First Game Impressions

That explains why my late game production was awful. How do I increase happiness though? It feels like most cities don't have enough luxury slots and few luxuries give happiness. (I am playing Charlemagne btw)
Towns you just leave as towns and specialize so they don't grow too large. Cities, you need happiness buildings, stay within settlement limit, be aware that many buildings have an happiness cost, and also each specialist is -2 happiness.

IMHO, you shouldn't be relying on trade resources for happiness, but they do help!

I am by no means an expert. This is just what I have noticed so far.
 
First impression are very poor. Refunded.
* UI is a joke
* AI can't play the game properly (worse than Civ VI?)
UI is bad yes; AI is much, much stronger than 5 or 6 - great to see them expanding, building large empires and being competitive with victory conditions near the end of the game.

Understand it's a lot of money and Steam policies are restrictive but you really need to play more than 2 hours to give it a fair shot.
 
Last edited:
I haven't played the game yet but I've preordered so will be getting my hands on it in roughly 2 days. Having looked at reviews at Metacritic, YouTube, and here, I'm honestly excited. The devs took a big swing with this one, and it looks like it mostly paid off. There do seem to be valid criticisms, like janky UI and not having Large or Huge maps available, but I feel like these things should get ironed out pretty quickly given time.
 
I'd like to see something like the loyalty mechanic come back - i've got the AI settling in any random space between my cities settlements
Really, the loyalty mechanic isn't needed yet. They need the AI to simply not forward settle too much. The AI divides and conquers itself for you. The settlement limit is the only reason to be choosy which of these isolated cities on your borders you should allow. I have played on Viceroy and recently started a fresh game on sovereign and I understand now about complaints of AI ignorance.

Loyalty was a decent system but not sure if it would mesh well with 7's structure. I think happiness could be modified through governments or something to help out with this problem much smoother.
 
Not sure if anyone else has tried marathon yet. I tried a game tonight and it seems like marathon is basically broken. On sovereign difficulty, this was the Antiquity ranking screens. I was the only person to even score 1 legacy point in the entire match. It felt like the Crisis was there WAY too fast. I am currently playing through Exploration on the same save to see how the other continent civs have done. But so far it really looks like marathon is broken.

Screenshot 2025-02-09 203037.png
Screenshot 2025-02-09 203026.png
 
Not sure if anyone else has tried marathon yet. I tried a game tonight and it seems like marathon is basically broken.
Quite a few people have reported this.
 
I (finally) reached the Exploration Age in my first playthrough today and, well . . . I don't know.

Hmm, where to begin. Okay, I'll admit to being very underwhelmed by the whole crisis mechanic, which just seemed super-abstract and a somewhat artificial way to inject a bit of drama into the late game (well, of the era). Mine was so vague I can barely recall what it was, something about "the scourge rising" or whatever. Really, I had so much gold and happiness by the end of Antiquity it barely made a dent in me at all.

I was a little nervous when the game switched to Exploration because I was around the year 20 BC, which seemed a bit early for such a thing . . . luckily the game jumped ahead to 400 AD at the start of Exploration.

I was slightly enjoying myself at first in Antiquity, but once I hit Exploration, a lot of my enthusiasm just kind of plummeted. As expected, I think a lot of this had to do with the civ switching aspect. Like I really just wanted to keep playing as Egypt, and was annoyed I had to switch to a new civ (I ended up settling on Abassid). In previous CIV games, I would kind of make up little narratives in my head as I played along, and this game it's hard to do that because it's so schizophrenic and all over the place. Someone said it feels less like you're playing against other Civs and more like you're playing against other Leaders, and that doesn't interest me as much. And the lack of a timeline is really cramping my enjoyment. So many things in VI felt epic, like being the first civ to create a religion, or build a seafaring unit, and so on. And I just don't get that feel here. Everything just seems so regimented and lockstep: you may do a pantheon in Antiquity, but not a religion until Exploration. You can explore only one area of the map in Antiquity. There's not much freedom here.

I just feel very disconnected from this game, in many areas. Like the map, for example. In CIV VI, I could look at a city (either my own or the AI) and instantly tell what was going on. The cities here look more realistic, but also more cluttered, and I have a hard enough time trying to figure out what's going on in my own cities, never mind the AI. I even feel disconnected from the AI. In CIV VI, I almost always had some idea of what the other civs were up to, either from gossip (which I SORELY miss in this game, the updates you get on the right of the screen are frustratingly vague, like when they say a religion has been founded, but neglect to say by who), or from the leaders popping up to interact with you. Here, it feels like me as a player has to make the effort to interact with THEM. For example, on my continent, there are 4 other civs, and aside from the one civ who is friendly with me and who pops up every now and then offering alliances, the other ones have almost totally ignored me. At times it even seems like they even ignore each other. In all of Antiquity I think I literally only saw one war launched by one AI against a neighbor.

This is the third time I've mentioned this, but I'm so, freaking, tired, of the CONSTANT screens of rivers flooding/volcanos exploding. It's pretty much every 5-10 turns, sometimes less, and it's TRULY annoying.

One final gripe for now. I really don't like how Great People have been dumbed down/oversimplified. I really think CIV VI did that one better.

Bottom line, I find this game more frustrating than fun.
 
In CIV VI, I could look at a city (either my own or the AI) and instantly tell what was going on.
Could you after one playthrough though? I found even in my 2nd game of 7 I had a much better idea of what was going on.

I really don't like how Great People have been dumbed down/oversimplified. I really think CIV VI did that one better.
It's probably personal taste but I wasn't a great fan of Civ VI great people, the new mechanic gives you interesting choices at least.
 
It's probably personal taste but I wasn't a great fan of Civ VI great people, the new mechanic gives you interesting choices at least.
I found Spain GP super flavorful and like not having to race for them (side note: although starting 400CE with a gunpowder infantry felt weird).
 
I'm a little surprised to read so many people saying modern goes too fast, AI is not good, winning is a breeze...

It's SO much NOT what I'm living in my first game. Now in modern with mexico at sovereign, from turn 20 on FIVE civs declared on me and mounted major assaults. I've been hanging on by a thread the whole game,
and even more so in modern... managed to capture 2 settlements and hold on to all of mine, but it's an every turn struggle, the AI keeps bombarding me with unit after unit, there's just no rest at all.

Now at around turn 85, we're at about 50% progression, I'm doing ok in culture and military, just finished the factory research and building factories everywhere (already have my ports and rail stations) so maybe the
factory ressources legacy path will finally start, but hey, I'm totally far from being confident of victory here.

I'm thinking that the military legacy path in modern makes it so everyone declares on everyone.. I hope it's not like this all games, I don't mind a challenge and a little warmongering, but I don't want to spend all my games doing mainly THAT !
 
On the topic of Modern era aggression:

Ideological tensions don’t apply to you if you don’t have an ideology. I cruised my way into late game with chill diplomacy, because I’ve completely ignored the ideology civic tree - you’re already being torn enough between the general civic tree and your civ’s traditions. Whether some peace and quiet is worth missing out on ideological social policies is up to debate.
 
Towns you just leave as towns and specialize so they don't grow too large. Cities, you need happiness buildings, stay within settlement limit, be aware that many buildings have an happiness cost, and also each specialist is -2 happiness.

IMHO, you shouldn't be relying on trade resources for happiness, but they do help!

I am by no means an expert. This is just what I have noticed so far.
Should I be avoiding having my towns get too big? When to upgrade a town to city and when to specialize are the two things I just have no idea about in this game.
 
On the topic of Modern era aggression:

Ideological tensions don’t apply to you if you don’t have an ideology. I cruised my way into late game with chill diplomacy, because I’ve completely ignored the ideology civic tree - you’re already being torn enough between the general civic tree and your civ’s traditions. Whether some peace and quiet is worth missing out on ideological social policies is up to debate.
Also, the Ideology civics are all bonus/malus combos. They really don't seem like they're worth the trouble.
 
Also one thing that bothered me in my game today, the AI gives cities away too easily. The AI should never give a city away in a peace deal if it is at 0 war support or more. And the willingness to give away a city should be weighted based on the size of the city. So bigger cities require more war weariness to ask for, smaller cities are easy to give away.

I tend to find if they are willing to give me one city. They will give me ANY one city. Whether it's 30 population or 3.
 
The AI should never give a city away in a peace deal if it is at 0 war support or more.
I think that's too simplistic, e,g. in my first game I was sieging a big developed city and Xerxes was willing to trade away a couple of towns for peace which made total sense. (I said no and killed him though lol).
 
Back
Top Bottom