At what difficulty level do you play Civ 7 (Poll)

[Nikolai II]

I play on Sovereign mostly. I can win on Immortal, but Sovereign somehow feels more fun. I like to just build my civ. Mostly only war when forced upon me. Then I strike hard.

 

[MutilationWave]

well… I also build walls everywhere as soon as I got the tech and the money… I think combination of both that and units makes for a game where DOWs on you will be more limited…

Of course when I get DOWed there’s almost a certainty that the attacker will have an alliance and that the allied will have an alliance with someone else also, so I usually wind up at war with 3 but hey, that’s the ways the game is designed

at least with walls and units galore, it doesn’t happen as often and you can defend

I'm curious, I doubt I'm the only one that doesn't build many walls. I usually put one in the city/town center eventually if I'm doing well.

I think the utility and power of having another unit beats walls every time. This makes me think of the other discussion we were having about getting attacked early. It just doesn't happen to me and I'm still at a loss trying to figure out why. Always deity difficulty.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I'm curious, I doubt I'm the only one that doesn't build many walls. I usually put one in the city/town center eventually if I'm doing well.

I think the utility and power of having another unit beats walls every time. This makes me think of the other discussion we were having about getting attacked early. It just doesn't happen to me and I'm still at a loss trying to figure out why. Always deity difficulty.

Walls are useful in the next era, although with half efficiency, they also don't have support cost. So, when there's nothing else to build (pretty common thing for long ages), I build walls and often have all my districts covered in them.

 

[MutilationWave]

Walls are useful in the next era, although with half efficiency, they also don't have support cost. So, when there's nothing else to build (pretty common thing for long ages), I build walls and often have all my districts covered in them.

Since I stopped playing long ages I just don't have time for them anymore. No shade meant, I just like it better.

 

[aelf]

I think the utility and power of having another unit beats walls every time.

This is true, but the walls are there to let the settlement survive for some time with 1 garrisoned unit (or even 1 spread across different settlements), while you send the rest of your units to attack enemy settlements.

 

[MutilationWave]

This is true, but the walls are there to let the settlement survive for some time with 1 garrisoned unit (or even 1 spread across different settlements), while you send the rest of your units to attack enemy settlements.

In theory yes, but enemies can't get to my settlements because of my units.

 

[tedhebert]

I'm curious, I doubt I'm the only one that doesn't build many walls. I usually put one in the city/town center eventually if I'm doing well.

I think the utility and power of having another unit beats walls every time. This makes me think of the other discussion we were having about getting attacked early. It just doesn't happen to me and I'm still at a loss trying to figure out why. Always deity difficulty.

First of all I play immortal always…

I dislike warfare… I prefer to play a building game and play the paths… thus these advices I was giving were really meant as a deterrent to the AI to make DOWs on you less frequent.

I am very far from a min/max player and wouldn’t present my strategies as such in any ways. Hope I didn’t confuse anyone.

 

[MutilationWave]

First of all I play immortal always…

I dislike warfare… I prefer to play a building game and play the paths… thus these advices I was giving were really meant as a deterrent to the AI to make DOWs on you less frequent.

I am very far from a min/max player and wouldn’t present my strategies as such in any ways. Hope I didn’t confuse anyone.

Yeah I can't help it. My brain is wired that way.

 

[McSpank01]

I tend to play Sovereign for the most part, and in Civ 6 I almost always played Emperor. I think those are the levels at which you can still play the game with relative freedom, without having to try to be optimal at all times, or doing any sort of min maxing.

In Civ 6 Immortal almost always means early wars, which I mostly found frustrating and boring, and prevented me doing my own thing.

I play for fun.

 

[Aldor]

I play on Scribe level exclusively so far, for the same reason that I played exclusively on Settler level in Civ6: I want a peaceful game with no stress where I can just build up a nice looking empire. Civ7 is better in this regard than Civ6, but it's still far from perfect. IMO, on scribe level the AI should NEVER attack the player (maybe there is an option for that that I overlooked?). But I still often get war declarations by multiple opponents at the same time. Mind you, they are not dangerous to me (most of the time), they are just stupid and pointless. In Civ6 I could only really play somewhat peacefully by intentionally reducing the number of civs by a fair amount. Here in Civ7 I haven't done that yet, but I may try it.

It's strange really. In Civ5 I used to play on Prince or King level. In Civ BE I always play on the second highest level, same as I did in Alpha Centauri. Somehow these games have (or had) a lower annoyance factor. With Civ however (since Civ6 really), it feels like the devs want their AI to be annoying. I just don't have the patience for that anymore, so I look for more relaxing gameplay.

 

[Lebo44]

the AI should NEVER attack the player (maybe there is an option for that that I overlooked?)

In CIV4 there was a game option "Always PEACE". Not sure about CIV5. I don't know why it has been missing in Civ 6 and Civ 7 but such tiny details highlight how customizable Civ 4 was.