Civilization VII - Civ switching and age transitions

[Ashvins]

Ok now that the game has been out for a bit, time for some feedback on age transitions. The big beef I have is that in a transition all but your capital revert to towns. A settlement can have a population larger than your capital have more improvements and/or wonders. be the "Jewel" of your civilization but as soon a an age ends bam your a town now. Um it has never worked this way for any real Civilization and is (being nice here) a piss poor game mechanic.

Using U.S. cities here to show my point.

New York, arguably the Jewel of the U.S. is not going to loose it's ability to put people to work for civic improvements just because of the passage of a few years (time from say end of exploration era to modern). A city can revert to a town for many reasons, take Detroit as an example. N.A.F.T.A. killed the auto industry in Detroit reducing the population from around 8 million to at it's lowest around 800,000. That could be an example of this downgrading to a town.

But never in history has a prosperous civilization gone from having multiple cities (all prosperous) loose all civic expansion save it's capital. Sorry it has never happened unless there was war or major natural disaster.

Yes civilizations come and go. Sometimes it is fairly rapid (Ottoman Empire, Third Reich, Atlantis?) but the norm is for gradual change not the rapid change this game uses. The rise and fall of most civilizations is gradual taking years. Small civilizations can be wiped out by natural Disasters or War but large civilizations take years to fall. The roman empire didn't die in a day or even a few years it took several hundred years. Ancient Egypt lasted for roughly 3000 years it had it highs and lows but again it didn't die in a few years it took hundreds. This rapid change and degrading all but your capital to a town is IMO poor game design.

I have many other beef's with this latest version of Civilization it's IMO a dumbed down version. I don't see it as an improved version of the core Civilization franchise. It is a far quicker paced game than any other Civilization game, and TBH I loved Civ for the epic games you could achieve from ALL the other versions.

This just seems like a quick buck and an attempt to get some of the console market.

( Um Fraxis that is not nor has it ever been your main target audience)

 

[MACKA0ili]

America's a modern civ though so New York is never gonna be turned from a city back into a town

On a more serious note though, the whole city vs town signage is more of a gameplay distinction than actually denoting their size or splendor. A better term would be centralized and decentralized cities rather than cities and towns, but I feel the latter gets the point across. In all my games, I never felt like the age transition downgraded my cities; everything I built was still there after all and I would still be getting lots of yields from them. What it felt like instead was that the new government was consolidating its power in a few centralized locations before extending its control (gameplay wise through city conversion and new settlements) to the rest of the empire. That gradual change that happens is something we get to play through at the start of each era and I think that's pretty cool.

There's a lot of things I can complain about Civ 7, the pacing at the end of each era is something I think we can agree on, but I feel like they nailed the age transitions and I'm excited to see what they'll build on top of it. Unfortunately, we still have to wait a few years once all the expansions are out if its still as dumbed down as you say it is.

 

[Canadian Bluebeer]

I still don't like it.

WHY do cities become towns on transition. I have to upgrade them going into exploration and again going into modern.
Makes no sense.

Yes I know you can earn a legacy to keep the cities, but, THAT is also a mess. Choose that one, and you lose other options.
(multiple 2 pt options for towns across the trees, but even if you have the points, you can generally only choose 1. That blocks
the others. sigh)

 

[Zaarin]

A settlement can have a population larger than your capital have more improvements and/or wonders. be the "Jewel" of your civilization but as soon a an age ends bam your a town now. Um it has never worked this way for any real Civilization and is (being nice here) a piss poor game mechanic.

Not really true. Agade (Akkad) was the crown jewel of Sumer, was a backwater by the Old Babylonian period, and today we haven't even identified a probable archaeological site for it. Babylon had all but vanished by the Classical period, and Nineveh had been replaced by nearby Seleucia-Ctesiphon. Many major cities in Europe today were minor outposts in Rome, while many important Roman cities are minor towns now. Having been significant once doesn't mean being significant forever.

(Mechanically, though, the economic golden age is usually a relatively easy one to target.)

 

[Siptah]

I still don't like it.

WHY do cities become towns on transition. I have to upgrade them going into exploration and again going into modern.
Makes no sense.

Yes I know you can earn a legacy to keep the cities, but, THAT is also a mess. Choose that one, and you lose other options.
(multiple 2 pt options for towns across the trees, but even if you have the points, you can generally only choose 1. That blocks
the others. sigh)

To clarify: it's not the 2 point options per se. You can have as many of these as you have points to spend (e.g., science from codices and + 2 settlement limit). But you can only have one golden age legacy: either keep cities, academies, amphitheaters, or gain units.

 

[evonannoredars]

I do find having to re-upgrade all my cities a bit tedious, especially since I don't think I've ever not upgraded a former city back into a city.
If they improved the urban centre specialisation to be worth it I wouldn't mind it so much, or reversed the situation so cities automatically remain cities, but you get given the option to downgrade them in exchange for gold or something.

 

[Zaarin]

I do find having to re-upgrade all my cities a bit tedious, especially since I don't think I've ever not upgraded a former city back into a city.

There have been a few cases where I've kind of wished I could revert Cities to Towns because I just didn't need the development from them. In particular, in the Exploration Age it can be advantageous to turn island settlements into Cities to support your colonization efforts, but frequently these island Cities would be more useful as Fishing Towns in Modern.

 

[Canadian Bluebeer]

To clarify: it's not the 2 point options per se. You can have as many of these as you have points to spend (e.g., science from codices and + 2 settlement limit). But you can only have one golden age legacy: either keep cities, academies, amphitheaters, or gain units.

Yeah, had that last night. took 2 pt military ones. Golden age ones are the pick 1 thing.
(even if I can have 2 or 3 of'em, can only pick one. I'll give'em a pass on this as 6 is the same. Pick one of these for your golden age. The UI should be clearer on this, but we know the UI is a total mess.)