Finally won a game

machiavelli
Antiquity as greece and went military, unconventional by absorbing city states which I guess is his forte anyway

In expansion era I became spain, made tons of colonies but really it was a foolish war by Napolean which allowed me to once again hit military tree by capturing all his colonies near me

In Modern I went wacky and chose mexico

Saw that Amina was winning and had a huge empire so I immediately went to war and took them down thru all of modern era, got to 20 cities, built manhattan project, built operation ivy

Good game!

The grind is huge once you get past mid-game. The timing sucks in Civ VI. I think it would be awesome if the years per turn was uniform throughout a full game showcasing just how fast things started changing from the Industrial Revolution onwards and the importance of strategic investments and wars into the Modern Era.

Besides who doesn't like a good catapult or Trebuchet, or Cavalry charge?

They made it like you should only play 1 era and skip a full game

Yea its really odd that you can make all these city state allies and build armies and then an era ends and all your stuff just poof

Glad to hear you're having a blast! :D
I love Civ games, so anytime someone is having a good time.... well that's a good thing!

I'm definitely going to wait for some patches, expansions, and a big sale I think. I cannot stand the UI as it currently is and I don't like how sterile the game feels at times. (Like with pop ups, it's usually text on a pretty bland background with nothing/very little to make it pull me into the world.

I'm also not a fan of how they've implemented changing ages. I'm not a fan of wars ending because some random timer went off, I don't like how they replace units, and I don't care for how after you've upgraded a town into a city you have to re-upgrade it after entering a new age. I think they're going for the feel of how some cities were once super important to empires, but as time goes on things change and they're not as needed and slowly dwindle but.... from a game play perspective it just feels bad imo. But I do love the idea of having my empire change as the world shifts and certain pressures impose their will on us. Very few empires have managed to have a continuity for hundreds and hundreds of years.

I love love love the new leader system for armies though. Omg. All that micro managing? So much easier. One of the big bright spots to me. (Also I love navigable rivers, but this is just a little thing for me idk if anyone else would care xD ) The lack of workers is.... well I'm sad to see them go since there are a lot of things that I loved about them. It was another unit to use, I could build offensive roads, it was a nice way to either hurt an enemy, or get another nation to like me more by giving them back....... buuuut by cutting them out things are just easier to handle. I don't really notice them missing that much. Heck in VI I often forget to build them, though I never played a ton of VI.

Basically....... I love a lot of the ideas behind this game, but dislike how a lot of it has been done. Given how a lot of Civ games go... I'm kinda expecting this to go the route that a lot of them do. Gets panned for its weak points and slowly gets a following of people who love it, for it to get updates and pull in new folks or people who'd tried it once but are curious about the changes....

Basically like a paradox game! xD

Status update

Game is incredibly fun. Early game is different without barbs but still sort of the same. Best thing this game has going for it is that opening build can vary more than civ 5 and 6. You can play as egypt for example and go for a quest that has you build 5 warriors in first 15 turns and its fun.
You can use diplomatic favor to just turn an angry city state onto your side and save your troops for an actual enemy civ.
Not having to make builders is really nice and is less tedious.

Diplomacy between empires has alot more options; and yet can be a bit redunadant. Once you make a deal with them they just keep coming back with more stuff to keep clicking.

Combat is sooooo much better than civ 6, in 6 it felt like once
Enemies had walls on higher difficulty that you had no chance of taking their cities. In this game the ai is more dynamic and simultaneously less defended. The archer is still great for when you get invaded and if the ai has alo
Of them it makes invasions alot nastier.

I havent even played a full exploration age yet or modern. Antiquity era is great and lots of fun. Get this game

I have loved every civ since civ 3, and they all take at least one expansion before they become really worth it. That being said, if i had to pick a best civ, I'd pick 4, but probably from nostalgia and the experiences I had as a teen playing it more than it being the best. They're always good, but I dont rush to buy. I looked at the 150 for founders for very little and was sketched out. I'll buy regular and play a little and then get really into it in a summer or two when I have a lot of time and the kinks have been worked out. They do a massive amount of fine tuning with each expansion and with games as in depth as they are, you gotta let the dev tweak a bit before judgement. Very excited though

So looking at steam the civ dlc pack is already coming out feb 10. This is stupid.

It adds nepal, bulgaria, simon bolivar, more wonders, great britain, ada lovelace, and carthage

The city loyalty penalities was also annoying so hopefully they never do that again. Capturing a city was hard enough only to have it rebel in 3 turns

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 07, 2025 12:51 am

Overall its kind of alot and I wanna play because im so bored with civ 6 now; but I hated how civ 5 punished players who liked large empires and it sounds like they made civ 7 very punishing to fast builder player types

I found that Civ 6 went too far in favouring wide rather than tall builds. 6 feels like it encourages you to build as many cities as you can, as quickly as you can, and with surprising geographical density to maximize district adjacency bonuses, all regardless of which Civilization you're playing. That eliminated a whole dimension of interesting decisions regarding whether and how quickly to expand. It also took the brakes off of total conquest strategies, which I find a little immersion breaking.

Will be curious to see how 7 balances all this.

On another note, I saw the publisher is already working on substantive updates to improve the UI in 7. Maybe some of the mixed reviews just reflect a rushed release. Civ games often get much more polished a while after release.

I live the momento stuff and the ability to have every game you play unlock a perk you can then plug in for your leaders. Thats sweet

Ive watched a ton of videos and playthru and it looks like they took the diplomatic system ui from beyond earth : rising tide; mashed that with civ 5 social policy ladder and anti city spamming happiness penalties, and then also kept civ 6 science and civic tech tree system almost identically.

Then made combat totally new compared to how its ever been done; and then stole humankind main selling point of changing evolving civs.

Overall its kind of alot and I wanna play because im so bored with civ 6 now; but I hated how civ 5 punished players who liked large empires and it sounds like they made civ 7 very punishing to fast builder player types

Oh, one more thing I liked. Instead of ancient ruins there are now lots of "narrative events" which give you a choice of goodies. I really liked these from a storytelling perspective. They would say things like "People have come from afar to worship idols of their patron god. They are generous with their tithes" and then you can pick "Worship with them" and get happiness + culture or "Collect the tithes" and get some gold. Added a nice RPG aspect to the game.

I bit the bullet and ended up buying it full price with DLC pre-order. I played a little bit yesterday. Overall enjoyed it, but am considering returning it if I can and waiting for a sale.

The main thing is - I don't know if I can give a great review because I mostly skipped Civ 6, and in terms of UI and mechanics Civ 7 has a lot of similarities to Civ 6. I was having a hard time adopting new stuff after so many hours of Civ 5. There is a decent chance I might power through it and everything will click.

I think the civ-swapping and leader-picking stuff is interesting, though I didn't make it to the second age yet. It is a little railroady as you have to start working on "legacy paths" (scientific, economic, cultural, and militaristic) to get bonuses in the next age. So it's probably harder to pivot from one victory type to another.

Each Civ is super different. In Civ 5 I feel like they were pretty tame with how each Civ played, it was just a unique ability, building, and unit(s). In 6 they added more stuff with leader abilities. Now in 7 each leader has an ability, each civ has an ability, multiple unique units and buildings, and their own civic trees, which are separate from government policies. It makes the game very asymmetric which is interesting.

Other changes - barbarians and city-states have been folded together into something called Independent Powers. You can use Influence Points to make them friendly and even convince them to raid other civs. Presumably even more options in later ages.

There are no longer workers - instead whenever your city's population expands you pick a tile to improve. There's also something similar to districts from Civ 6, and some sort of distinction between cities/towns and urban/rural population but to be honest I didn't really grasp that aspect yet.

The UI is... quite bad. It's hard to find some pretty important things like what your standing is with various Independent Powers, or a breakdown of where your various stats are coming from (i.e. X gold from resources, from other civs, from trade routes etc).

The map looks beautiful, an improvement over 6 in my opinion. I did hear that the continents are super rectangular and uniform though.

FYI, there is a review of version 7 at:
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2025/02/civilization-vii-review-a-major-overhaul-solves-civs-oldest-problems/
Apologies if this is old news or otherwise not useful.

Bumping this thread to see if you (or anyone else) picked up Civ 7? The reviews so far look underwhelming, but I'd be curious to hear more perspectives on it.

brainbomb wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:45 am

Alright I bought the game

Be sure to let us know what you think

Buy Civ IV: Best Version ever, and quite cheap!

(If you buy this game from Steam, and want a non-English quotes speaker for the tech tree, you need to directly edit the sound file, which can be easily done: https://steamcommunity.com/app/3900/discussions/0/352788552262212346/)

Alright I bought the game

Similar dilemma - the game is almost certainly going to be underpolished at launch, but Civ is one of the few game franchises where I know I’m always going to play the new installment.