Civ Switching - Will it prevent you from buying Civ 7?

[Gedemon]

Heh, at least they released it eventually, IIRC, but then they've refused to release it for VI entirely. Which is why I am less confident that mods can fix VII

I mistyped, I meant civ6

 

[thecrazyscot]

I'm not bullish on them releasing the DLL for Civ7 either, which is a real shame.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I think they should do a lot in this vein, to mitigate the identification problems that some of the skeptical here have voiced. "That people once known to historians as the Egyptians but now more commonly the Mongolians . . ." "The Hanging Gardens, built by the earliest predecessors of modern Mongolia and still one of that culture's most treasured wonders . . ."

To further my thought.

They could have a robust archeological minigame in the Modern era that involves recovering elements of the earlier phases: "It is believed that the reconstruction of the Globe Theater will give contemporary Australians a tangible feeling of connection with their glorious Spanish ancestors who built the original structure"

 

[Zaarin]

Definitely have done all of these. I use SS and Heroes occasionally especially for situational games. Such as when playing as Scotland I turn on SS so I can build my own "Hogwarts" with the Alchemical Society, for example.

It's considered underpowered by contrast, but Hermetic Order + Bullmoose Teddy can be situationally awesome.

 

[Zaarin]

To further my thought.

They could have a robust archeological minigame in the Modern era that involves recovering elements of the earlier phases: "It is believed that the reconstruction of the Globe Theater will give contemporary Australians a tangible feeling of connection with their glorious Spanish ancestors who built the original structure"

I strongly suspect they will. This seems to be Ed's thing.

 

[bv98132454]

That rebuttal really doesn't address the point of the post i was responding to which was based on the same sort of flimsy historical justifications that the devs gave for the mechanic in the first place.

No Eygpt didn't became the Mongols because they settled near horses and used cavalry. No American civs don't just have "mongol phases"

Don't worry, he's just going through his Mongol phase. Things will settle down when he enters his Dutch phase.

 

[Dotsworthy]

I never tried the optional modes for VI. Are they any good?

They are all fun to play and allow you to deploy new strategies for winning, although I find it stacks the deck in favour of the player as the AI struggle with the mechanics. Dramatic Ages in particular was chaos, especially if Eleanor is around to mop up all the free cities.

Secret Societies, Heroes and Legends, and Monopolies were the ones I used the most. They added stuff like lay lines and industries which made cities in subpar areas potentially viable.

 

[Cywil]

It's the unexamined confidence that's getting people uptight. There's a distinction between "not to my taste" and "bad idea" and it'd make the discussion smoother if we could keep that clear.

The OP and the poll is about "do you love it?" or "don't you like it?" and "if you buy it?" so for me any answer "no to my taste" or "up to my taste" is valid one. Then there are interesting numbers - how many people love it and how many people don't like it. We could to try to convince each other of course but that's not the point. The point is to see how serious the problem is. The civ switching feature seems to be bigger* problem then cartoonish art style in Civ 6 or 1UPT in Civ 5 in terms of dividing fans. I'm a huge fan - I play 33 years - Civ 1-6, I have 10k+ hours in Civ 5 and Civ 6 together according to Steam, I pre-ordered every single piece of the franchise (base games, expansions, DLCs, pass) and I was decided to buy Civ 7. Now I'm undecided - it's like 40:60 in favor of ARA (and was 100:0 in favor of Civ 7 before the gameplay revealed). I'm a single civ/full history strategy game hardcore player and the Civ franchise was an obvious choice for me.

*There is posted somewhere on the forum an interview with the Civ 7 producer and you can see how risky this huge change was seemed by FXS:

“We didn’t want to make Civilization 6.5,” the producer explains. “People already have Civilization 6 and they play it a lot. They still play 5. They still play 4. Some of them are still playing 3. Ed [...] wanted to simulate something new on top of the world that Sid [Sid Meier, creator of the series] built. [...] It is a risk and we’re excited about it, but we also think that is a new direction that will give players something new to chew on.”

 

[Professor Phobo]

It's definitely a huge risk. No question. But I feel like just carrying on without seeking to build on the game design is also a risk. I'm much more excited to see a Civilization 7 that I don't quite like than I would be to see a Civilization 5.5 I like a lot.

 

[Cywil]

It's definitely a huge risk. No question. But I feel like just carrying on without seeking to build on the game design is also a risk. I'm much more excited to see a Civilization 7 that I don't quite like than I would be to see a Civilization 5.5 I like a lot.

Fair enough.

 

[Equilin]

you are all wrong, the biggest crisis in civ history was when they didn't release the civ6 DLL code.

I mean, I remember very well, I was the one complaining all around that time

I remember you complaining nonstop about it to the point of stopping civ6 modding. It truly was the biggest crisis in civ history.

Also give me back my full Giant Earth! Why did they have to make it broken!?

 

[Republic of San Montuoso]

To further my thought.

They could have a robust archeological minigame in the Modern era that involves recovering elements of the earlier phases: "It is believed that the reconstruction of the Globe Theater will give contemporary Australians a tangible feeling of connection with their glorious Spanish ancestors who built the original structure"

I strongly suspect they will. This seems to be Ed's thing.

That's exactly what I thought, and what I want.

For now, archaeology is kinda of disappointing. "You uncovered an ancient artefact of the Americans..." but I am the Americans, I remember when the thing happened, I have libraries that are still standing up older that this piece of metal we unearthed. It seemed odd to me because they tried to sell us something that was "lost in time" while we clearly had a strong continuity from end to beginning. The game never let me the chance to feel that my first eras were really chronologically far away from my last ones. Which is something that a lot of people want in this game, apparently (having a continuity that great that it seem those "ancient times" were just 200 years ago).

Here, the archaeological mechanics will really have a sense and a meaning. "You, the Americans, have uncovered an artifact of the first times of your civilizations, when it was known as the Romans..." I mean, I will really feel the connection AND the passage of time. I will really get the feel of "building a civilization that stands the test of time" because I will have the feeling that my first eras were long ago, and yet, my modern empire is the dwarf built on the shoulders of my antique and exploration eras. I would have "stand the test of time" because my civilization is so long that even languages, even names, even cultures had time to evolve, which is the proof of a strong and robust civilization that goes a long way.

As a Frenchman myself (sorry, not my choice, nobody's perfect, that's my burden to bear), I feel more interested when we discovered some documents of the early Frankish kindgoms or the Gallic tribes than uncovered a musket from the French revolution. I mean, don't mistake me, it's historically valuable, but I found the discovery much more wholesome and the connection with my artificially nationalistically-fabricated ancestors than if it was a plate from the Directoire period. That's might be just me, but as someone who loves the idea of archaeology in games like that and always was disappointed in them to the point where I never really looked at what I unearthed, just the culture to build the themes of my museums, I'm utterly curious about what they can do with such a drastic change in eras.

 

[ColtSeavers]

depends how much new consumers they gain.

Yes, but it is also far easier retaining existing customers, than attracting new ones!

 

[Gori the Grey]

I remember when the thing happened,

Well, if they get it to work right, that will actually be part of the appeal, I think. In world, everyone will be talking about this amazing find from forever ago, but you will know in your heart "actually, I was there for that."

I still worry that the civilizational names will be a block to their pulling this off, though. Those have real world associations. If in the game you were Egypt, Mongolia, Brazil, when the game tells you your archeologists have dug up an artefact from your Mongolian past our minds won't be able to associate that past only with a phase of one particular game. Mongolia means something; its a distinct culture from Egypt and from Brazil. Our real-life associations with them will prevent a seamless in-game feeling of continuity. You can take an interest in either a revolutionary musket or a Gallic artifact in part because you know those things could both turn up in that territory.

When I'm concocting these little "It is believed that the reconstruction of the Globe Theater will give contemporary Australians a tangible feeling of connection with their glorious Spanish ancestors who built the original structure," I kind feel like it's putting lipstick on a pig, that the challenge to identification with your empire-of-three-civs will be real, and that any attempts by the game to finesse it will not overcome that felt dichotomy.

Another thing I think will interfere is that people will pick as their second civ (then third) whatever gives them the best game advantage at that moment, so they won't really feel an investment in that civ as a civ, because it was really just a cluster of bonuses.

Dunno. We'll see, I guess.

 

[I was NC]

I just about only play TSL games (giving each civ room to grow), which is at least mostly antithetical to switching civ mid-game. Understood most people prefer random maps, so this aspect is not an issue.

(apologies if I missed someone else making the same point in the preceding 29 pages)

 

[ColtSeavers]

I just about only play TSL games (giving each civ room to grow), which is at least mostly antithetical to switching civ mid-game. Understood most people prefer random maps, so this aspect is not an issue.

(apologies if I missed someone else making the same point in the preceding 29 pages)

You are certainly not the only one (I love playing and TSL maps too ), and judging by the popularity of the Yet (not) Another Earth Maps Pack, we are not the only ones! I can also hardly imagine playing TSL with a CivSwitching Mode. Conquering the Vikings which are ruled by Augustus of Mongolia, that's really a tough sell for me

 

[thecrazyscot]

You are certainly not the only one (I love playing and TSL maps too ), and judging by the popularity of the Yet (not) Another Earth Maps Pack, we are not the only ones! I can also hardly imagine playing TSL with a CivSwitching Mode. Conquering the Vikings which are ruled by Augustus of Mongolia, that's really a tough sell for me

I mean, you could go that fanciful, but you don't have to! Which I feel is important not to lose. Although I'm aware that doesn't address your root complaint, which I respect

 

[uppi]

I just about only play TSL games (giving each civ room to grow), which is at least mostly antithetical to switching civ mid-game. Understood most people prefer random maps, so this aspect is not an issue.

(apologies if I missed someone else making the same point in the preceding 29 pages)

Is it really? The "historical" options should be somewhat geographically related. So there is a decent chance that even after switching the civs will be somewhat in the right place. A competent Egypt on a TSL map should usually expand into Songhai territory, anyway. And an allow-"historical"-options-only mode should be possible. If not provided by Firaxis, it should be easy to do with modding (provided Civ 7 comes with any modding capabilities that deserve that name).

The civ switching could even open new possibilities for TSL maps: Have a map script that spawns corn only in the new world and then mod in restrictions for the USA that it can only switched into by European civs which have settled three corn resources. That way you could play with an American civ which traces their origins to European colonists settling America.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Is it really? The "historical" options should be somewhat geographically related. So there is a decent chance that even after switching the civs will be somewhat in the right place. A competent Egypt on a TSL map should usually expand into Songhai territory, anyway. And an allow-"historical"-options-only mode should be possible. If not provided by Firaxis, it should be easy to do with modding (provided Civ 7 comes with any modding capabilities that deserve that name).

Do you know where the Songhai are....? and shouldn't the Songhai be in Songhai territory?

The civ switching could even open new possibilities for TSL maps: Have a map script that spawns corn only in the new world and then mod in restrictions for the USA that it can only switched into by European civs which have settled three corn resources. That way you could play with an American civ which traces their origins to European colonists settling America.

or those mechanics could be introduced without spliting the game into three rounds and introducing completely silly and jarring culture swapping mechanic that sees Eygpt turn into Buganda or unrelated civs becoming the Mongols because they settled horses?

 

[Gedemon]

You are certainly not the only one (I love playing and TSL maps too ), and judging by the popularity of the Yet (not) Another Earth Maps Pack, we are not the only ones! I can also hardly imagine playing TSL with a CivSwitching Mode.

I've tried TSL with civ switching, it works great once modded for TSL IMO, unlock based on geography as explained by uppi, and if civ7 is as moddable as civ6, you'll get it.