FXS needs to put out a new roadmap - direction of the game is unclear

[Leucarum]

That is a good point to shine a light on. I had only been thinking in terms of players quitting mid game as the challenge and excitement dwindles as the game gets predictable. Civ 7 is certainly unique that this flaw, if uncorrected, wipes 1/3 of the content of the game away entirely.

Agreed. I am not quite at the point where I am leaning towards their removal, but I certainly understand why someone would. If they don't plan on opening them up for multiple styles of play, I would also prefer they just remove them.

It definitely makes Civ Switching an all-or-nothing affair. You don't get to have it be a compelling mechanic unless you first get a strong grade for the ages mechanics. Currently, I am leaning towards this being a mountain Firaxis won't scale. They've never made a compelling late game before, expecting them to do it under the full glare of public scrutiny, just after a round of layoffs, and under a time crunch... I don't think I'd put money on that. Some battles are better to walk away from.

Bleh. That last part is not to my tastes, personally. I have not played exploration or modern as single era games yet and may never get around to it. Ancient will always have that excitement of revealing the map. It would be nice if Exploration and Modern also offered an exciting thing to discover as you played the age. Like if Independants (and piracy) became a meatier diplomacy game in Exploration just as an example. Something to get the player excited about a new aspect of the game that wasn't there last Age. Then do the same for Modern. But this is 2 big overhauls, which I think both of the last 2 ages need desperately. Which leads back to the roadmap...

It's more that it lets explo and modern capture some of the secret sauce from antiquity than anything else. I wasn't a fan of advanced starts in previous Civ games but 7 does them well and it showcases just how bad snowballing and carrying over stuff from previous ages impacts game systems. Even if you only try it once, I reccommend trying it, I found it an eye opening way to play.

 

[Siptah]

It's more that it lets explo and modern capture some of the secret sauce from antiquity than anything else. I wasn't a fan of advanced starts in previous Civ games but 7 does them well and it showcases just how bad snowballing and carrying over stuff from previous ages impacts game systems. Even if you only try it once, I reccommend trying it, I found it an eye opening way to play.

That‘s why I think a hard reset would have been more interesting than the soft one we got at launch (or now the rather non-existent one). You won‘t be able to re-discover the map in these of course (which takes away some fun), but let me start from basically scratch and the need to retake my former settlements or land through diplomacy/friendly units or by force. Don‘t give me 20 settlements that come fully fleshed out with wonders and (obsolete) buildings. Let me found new cities near the old ones that can incorporate some of the remnant districts - whether from my former empire or from another one. I want a partially but not fully white canvas for the later ages if I decide to play through the whole game.

 

[Leucarum]

That‘s why I think a hard reset would have been more interesting than the soft one we got at launch (or now the rather non-existent one). You won‘t be able to re-discover the map in these of course (which takes away some fun), but let me start from basically scratch and the need to retake my former settlements or land through diplomacy/friendly units or by force. Don‘t give me 20 settlements that come fully fleshed out with wonders and (obsolete) buildings. Let me found new cities near the old ones that can incorporate some of the remnant districts - whether from my former empire or from another one. I want a partially but not fully white canvas for the later ages if I decide to play through the whole game.

In one parallel universe Civ7 and then it's two big expansion packs were Antiquity, Exploration and Modern. Each one was a fleshed out age the length of a full game, giving Firaxis the time to get each one right in turn... And since each one was a game in its own right, you could more easily have each one be a reset, only somewhat influenced by the previous.

 

[stealth_nsk]

That‘s why I think a hard reset would have been more interesting than the soft one we got at launch (or now the rather non-existent one). You won‘t be able to re-discover the map in these of course (which takes away some fun), but let me start from basically scratch and the need to retake my former settlements or land through diplomacy/friendly units or by force. Don‘t give me 20 settlements that come fully fleshed out with wonders and (obsolete) buildings. Let me found new cities near the old ones that can incorporate some of the remnant districts - whether from my former empire or from another one. I want a partially but not fully white canvas for the later ages if I decide to play through the whole game.

This argument could be moved even further - why do you need hard reset if you can play each age separately (well, at the moment you can't, but the feature to end the game in any age was promised since the first gameplay reveal, so I'd expect it soon)?

I think we need:

• Good victory conditions for each age, which need much more than the current modern age beelining, so you could play each age separately
• Enough attention for soft transition, because soft is that makes long campaigns meaningful
• Some other improvements in both areas. Like my favorite thing about complex score system which would take into account various achievements and thus improve the victory

 

[ggalindo001]

I think a lot of long time Civ fans are like me with respect to Civ 7.

This is from someone that has thousands of hours each in Civ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. And someone playing the last iteration until the new one was released (and in the case of Civ 5, until Civ 7 was released). And usually if I take a quick hiatus from the game, I'm itching to come back after a few weeks.

When Civ 7 first came out, I enjoyed it. Played quite a bit. I wasn't a fan of many of the design choices, but I played it nonetheless and enjoyed it. It was different -- albeit not what I would have wanted in Civ 7.

Then the feedback rolled in. All of the changes by the devs in (to me) a random and knee jerk responsive way tore away from this enjoyment. The poor UI and the constant break of UI mods also contributed to the decreasing enjoyment. In the end, I came to the conclusion that I am playing an early beta or late alpha release. And a dev team that is desperately trying to find a silver bullet to get this release back on track without any clear direction.

I've not played since early August -- and I have no desire to play right now. It probably will not be until there is a major overhaul release that I might turn this back on. So, long story short, I don't necessarily need to see a roadmap, I think the devs desperately NEED a roadmap and stick to it. The knee jerk feel to releases is IMO making things worse, not better.

And I know it isn't just me -- the new mods being released are down to a trickle, and many early mods are no longer supported. I would have never imagined that a Civ title would be practically "dead" after 6 months -- but here we are.

 

[AD1730]

the new mods being released are down to a trickle, and many early mods are no longer supported. I would have never imagined that a Civ title would be practically "dead" after 6 months -- but here we are.

Add this to the list of parallels with Starfield. People say “mods can save the game.” This is rarely true in my experience. Enough people have to love the base game (or at least aspects of it) to have a vibrant modding community.

 

[queenpea]

Well, we have this update for the moment. Thoughts?

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Well, we have this update for the moment. Thoughts?

View attachment 743260

Maps don't look entirely good, but at least less bad? Might be they are still gamifying them because of exploration era rules, but it's just looking artificial and arena-ey still to me. Not a fan

Then 2 changes to parameters packaged as major changes?

What are they doing all day in Maryland?

 

[j51]

Maps don't look entirely good, but at least less bad? Might be they are still gamifying them because of exploration era rules, but it's just looking artificial and arena-ey still to me. Not a fan

Then 2 changes to parameters packaged as major changes?

What are they doing all day in Maryland?

I mean they probably aren’t doing quite as much. The people left after the layoffs gotta be pretty demoralized. That’ll hurt productivity.

I feel for them.

 

[uppi]

Well, we have this update for the moment. Thoughts?

View attachment 743260

It looks like an incremental update. The changes are very welcome, but not really anything groundbreaking.

This makes releasing a roadmap alongside it even more important.

 

[Siddorm]

People seem to be thinking that they have a roadmap but they are not releasing it. I am thinking that they do not have a roadmap.

 

[Gorbles]

Then 2 changes to parameters packaged as major changes?

I don't know why anyone takes this kind of commentary seriously.

It's more than okay to not be fussed by changes. But actively undermining the effort went in based on zero knowledge of what it takes to make them?

What purpose does this serve?

 

[Pfeffersack]

I (re)posted my thoughts on what we already know about 1.2.5 in the stickied thread, as I think they better fit in there.

However, given that those "first infos" are usually centered around the bigger items of a update...this feels a bit concerning. Not devaluing in any way what we will get, but it doesn't seem to address the real bug elephants in the room. And it will even make the call for a new roadmap louder: If this late September patch "disappoints" by missing the mark (again: not saying that what we get will be bad or useless, but may be just perceived as "setting wrong priorities"), people will inevitably ask whether more fundamental changes to e.g. the era/consistency theme come later. Or maybe never? The easiest way to answer such questions would be a new road map and it would also quell doubts about the game future sparked by the recent lay-offs.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

In gameplay terms, "Expansionist City State" is a bit odd to me.

 

[Xandinho]

I (re)posted my thoughts on what we already know about 1.2.5 in the stickied thread, as I think they better fit in there.

However, given that those "first infos" are usually centered around the bigger items of a update...this feels a bit concerning. Not devaluing in any way what we will get, but it doesn't seem to address the real bug elephants in the room. And it will even make the call for a new roadmap louder: If this late September patch "disappoints" by missing the mark (again: not saying that what we get will be bad or useless, but may be just perceived as "setting wrong priorities"), people will inevitably ask whether more fundamental changes to e.g. the era/consistency theme come later. Or maybe never? The easiest way to answer such questions would be a new road map and it would also quell doubts about the game future sparked by the recent lay-offs.

I share your concerns and find your points quite valid. However, I don’t believe any major or fundamental changes will come in these monthly updates. We’ll have to wait for the first expansion for that. I agree that getting a response from them about their future plans would help a lot, but personally, I believe they’re already working on something big behind the scenes. I don’t think they’ll let this game fade away without at least attempting something transformative.

 

[j51]

One can hope.

 

[Gorbles]

In gameplay terms, "Expansionist City State" is a bit odd to me.

You don't grow / want to grow your city states (before / instead of assimilating them)? Or get symbiotic benefits for a similar playstyle? The same as being rewarded with Science-related benefits, etc.

 

[ggalindo001]

I share your concerns and find your points quite valid. However, I don’t believe any major or fundamental changes will come in these monthly updates. We’ll have to wait for the first expansion for that. I agree that getting a response from them about their future plans would help a lot, but personally, I believe they’re already working on something big behind the scenes. I don’t think they’ll let this game fade away without at least attempting something transformative.

I really hope that is the case.

If you look at the history from Civ 3 on with expansions, they have never truly been "transformative" from the standpoint of fixing core mechanics in the game. And right now, I think there is significant concern on just that -- the devs (except for potentially this last update) have been tinkering with the core mechanics of the game in order to try to get to something satisfactory for the game playing public -- and without (to me as an outsider) a clear strategy or roadmap. So, if there is a major expansion and it addresses the core mechanics of the game -- it will be a first.

Instead, I am concerned that any expansion will be built on a crumbling foundation and will suffer accordingly.

I'm sure they won't do this because nobody looks longer term -- however, I think it would be, in the long run, much more optimal for 2k and Firaxis to quietly distance from Civ 7 -- and use future dev time and resources for an earlier but better release of Civ 8. This could be considered "failure" but I wouldn't think so -- I would look at it as we learned from the 1/3 that didn't go all that well, and instead of doubling down -- we are just going to revert back to what does work.

And for what it's worth -- there is a lot and I mean a lot about Civ 7 that is awesome, great, etc. Just implemented on a bad premise that continues to be knee jerked around.

 

[Leucarum]

However, given that those "first infos" are usually centered around the bigger items of a update...this feels a bit concerning. Not devaluing in any way what we will get, but it doesn't seem to address the real bug elephants in the room.

It sounds from the civ7 discord as if the devs are still working on a lot of other issues players have raised. But this isn't the patch for them. Hopefully there is at least a new roadmap.

I agree that this patch won't move the needle regardless of how much work went into it. I presume these are the headlines because why put your worst foot forward. It's disappointingly static even if below the surface the duck's feet are probably flapping like crazy...

 

[SammyKhalifa]

You don't grow / want to grow your city states (before / instead of assimilating them)? Or get symbiotic benefits for a similar playstyle? The same as being rewarded with Science-related benefits, etc.

Oh, not that. The term is just a little bit of an oxymoron.