Civ7 is the most bizarre game in the franchise so far.

[Zaarin]

Come on we all know the real reason why they scale down this game is to make console gameplay possible.... They are abandoning PC crowd.

[citation needed]

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I agree with the above points that this entry does seem to be focused on smaller civilizations more akin to Civ 5. The settlement limit reinforces this idea. Yes you can exceed it, but at the cost of losing out on celebrations due to lack of happiness? Is that realistic to do?

Not to say it's the perfect solution but I'm hoping it feels similar to how unit maintenance cost is a limiter at the start of the game. Once I got my economy going didn't really have to worry about money very often.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

[citation needed]

I greatly admire your genetically enhanced tact.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Art is subjective so it's logical some percentage of people will think it's ugly. When I see AI generated art I want it thrown back into the pit of hell from whence it came.

 

[ColtSeavers]

This criticism puzzles me. Civ7 literally eliminates most of the micro in previous civ games. No more builder/worker micro. No more micro of needing specific strategic resources for units. No more 1upt micro. No more diplomatic trade deals micro.

Sure, compared to Civ 6 it is fair to assume, that micro management will probably be less of an issue. However, there will still be a lot of (unnecessary) Micro Management: E.G. satisfy the various agendas, Civ 7's religion mechanics, manually having to steer the Treasury Fleets and switching policy cards instead of having real governments like we had in Civ 4 or Civ 5. I therefore think, micro management will still be an issue which will bother players quiet a bit in this game.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Not really. Some features are very off to me. others are what I want for too long
1. Navigable rivers (So much mod potentials to think of, ship sizes and drafts will decide whether one can pass)
2. Streamlined Infantry class. No more separated 'Shock Melee' and 'Anticavalry' class.
3. Sefl-upgrading UUs.
4. Field Commanders (and fleet commanders), can be trained. and acts as stacking host. and the only units that can level up. This is what I like most.

 

[Evolena]

They didn't really say they would reduce the amount of micro-management, but that the things you would have to micro-manage would be more meaningful decisions.

 

[ColtSeavers]

They didn't really say they would reduce the amount of micro-management, but that the things you would have to micro-manage would be more meaningful decisions.

Well, at least for me, having to build a galley just to fulfil Harald's agenda or having to switch policy cards to generate x amount of yield for a certain item, is not really a "meaningful decision", either.

 

[Kev1916]

Come on we all know the real reason why they scale down this game is to make console gameplay possible.... They are abandoning PC crowd.

Nail on the head and yea civkind aint going be for many PC players , less tactics less clicks, small maps with a limited amount of Huge troops and a mobile game aesthetic's.

I agree with the OP and there is a significant amount of concerned players in the simplification of the core gameplay of the new "civ".

 

[Zaarin]

a mobile game aesthetic's.

I have to ask, genuinely, have you seen any footage at all that wasn't from the Switch trailer?

 

[anemo]

Well, at least for me, having to build a galley just to fulfil Harald's agenda or having to switch policy cards to generate x amount of yield for a certain item, is not really a "meaningful decision", either.

You don't really have to satisfy your opponents agenda, or build your strategy around them. It is just an internal mechanism for making AI leaders play to their advantage. Harald is more likely to attack you if you have small navy. You will have big navy or not according to your plans. What I hope this time is that AI leaders will take advantage of their bonus. In your example, the problem is when Harald don't build a navy himself.

 

[ColtSeavers]

You don't really have to satisfy your opponents agenda, or build your strategy around them. It is just an internal mechanism for making AI leaders play to their advantage. Harald is more likely to attack you if you have small navy. You will have big navy or not according to your plans. What I hope this time is that AI leaders will take advantage of their bonus. In your example, the problem is when Harald don't build a navy himself.

Sure, but the game encourages you, to build stuff (in this case a galley) which you might not have any use for at all, just to have a better relationship with another leader. This is a very gamey adaption of real world diplomacy, and doesn't count as a "meaningful decision", in my point of view.

 

[pokiehl]

Sure, but the game encourages you, to build stuff (in this case a galley) which you might not have any use for at all, just to have a better relationship with another leader. This is a very gamey adaption of real world diplomacy, and doesn't count as a "meaningful decision", in my point of view.

You’re referring to Civ 6, not Civ 7.

 

[Lord Lakely]

You’re referring to Civ 6, not Civ 7.

Not that I have a desire to will it into existance, but that sentence is missing a "not yet".

There is not such thing as a creative rock bottom. Expressing concern on a forum we know the devs read can hopefully prevent a few dumb decisions going forward.

Otherwise, let's be grateful things aren't worse, and they certainly could have been.

 

[ColtSeavers]

You’re referring to Civ 6, not Civ 7.

We will see!

 

[Kyriakos]

Tbf only a tiny minority of games have reached title 7, and for something like civ they could either go the EU paradox-style (typically small changes or aesthetic ones) or try to make each game stand entirely on its own and not care about continuity that much.
7 clearly is far more about the latter.
Besides, does anyone expect the Civ series to reach 100 or something? Imo presenting a new one in the series every few years is itself (gameplay-wise) overkill, but obviously done for profit first and foremost.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think the most revolutionary civ game was 5. We got hexagons, 1UPT, road maintenance and tall gameplay support in a single step (not to mention a lot of other new concepts). Compared to this, Civ6 to Civ7 transition doesn't look that big.

 

[ColtSeavers]

I think the most revolutionary civ game was 5. We got hexagons, 1UPT, road maintenance and tall gameplay support in a single step (not to mention a lot of other new concepts). Compared to this, Civ6 to Civ7 transition doesn't look that big.

Maybe not that big, but certainly in the wrong direction!

 

[Gori the Grey]

Besides, does anyone expect the Civ series to reach 100 or something?

I do.

They'll work it into the logo:

Civilization.

Callin' it right now.

Hey, you Civfanatics in 2824, you heard it here first!

I already successfully predicted Civili7ation.

And I'm on record with Civiliz8ion. (N.B. that' one's a joke)

And I'll just let you guess what I think they'll do with the logo in CIvilization 101.

And CIV 104

 

[stealth_nsk]

Maybe not that big, but certainly in the wrong direction!

I don't agree here. The idea is pretty good.