(AMA) First Playthrough - Deity Win w/ Game Feedback

civfanatic4sure

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 8, 2025
Messages
58
Just completed my first game; played pretty slow and meticulously to soak it all up. Here are the details and how it went, AMA.

PC: Intel i9-13900HX, GeForce RTX4080
Version/Graphic Settings: DX12 / 4K Resolution / Max Settings

Game Settings: Deity, Standard Size, Terra Incognita Map, No mementos used all game
Leader/Civ: Tecumseh | Mississippian >> Shawnee >> Mughal
Result: Economic Win T80

First just want to say, I cannot understand anyone giving this game a bad review. As an early release v1, it's pretty damn good w/r/t bugs and issues. I 100% had fun and enjoyed the playthrough end to end.

Positives:
- The world looks beautiful; all the detail on the map is A+ and the music was great throughout
- Narrative choices were awesome and ALL the narratives were immersive (as someone who loves that stuff)
- No matter how far ahead (and I got WAY ahead in the Exploration era -- golden Economic, Science, and Culture) the new age start had me worried I might lose
- The macro strategic level decisions felt important all the way through, and even though it tapered off by age, there were still sometimes 10+ turn plan in advance decisions that had to be made for optimal outcomes
- The sheer amount of mechanics that exist made it feel like there were so many contextual choices to make that mattered -- time will tell if they really are choices or if super clear ways of playing are more optimal
- Combat mechanics w/ Commanders felt good
- The tech and civic trees were not just paths you eventually got all of.. there were clear strategic paths for your aims while other branches in the trees could be ignored (and sometimes not possible to even reach)
- The additional civic trees in each era (your civ specific trees, theology tree, ideology tree) forced tradeoffs, which I loved
- I was worried that not having "fast unit movement" would drive me nuts, but you could immediately start moving more units while the previous one was animating, so it did not slow down gameplay AND it looked awesome
- The city vs town mechanic was amazing -- it may have been the most interesting choice through the game and I started to love it more as the game went on to subsequent ages
- Influence as a yield was super versatile and added great flavor to the playthrough
- Resources were fun to engage with and were meaningfully impactful to the game, e.g. moving Marble around to the city you're building a wonder in for the stacking % production to wonders; this also made trade targets strategic and interesting
- At first I hated that random civs were dropping settlements in the middle of other civs with no connection at all to their cities... until I realized just that, there is no connection to their other cities and they are sort of useless which felt more realistic than I thought it would
- Related to that, if you have a town that ends up not connected to anything it becomes essentially worthless since the primary value of specialty towns is sending food to connected cities, and upgrading a town into a city that's not being fed from a connected town severely limits its impact
- AI is so much improved from civ6 on Deity.. I have high hopes we will end up with a somewhat competitive single player at some point, whether it's through patches or mods
>> Himiko was actually very strategic in blocking my treasure fleets by prioritizing growth to sea tiles I needed to pass through, not allowing open borders, and even blocking open tiles with ships
>> I thought at one point in Antiquity that I could grab a valuable adjacent city from Isabella and she EASILY repelled me and I barely got my Army Commander out

Negatives/Issues:
- 2 crashes; one during the Antiquity to Exploration age transition, and the other when I loaded a saved game after taking a break (both after the patch they released)
- The map gen was a big oof -- see two areas of hard straight lines that looked so unnatural; one side of a string of islands and the bottom of the other major continent (screenshots below)
- City projects in the yields screen show up with backend language, e.g. LOC_CITY_YIELD_435 or something to that effect
- Game got annoyingly jittery in modern era when clicking on a merchant specifically; I think because it has to load up a whole lens on the screen to show available trade destinations
- The text must be incorrect regarding how connected cities/towns work. I had a fishing town on an island landmass that was still considered part of the same mainland continent, but it DID NOT send its food to my coastal city on the same continent... which the tooltip says it should. So it must be that it not only has to be the same continent and coastal but also the same landmass of that continent OR not separated by deep sea...
- Hover popups are sticky to the first thing you hover, e.g. I hover over a tile and it says "Build Over X Building" and then I hover to a tile next to it and it says the same "Build Over X Building" again, when that building is not on the new tile being hovered
- Similarly, I found that when selecting a city and doing an action, then selecting another city for a growth event or placing a building/improvement, the popup showing that city's yields were from the city I was on before -- this had me super confused for a bit as I wasn't getting the right yield change from dropping a purchased building or improvement. Deselecting the city and reselecting fixed it.
- The ageless buildings from previous ages were not correctly showing the yields they would add in future ages -- I am 95% sure I tested it and those buildings continued to give all their yields, e.g. Granary gives +1 Food to Farms and let's say in Antiquity the tooltip said building it would give you +5 Food (+1 from Granary plus +4 from farms in the settlement), then in Exploration in the same settlement with no changes the tooltip would say that same Granary would only give you +1 Food when it actually still gave +5 Food. Would appreciate if anyone can confirm.
- You can't see what your options are for trading destinations without first building a Merchant.. which resulted in me buying a Merchant with nowhere to go a few times
- It seemed like my Army Commander lost its bonus movement from the Maneuver promotion after Antiquity
- Placing a building/improvement on top of an existing one shows you the yields the new building/improvement will provide BUT does not show you what you're losing from what you build over. The buildings from prior ages do lose potency, but in some cases you DO NOT want to build over them because they provide a specialty yield, e.g. there are only a few buildings that provide Influence and they do carry that over to subsequent ages (confirmed in city yields detail) and a few times early on I overbuilt them and lost Influence which I would not have done if the tooltip was clear about what I was losing in addition to what I was gaining. Showing net change of yields in the tooltip vs just the gross new yields would solve that very simply. I wasted A LOT of time checking city yield screens to see what I would be losing every time I was going to overbuild..
- Resource management in the end game when going for economic win condition became super tedious because once you hit the points you need to unlock the World Banker you don't need factory resources anymore and some of them give useless yields for your current strategy... in one city I had 8 of one factory resource and had to manually click each one and then scroll to an open slot in the inventory to move it over and over... would be great to be able to right click a slotted resource and have it dump to inventory instead

Here are some screenshots w/ yields:

Turn 2

Turn 2.png


End Antiquity:
End Antiquity.png


End Exploration:
End Exploration.png


End Modern:
End Modern.png


Banker Last Convert.png
 
Now you've beaten it with no mementos, are you going to play again? How will you make it more challenging?
 
This. You beat the game on the hardest difficulty on your first playthrough... That shouldn't happen.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I would have listed that number 1 in negatives.

And . . . like . . . not needed to mention any other negatives.
 
Claiming the AI has improved when you beat it on highest difficulty without even understanding the game really. Great. Sure, Civ 6 AI was braindead too. I am certain, you would of had a hard time to beat Civ3/4 (not sure about 5, didnt really play) on highest difficulty in your first play through.
 
1. RE difficulty -- I'm not just playing for the difficulty, though it was fun to find out how it compared to 6 in game one. In my post in the new members thread, I shared that I had optimized the fun out of 6 by the end, only focusing on getting faster and faster science victories. So far, I don't think there is a meta around competitive single player, so I'm really enjoying playing all the leaders and civs. Prioritizing trying out as many of the historical options as there are.
2. RE: game rating -- I wouldn't rate a game poorly just because it's not challenging, I really like the story and immersion. And even if I'm not feeling like I could lose, the puzzle that each game presents is what I love most about civ.
3. RE: AI -- it is definitely improved. Again, not measuring it in "will I win", but instead whether it does more than what it did in 6. They absolutely CRUSH yields by modern era, particularly Himiko and Jose. They make a decent run at science and culture, though obviously need some improvements to take them from 50% of the way to victory to 100% of the way (e.g. they often jump out to 5-7 artifacts super fast when I'm not playing culture VC, but then they just stop). Though my favorite improvement is military when they are defending cities. I have been repelled a few times and that was satisfying to not just roll them over. Most recent examples being Persia stopping my Legions w/ highly promoted commanders, Charlemagne stopping my Gusa with highly promoted commanders, and Frederick defending behind a navigable river really well. In 6, it wouldn't matter and I would always steamroll, prepared or not.
4. RE: mementos -- I will play through many more combos without them while more unlock in the background, and then when I'm bored or want to try chasing whatever competitive single player meta emerges, I'll start throwing them in on OP combos.
 
Get out of the fake account, Firaxis! No way you actually think it's good for a STRATEGY GAME to let you win on your FIRST TRY at the hardest difficulty—plus, you even said you dominated in the second era.The AI is absolutely terrible. There's no real strategic choice to make—you just dominate everything all the time. Money is basically infinite. Cities keep growing effortlessly. Happiness is ridiculously easy to manage. Tech stealing is overpowered. Everything is designed to be easy, like it was made for kids.
 
Get out of the fake account, Firaxis! No way you actually think it's good for a STRATEGY GAME to let you win on your FIRST TRY at the hardest difficulty—plus, you even said you dominated in the second era.The AI is absolutely terrible. There's no real strategic choice to make—you just dominate everything all the time. Money is basically infinite. Cities keep growing effortlessly. Happiness is ridiculously easy to manage. Tech stealing is overpowered. Everything is designed to be easy, like it was made for kids.
That might be our experience, but pretty sure the majority of people are not having the same. The game shouldn’t be tuned for the most try hard players, it should be tuned for the center of the bell curve.
 
I also won on Deity yesterday, my fifth playthrough. I did the same with Civ6, upped the difficulty game by game until I lost, then I stayed there until I beat it, then moved up etc. I feel that Deity is not that difficult in Civ7 compared to 6. The ages plays into the human players hand, it seems difficult for the AI to choose an effective win condition. I didn't win by a landslide, but I shouldn't be able to win Deity after just five tries.

I do love the game though, but wouldn't mind more challenging AI.
 
devs should remove the auto save reload feature and have an ironman mode like they have in xcom2. im not saying you did im just saying i have used it get the perfect win which i didnt deserve but well done on the win. i failed twice before getting my first win.
 
devs should remove the auto save reload feature and have an ironman mode like they have in xcom2. im not saying you did im just saying i have used it get the perfect win which i didnt deserve but well done on the win. i failed twice before getting my first win.
I moved on from scum saving years ago — I used to do it when I was learning deity on 6, but never do it anymore; I’m not trying to make it less challenging.
 
Let's not conflate the skill of the AI with the difficulty of the game overall. The AI can be objectively "better" or "improved" compared to previous Civ iterations, while the game mechanics allow for "easier" victories at Deity. Apples and oranges.

I guess I'm bad at this game though, because I barely eked out a victory on Immortal.
 
devs should remove the auto save reload feature and have an ironman mode like they have in xcom2. im not saying you did im just saying i have used it get the perfect win which i didnt deserve but well done on the win. i failed twice before getting my first win.
While I have no problems with people wanting or using iron man mode it should be an option as everyone should be able to play how they enjoy best.

I would play iron man mode in games if it wasn't for the fact almost every game these day has game breaking bugs or simply things that don't work as intended thus you can have your game ended for something beyond your control and is an issue with the game.

Civ 6 was riddled with such issues that only got worse as they added more broken DLC which is one of the main reasons I barely played it compared to other games in the series.

This is made worse by the fact that devs seem increasingly happy to let modders fix game for them and with increased use of mods you get increased risk of bugs. I am already relying on a number of mods just to give some basic information that should be available for core decision making.

Considering the extremely poor or completely lacking information in the game for many things autosave/saving and then rolling back in general is basically a requirement to learn the game as you can only see what many important things do by doing it and seeing what happens. Only then do you know if it did what you expected or not and then can make and actual decision on what to do.

In short, iron man is always a good option to have as many people enjoy it. It should never be the default or required option unless they can guarantee a game is perfect...which no game ever is.
 
Let's not conflate the skill of the AI with the difficulty of the game overall. The AI can be objectively "better" or "improved" compared to previous Civ iterations, while the game mechanics allow for "easier" victories at Deity. Apples and oranges.

I guess I'm bad at this game though, because I barely eked out a victory on Immortal.
Except AI is the game mechanics too. It can't be objectively better or worse, only subjectively.
 
Whatever we think of the AI, the AI has to be seen in combination with the game obviously. It is no secret that the Civ AI can handle stacks much better than 1upt warfare. That's problem #1.
Civ 6 then added lots of convoluted mechanisms that the AI can simply not handle. To me Civ6 is unplayable except for multiplayer. I played always war games in Civ6 and the AI is downright comatose. To make matters worse, they added expansions that made it even more complicated for the AI.

One would of thought that they had learned their lesson, but Civ7 isn't helping the AI it seems. Yes, they got rid of workers, but it seems, city management isn't easier for the AI. It's also no secret that Firaxis has never prioritized AI development, as it doesn't concern sales to casuals. The most notable improvements to Civ4 came from a modder and was partially incorporated into one of the expansions. Civ3 has been blessed with a mod that finally enables to AI to effectively use siege weapons and armies. Took more than 2 decades, but it is there. Not sure, whether modders can salvage this situation yet again, looking at Civ6, I highly doubt that.
 
Whatever we think of the AI, the AI has to be seen in combination with the game obviously. It is no secret that the Civ AI can handle stacks much better than 1upt warfare. That's problem #1.
Civ 6 then added lots of convoluted mechanisms that the AI can simply not handle. To me Civ6 is unplayable except for multiplayer. I played always war games in Civ6 and the AI is downright comatose. To make matters worse, they added expansions that made it even more complicated for the AI.

One would of thought that they had learned their lesson, but Civ7 isn't helping the AI it seems. Yes, they got rid of workers, but it seems, city management isn't easier for the AI. It's also no secret that Firaxis has never prioritized AI development, as it doesn't concern sales to casuals. The most notable improvements to Civ4 came from a modder and was partially incorporated into one of the expansions. Civ3 has been blessed with a mod that finally enables to AI to effectively use siege weapons and armies. Took more than 2 decades, but it is there. Not sure, whether modders can salvage this situation yet again, looking at Civ6, I highly doubt that.
Modding is more difficult in Civ 6 than Civ 5 because they never released the underlying code. Civ V Vox Populi has good AI.
 
One would of thought that they had learned their lesson, but Civ7 isn't helping the AI it seems. Yes, they got rid of workers, but it seems, city management isn't easier for the AI. It's also no secret that Firaxis has never prioritized AI development, as it doesn't concern sales to casuals.
The Civ7 AI is a lot better than the Civ5 AI was. I’m afraid I don’t remember what the Civ6 AI looked like. But I went from enjoying Civ5 to not enjoying it when I discovered that while the game had these Anti-Aircraft units which I manufactured a bunch of, it was not in fact capable of building aircraft. Nor was it able to carry out an amphibious landing.

My current game is on Sovereign, and the AI is not only building aircraft but using the effectively, both to chew up my land units, attack my cities, and destroy my ships. It is also carrying out amphibious attacks and harassing my islands, although probably not as effectively as I’d like.

At Sovereign, I don’t think it has the proper balance on when to build ships. For a while, I was afraid it wasn’t building them at all. But I have since run into several fleets that were reasonably placed and used. But not enough of them.

It’s still not properly protecting its generals though. How hard can it be to always make sure a General ends its move on top of another unit, preferably one with a high combat strength and lots of hit points left.

Overall as far as war goes, Civ7 is a much better experience in the Modern Age than Civ5 was at launch.
 
Overall as far as war goes, Civ7 is a much better experience in the Modern Age than Civ5 was at launch.
Civ5 AI at launch was close to non existent, it couldn't handle 1upt at all. Civ6 AI couldn't take cities due to the new concept of city defenses etc.

Civ7 AI might be better, but the fact that it gets +8 strength on deity and yet, people beat deity on their first play through....not encouraging.
 
Let's not conflate the skill of the AI with the difficulty of the game overall. The AI can be objectively "better" or "improved" compared to previous Civ iterations, while the game mechanics allow for "easier" victories at Deity.
Or in this case the much improved AI can't compete with the free Settlers etc the AI gets on Civ 6.
 
Back
Top Bottom