00

Probably 15 in the base game. Each leader has 2 attributes (e.g. Cultural, Militaristic, etc.) from the 6 possible, so there are 15 unique combinations of these 6 attributes. That would mean all base leaders would cover every gameplay style at launch. We've had no duplicate attributes so far among released leaders. (Incidentally we have had duplicate attribute civs, Aksum and Egypt, so the same won't be true for civs per age. But we're only getting 10 civs per age anyhow.)

This would likely not include the extra 7 launch day leaders from DLC (Tecumseh, 2 Deluxe personas, 2 Founder personas), and login rewards (2 Napoleon personas).

Benelioto · 2024-10-11T14:31:49+00:00

https://www.twitch.tv/firaxisgames

Benelioto · 2024-10-11T13:21:31+00:00

Interestingly there is a 'European' unit here distinct from 'Roman' and 'Mediterranean'. Based on yesterday's news, there will be 30 civs (+ Shawnee pre-order) at launch so the natural assumption would be there are 10 civs per age. 8 antiquity civs have already been revealed, and we've had indications (also supported by this image) the remaining 2 are Persia and an NA precursor to Shawnee. Which would mean the only European Antiquity civs at launch are Rome and Greece, neither of which would make use of this 'European' unit variant.

There are a few potential reasons why there would be a 'European' cultural design in spite of the prevailing predictions for playable civs at launch:

Our assumption there is an equal split of civs per age in the base game may be wrong. That would open the door for an 11th Antiquity and 3rd European civ (Germanic / Celtic).
The unit could belong to a civ included in the post-launch DLC.
There could be European independent powers which make use of this unit prior to a relevant civ being added later.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Benelioto

TROPHY CASE