A confession…

[McSpank01]

Ok, I’m going to hold my hand up here..

I’ve played 50+ Antiquity age games now, but I have yet to complete the exploration age or even see the modern age. I guess that is kind of shocking? I haven’t even gotten halfway through an exploration age yet.

 

[Nikolai II]

The ancient era is super good. Best part of the game hands down. Exploration is much less fun and more of a chose. The modern age is in between though, much better than the exploration phase in my book.

 

[Siptah]

It is shocking in a way, but not totally unheard of. Apparently, most people did not finish their games in previous civ games.

May I ask what’s stopping you? Is it the change of civilization or the exploration age mechanics?

Btw, I have completed many games by now and I think that Antiquity is by far the best part of the game. For me, it‘s right up there in the best civ has ever been (but I use many UI mods for that). So, I can feel your seeming desire to stick to that. Yet, some later civs are really, really fun for me (Abbasids, Bulgaria, Normans for example).

 

[protocol7]

Whenever I start the exploration age, I pick my legacies and then usually quit because I don’t want to do all the exact same things as the last time. Hopefully they will make it more interesting in an expansion, but I know what you mean exactly. Modern is almost always over before I really get too bored of shift-entering.

 

[McSpank01]

It is shocking in a way, but not totally unheard of. Apparently, most people did not finish their games in previous civ games.

May I ask what’s stopping you? Is it the change of civilization or the exploration age mechanics?

Btw, I have completed many games by now and I think that Antiquity is by far the best part of the game. For me, it‘s right up there in the best civ has ever been (but I use many UI mods for that). So, I can feel your seeming desire to stick to that. Yet, some later civs are really, really fun for me (Abbasids, Bulgaria, Normans for example).

I've asked myself many times what is blocking me from continuing, and it's probably a few things.

The Era thing does feel like a mental break, like I have to start again in many ways and that feels bad. Losing most of the bonuses I'd built up and trying to get them going again just feels like work. I understand the idea behind this, but it leaves a negative taste.

The other thing I think is that the way legacy paths work in Exploration just doesn't seem fun. Spreading religion is very tedious and is annoying when other civs seem to race ahead. Most of the paths tend to reward going to the distant lands, either through expansion or conquest, but this in of itself is quite slow and frustrating. I played a Spain game recently where I wanted to expand onto the other continent, but it just felt overwhelming and would take too long.

I guess that just makes me go and start again.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

You aren't alone. I had completed a dozen Antiquity Only games before I ventured into Exploration Age, and at this point (near 400 hours in the game) I still have completed probably about 3 Antiquity Ages for every Exploration AND Modern Age I've completed.

The big problem for me is that so much of the Exploration Age is either ridiculously easy or completely Map Dependent. I have dropped at least a dozen Exporation Age games because by Turn 20 it was obvious that there were no 'Treasure' resources available anywhere unless I went to war and took them away from other Civs. When I don't want to play a combat game, the game gives me no choice at all. Rather than play the game some programmer thinks I should play, I won't play his &#$%^@ game at all, thank you.

The problem with the Modern Age is that, as a military historian specializing in the 20th century, the units they provide me to play with make me physically ill when I look at them, and the Tech Tree makes me want to go bang my head against the wall in frustration - which hurts, so it's easier on my Health just to not play the Age at all.

 

[queenpea]

It’s weird to me there is no option in single player to set a game as a single age match. There seems to be a tension between discussing this possibility during the lead up to the game whilst also hoping for players to finish a complete play through.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It’s weird to me there is no option in single player to set a game as a single age match. There seems to be a tension between discussing this possibility during the lead up to the game whilst also hoping for players to finish a complete play through.

It's on a roadmap already. Firaxis need to implement victories for antiquity and exploration though, before letting players select the end age.

 

[queenpea]

It's on a roadmap already. Firaxis need to implement victories for antiquity and exploration though, before letting players select the end age.

Yes, it is weird it isn’t implemented yet.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Yes, it is weird it isn’t implemented yet.

I wouldn't say it's weird. Each victory requires a lot of assets and game design passes, making 8 new victory (10 with score victories, although they require less work) is a huge chunk of production. And it's not something which prevents the game from being playable, so Firaxis priorities are totally understandable.

 

[sixty4half]

For all of those that enjoy Antiquity; I invite you to try advanced age starts. It's a different age with different legacies, but the themes of Antiquity are still there. You're expanding and exploring all the same. You're developing new relations and navigating conflicting diplomacy. You also start off without a giant lead that can be developed during the previous age. Modern Age games give you enough time to complete your leader quests too.

 

[queenpea]

I wouldn't say it's weird. Each victory requires a lot of assets and game design passes, making 8 new victory (10 with score victories, although they require less work) is a huge chunk of production. And it's not something which prevents the game from being playable, so Firaxis priorities are totally understandable.

I’m not surprised by your response, but I will again assert that it’s strange that single age victory conditions weren’t figured out before launch as the “single age game” version of Civ VII was flirted with during the lead up to release.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I’m not surprised by your response, but I will again assert that it’s strange that single age victory conditions weren’t figured out before launch as the “single age game” version of Civ VII was flirted with during the lead up to release.

I'm just doing prioritization in software development as part of my usual job and I know how you constantly need to make decisions which things you could cut off from release. For a game, playability in default mode is absolutely top priority, additional modes, especially ones which require a lot of work are among easy candidates for sacrifice.

 

[queenpea]

I'm just doing prioritization in software development as part of my usual job and I know how you constantly need to make decisions which things you could cut off from release. For a game, playability in default mode is absolutely top priority, additional modes, especially ones which require a lot of work are among easy candidates for sacrifice.

The insistence on “playability” as the standard inspires neither confidence nor joy. I get what you are saying, but I think it was a mistake to release this game in such a state.

 

[McSpank01]

I would be interested in seeing the stats in how many people actually finish ages. If Firaxis were intent of solving the problem of players not finishing games, they must be intently watching game completion numbers, and my own experience would make me suspect that the completion numbers would be even lower, and players may be dropping out even earlier than Civ 6. That would be a very worrying statistic if true.

 

[MutilationWave]

I've asked myself many times what is blocking me from continuing, and it's probably a few things.

The Era thing does feel like a mental break, like I have to start again in many ways and that feels bad. Losing most of the bonuses I'd built up and trying to get them going again just feels like work. I understand the idea behind this, but it leaves a negative taste.

The other thing I think is that the way legacy paths work in Exploration just doesn't seem fun. Spreading religion is very tedious and is annoying when other civs seem to race ahead. Most of the paths tend to reward going to the distant lands, either through expansion or conquest, but this in of itself is quite slow and frustrating. I played a Spain game recently where I wanted to expand onto the other continent, but it just felt overwhelming and would take too long.

I guess that just makes me go and start again.

0. "Preperation" (I came back and added this)
Spend the end of antiquity building the units you want and as many commanders as you can, so you won't be weak in the next age. You can artificially delay the end of the age to get everything you want done by not getting those final legacy points until you're ready. Also I highly recommend playing with longer ages enabled so you can really enjoy antiquity.

1. "Losing Bonuses"
Maybe you could change your thinking to gaining bonuses? I love getting settlement limit increases and the Fealty military legacy gets you two right off the bat. Plus you can get all kinds of attribute points for powerful bonuses. Even though I've played a ton, I still get paper and pen and go take a look. You can close the legacy bonus screen and look at your attributes. I'll write two columns for each path. Points I need and points I want. Then I go back and make my choices. For me it makes the transition less intimidating.

2. "Dealing with Distant Lands and Legacy Paths"
Give the Mongols a shot! Their military legacy is totally changed from the usual for exploration. Their Ortoo improvement is just fantastic, and they get amazing bonuses in their civic tree. Their unique commander has a lot of movement and 4 sight range! Great for going out to sea and looking for places to get into a fight. Or you can string Ortoos and have them run across the continent in a single turn.

I really feel you on this post. In earlier civ games I lost interest around gunpowder. I'd think well it's clear I've already won/ possibly lost this game, and start a new one because antiquity is so good. I put thousands of hours into 6, and I think I maybe finished four games. 7 actually has me finishing almost all my games, even though I largely dislike modern except for war.

EDIT-
3. "Religion"
You can totally blow off religion and get the path done whenever you feel like it. I've been doing this my past three games.

 

[queenpea]

I would be interested in seeing the stats in how many people actually finish ages. If Firaxis were intent of solving the problem of players not finishing games, they must be intently watching game completion numbers, and my own experience would make me suspect that the completion numbers would be even lower, and players may be dropping out even earlier than Civ 6. That would be a very worrying statistic if true.

The stats that were released during launch week suggested that many more players were playing antiquity than exploration and more players were playing exploration than modern, suggesting sequential drop off age to age.

 

[MutilationWave]

It's on a roadmap already. Firaxis need to implement victories for antiquity and exploration though, before letting players select the end age.

Could always go score with a time limit. If I had my way all games would be score only and just have the current quick victories give score and/or bonuses.

 

[GeorgeF]

I'm the same way, its a rare game that sees me doing Exploration age, and rarer yet that sees me into the Modern Age, or finishing. Like around a 5:1 ratio at each juncture. I've only finished one modern age game. Going to try to do this with my current game (See the Treasure fleet thread), Charlesmagne -> Carthage -> Norman -> Prussia

 

[stealth_nsk]

The insistence on “playability” as the standard inspires neither confidence nor joy. I get what you are saying, but I think it was a mistake to release this game in such a state.

I totally agree here. Looking at things which didn't make it on release, I could say the game went out probably half a year earlier than it should be. I think there was some financial pressure and commitments in play.

Could always go score with a time limit. If I had my way all games would be score only and just have the current quick victories give score and/or bonuses.

It's a bit questionable. I'd expect a lot of additional criticism for incomplete game if feature to finish in earlier ages didn't come with full victories.