Civ 7 Roguelite

[ggmoyang]

I feel this memento thing was made to sell DLC. Now new leaders will come with associated memento, so it'll affect the gameplay even if the leader isn't in a game. Also, if a new leader's menento is really OP, people will want it.

 

[thecrazyscot]

After 1 standard speed game through all three ages I am at level 5 with Augustus and level 11 with the general unlocks. Doesn't seem all that slow to me tbh.

 

[cuc]

Sounds SIMILAR to AoE3.

There is similarity in leveling up to unlock items (AoE3's cards, Civ7's mementos) to "equip" into slots, and to unlock age-up options ("politician" options in original AoE3, legacies in Civ7), but these are very common design elements.

The purpose of metaprogression in the two are different.

Civ7's metaprogession is added spice on top of a solid foundation. A player loses nothing by opting out, and has access to every ounce of "game design juice" Civ7 has to offer. Given the play pattern of Civ games, where individual games are long and players may not want to replay the same loadouts, Firaxis made the right decision.

AoE3's metaprogression was meant to turn the game into an RPG, where leveling up is the quintessential experience. The player had to unlock more varied play options, better version of essential necessities, weird and interesting gambits, and a civ's strongest "capstone" powers. Low-level play was meant to be training wheels where the player get familiar with gameplay basics.

The AoE3 way has its intended design goals, but it didn't work because there was no opting-out. Without leveling up a civ, players couldn't compete on a level playing field, didn't have access to fun & powerful abilities the civ was meant to have, while the long grind to unlock the essentials drove players onto editing their local profiles in single player, or running custom-built "experience farm" maps for server-end profiles in multiplayer.


For a longer digression, there are several reasons a long-lived MMORPG like WoW (which AoE3 sought to emulate) would update to "compress" the time & effort needed to reach max level, letting new characters get to the endgame as soon as possible. A big one is: their functioning relies on communities of similarly-leveled cohorts, which would disappear as the MMO's overall playerbase mature, and there isn't an infinite supply of new players coming in. These problems would only be exacerbated on AoE3.

 

[Siptah]

After 1 standard speed game through all three ages I am at level 5 with Augustus and level 11 with the general unlocks. Doesn't seem all that slow to me tbh.

Progress is much faster in the first game. You probably got all the available EXP from the tutorial challenges and other easy to achieve one-timers (e.g., build the associated wonder of civ x, finish that legacy path with civ x). So, at least the general EXP will grow slower from game to game. Each new leader will level up similarly fast, but I fear getting them to level 9 is not done in two games either.

 

[Patine]

There is similarity in leveling up to unlock items (AoE3's cards, Civ7's mementos) to "equip" into slots, and to unlock age-up options ("politician" options in original AoE3, legacies in Civ7), but these are very common design elements.

The purpose of metaprogression in the two are different.

Civ7's metaprogession is added spice on top of a solid foundation. A player loses nothing by opting out, and has access to every ounce of "game design juice" Civ7 has to offer. Given the play pattern of Civ games, where individual games are long and players may not want to replay the same loadouts, Firaxis made the right decision.

AoE3's metaprogression was meant to turn the game into an RPG, where leveling up is the quintessential experience. The player had to unlock more varied play options, better version of essential necessities, weird and interesting gambits, and a civ's strongest "capstone" powers. Low-level play was meant to be training wheels where the player get familiar with gameplay basics.

The AoE3 way has its intended design goals, but it didn't work because there was no opting-out. Without leveling up a civ, players couldn't compete on a level playing field, didn't have access to fun & powerful abilities the civ was meant to have, while the long grind to unlock the essentials drove players onto editing their local profiles in single player, or running custom-built "experience farm" maps for server-end profiles in multiplayer.


For a longer digression, there are several reasons a long-lived MMORPG like WoW (which AoE3 sought to emulate) would update to "compress" the time & effort needed to reach max level, letting new characters get to the endgame as soon as possible. A big one is: their functioning relies on communities of similarly-leveled cohorts, which would disappear as the MMO's overall playerbase mature, and there isn't an infinite supply of new players coming in. These problems would only be exacerbated on AoE3.

Thank-you for that in-depth comparative run-down.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I won a game with Confucius and didn’t get any mementos. I did get an extra legacy option. I don’t plan on playing him until I’ve tried the other leaders. I’m not even sure where I would look up what mementos I have.

 

[Hildebolt Von Berenreuthe]

I like the system. Some games I will ignore it if I want a challenge, in other games I like the flexibility it offers to play some leaders in different ways. But for those who don't like the system, it seems relatively easy to just ignore and not interact with, no?

 

[Kulko]

Progress is much faster in the first game. You probably got all the available EXP from the tutorial challenges and other easy to achieve one-timers (e.g., build the associated wonder of civ x, finish that legacy path with civ x). So, at least the general EXP will grow slower from game to game. Each new leader will level up similarly fast, but I fear getting them to level 9 is not done in two games either.

If you want to get a leader to level 9 you would have to win each legacy path thrice with him. so at the very least that are 3 full games, but given that you can normally only finish 2 before the game runs out, probably more like 6-9 games with this leader.

But as was said already, this is a feature without much impact on the overall game balance so if you want to get to level 9 with your favorite leader it is probably also not that hard.
And if you believe you need to have every leader on level 9 in order to be happy, you should probably question your live choices and not the game design decisions.

 

[Piranga]

But for those who don't like the system, it seems relatively easy to just ignore and not interact with, no?

Ignore it, and you'll never get most of the mementos (levels 5 and 9) that can be used between leaders. In this new version of civ where its all about mixing and matching leaders, with civs, and memento's. It seems non nonsensical to lock one of the three aspects behind a really high time wall. (Especially the level 9 ones). You'de also be missing out on the leader specific social policies in the exploration and modern eras.

I can see ignoring all the meaningless fluff like profile banners and icon. Those add nothing to actual gameplay. Fine, keep that stuff behind an unlock wall for the people who think customizing some lobby banner is fun.

 

[doolar]

I like it, it’s fun and something extra. And after what 2000 hours in Civ6 I had half of the achievements I think? Shouldn’t have played on the Switch and iPad for another 2k hours, and I might have unlocked them all?

 

[Baudshaw]

It’s a bit daunting imo. Completing the Civ 6 hall of fame was hard and tedious, but still doable. Civ 7 doesn’t really have anything comparable to that

 

[doolar]

It’s a bit daunting imo. Completing the Civ 6 hall of fame was hard and tedious, but still doable. Civ 7 doesn’t really have anything comparable to that

I was never a fan of the Hall of Fame, I believe it was local only, so over the years I lost my progress due to reinstalls etc. Sure I could have kept saves etc, but over almost a decade over several computers it just wouldn't happen for me. Just the last month I had to do a reinstall of Civ6 on my Steam Deck and lost all data there. I think this is better with cloud save for the progress.

 

[wuTz]

well isn't there a mod that unlocks all memento?

I cannot seem to find the download link and I want it for replayability and fun

 

[MutilationWave]

well isn't there a mod that unlocks all memento?

I cannot seem to find the download link and I want it for replayability and fun

Here you go. It was hard to find at first because they spelled mementos wrong. How do you do all the work to make a mod solely involving mementos and then spell it wrong?

Resource icon E

Unlock all Momentos

Feb 26, 2025

Unlock all Momentos

• elmorro702
• Civ7 - Mod Components

 

[Yzman]

Mementos and leader specific legacy cards, in game statistical bonuses and abilities, are locked behind earning xp per invidiual leader (including each leaders alternate form). This has to be one of the worst ideas in the entire game. This type of "roguelite" progression works well in games where an entire round playtime lasts under an hour....in Civ though...what were the devs thinking?

After a 20 hour round as Hatshepsut, where I completed each era's cultural goal and won the game with the world's fair, I ended up at level 4 of her progress bar in main menus. Nowhere close to unlocking the level 9 memento.
XP seems scales per level as well. 100 xp needed for level 2. At level 4 I'm at 400/550 xp needed for level 5. I'm guessing it will be 3 or 4 more games with her to unlock her final memento.

It's just an insane amount of gameplay needed to unlock things...and again thats just for the single leader!

I wouldn't mind if this leveling system just unlocked badges, titles, banners and all that other completely useless profile nonsense they added. But locking playable features behind an insane amount of grinding should not ever have been a part of the Civ series.

You can fully unlock something in 2 to 3 games. This hardly seems inappropriate. What is the point of unlocks if you get them after 1 play? You can't even use most of them first play, as they may be for an age that just passed.

 

[King of Prussia]

As they are currently, they are fine. They arent required, and they can be banned in MP. They add more ways to play which helps replayability.

 

[m_mus]

Actually I like it. What's there not to like about possibilities to customize one's leader combined with minor challenges? Compared to other games, I'd hesitate to call this grind.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Im not that fussed by these sorts of mechanics either way, but it does sound like a gentle introduction to "you can unlock these without the game time by buying Civbucks!"

My actual gripe with this is I'm playing civilization. Why am I investing and developing some person rather than my favourite civilization? I'd be much happier with a system that unlocks alternate skins for cities / units as mementos by each civilization. I just don't care about Hatshepsut or Augustus