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

[Bug Repellent]

I expect they will be showing us a roadmap soon. The Ottomans banner in the Lakshmibai First Look is a hint that they have more content in the works, and the whole roadmap will either be tomorrow or on Tuesday when 1.2.5 comes out.

Civ6, the finished game, has 50 civs. Civ7 already has 40. Bringing more civs is not what the game needs. Quite the contrary. To me, with its ages and civ swapping mechanism, Civ7 automatically gave itself a great sin: civ inflation. Too many already, but with plans to add more. Probably a lot more, since each age only has 13. I totally see the game reaching 100 civs after one or two expansions. When you have that many, it's impossible to make them unique. They'll be only marginally different from one another and add difficulty for people to remember what each civ's unique abilities are. In the restaurant business, restaurants with 100 menu items are just about guaranteed to be bad restaurants. Civ7 seems to go in this direction. In my opinion, new Civ installments should launch with ~15 leaders/civs combos that are very unique and even unbalanced/OP in what they do. More is not better. For example, chess has only 6 different pieces and yet, it achieves incredible strategic complexity. Heroes of Might and Magic 3, my all time favorite game, launched with only 7 town factions and added only one in a later expansion. And yet, it always feels rich to me, even after playing thousands and thousands of hours.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Civ6, the finished game, has 50 civs. Civ7 already has 40. Bringing more civs is not what the game needs. Quite the contrary. To me, with its ages and civ swapping mechanism, Civ7 automatically gave itself a great sin: civ inflation. Too many already, but with plans to add more. Probably a lot more, since each age only has 13. I totally see the game reaching 100 civs after one or two expansions. When you have that many, it's impossible to make them unique. They'll be only marginally different from one another and add difficulty for people to remember what each civ's unique abilities are. In the restaurant business, restaurants with 100 menu items are just about guaranteed to be bad restaurants. Civ7 seems to go in this direction. In my opinion, new Civ installments should launch with ~15 leaders/civs combos that are very unique and even unbalanced/OP in what they do. More is not better. For example, chess has only 6 different pieces and yet, it achieves incredible strategic complexity. Heroes of Might and Magic 3, my all time favorite game, launched with only 7 town factions and added only one in a later expansion. And yet, it always feels rich to me, even after playing thousands and thousands of hours.

Civ 7 civs are not equivalent to Civ 6 civs. There's 40 because each player plows through three per game. A Civ 7 civ is worth 0.33 Civ 6 civs.

 

[queenpea]

Civ 7 civs are not equivalent to Civ 6 civs. There's 40 because each player plows through three per game. A Civ 7 civ is worth 0.33 Civ 6 civs.

Yes, the game absolutely needs more civs for civ switching to feel less jarring. More “historical-ish” paths are needed.

I think if the game had launched with 15 per age—which was the number being thrown around these forums prior to launch—it would have had a marginally more positive reception.

 

[Krajzen]

Civ 7 civs are not equivalent to Civ 6 civs. There's 40 because each player plows through three per game. A Civ 7 civ is worth 0.33 Civ 6 civs.

Frankly this alone should have been a damn good reason to give up with the civ switching: it requires three time as work to (at best) make the same psychological impression as usual.

There really is no winning here:
- "only" like 60 civs? the game functionally has 20 in the same time, they still keep repeating all the time, plus they still have many very ahistorical transitions
- adding like 120 more civs? crazy workload and you end up really suffering from the inflation of too damn many civs (good luck remembering their uniques)

It gets even better if devs really plan to add the fourth era with its own separate set of civs, making the work even harder for themselves... for no reason

 

[Gorbles]

It gets even better if devs really planned on adding the fourth era with its own separate set of civs, making the work even harder for themselves... for no reason

I mean, there is a reason. History in layers.

It can be disliked, criticised, you name it. But it's there, and it's a stated goal for this iteration.

 

[Leucarum]

I'd not put too much stock in the Devs' goals at the moment. Their cursed monkey paw curled so hard it got arthritis. Especially their goal of making the lategame interesting. They've pretty much made the worst lategame Civ has seen.

The one goal I think they mostly get a solid passing grade for is reduced micromanagement, but even that only holds until Modern gets bloated.

History in Layers seems too nebulous to be a goal, more a design philosophy/guiding principle.

 

[Kev1916]

Frankly this alone should have been a damn good reason to give up with the civ switching: it requires three time as work to (at best) make the same psychological impression as usual.

There really is no winning here:
- "only" like 60 civs? the game functionally has 20 in the same time, they still keep repeating all the time, plus they still have many very ahistorical transitions
- adding like 120 more civs? crazy workload and you end up really suffering from the inflation of too damn many civs (good luck remembering their uniques)

It gets even better if devs really planned on adding the fourth era with its own separate set of civs, making the work even harder for themselves... for no reason

Civ Switching was always part of the scam, to turn a beloved series into an expensive tart, history was not made in layers.

Micro transactions and de-attached toons ( Leaders ) along with what will be an expensive 4th "age" should put this version of " civ" down for good

 

[j51]

Every thread eventually becomes an argument about civ switching. Sigh..

 

[Leucarum]

Almost like it's a controversial feature...

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Almost like it's a controversial feature...

And almost like everyone knows that already, and would like to discuss something else once in a while

 

[j51]

Anyway, a roadmap for the next six months would be really nice to have. I’d certainly like to see what they got planned. I hope it’s the per era victory conditions, that cataclysmic era transition mode, more techs/length for the modern era at both ends, and more civs that fit good historical pathways!

 

[socratic]

The Ottoman tease on the latest teaser makes me wonder. Is it likely it’s part of another 2-Civ, 1-Leader DLC pack or coming with the first Expansion?

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Like a lot of people (and has been talked to death so I'm kind of contradicting myself here) I'm mostly hoping for fleshing out the paths, post-ancient. It's such a good idea and falls so flat in practice. We need writing and music and art.

 

[queenpea]

Like a lot of people (and has been talked to death so I'm kind of contradicting myself here) I'm mostly hoping for fleshing out the paths, post-ancient. It's such a good idea and falls so flat in practice. We need writing and music and art.

Yes, can we actually have culture in the game? I think one of the reasons that this iteration really isn't clicking with me is that the cultural gameplay feels particularly shallow.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Yes, can we actually have culture in the game? I think one of the reasons that this iteration really isn't clicking with me is that the cultural gameplay feels particularly shallow.

And as an added kick in the teeth, they took away my concert halls and art galleries and replaced them with an even worse version of CivVI missionary stuff.

 

[Gorbles]

I'd not put too much stock in the Devs' goals at the moment.

Like I already said, you can dislike or criticise it as much as you want.

That doesn't mean "for no reason" magically becomes true, though!

 

[Leucarum]

Like I already said, you can dislike or criticise it as much as you want.

That doesn't mean "for no reason" magically becomes true, though!

I agree there were reasons for everything the devs did. Good reasons even.

But having goals and achieving goals are very different things. Like if your goal was to lose weight, but instead you gained 10lbs...

 

[Leucarum]

And almost like everyone knows that already, and would like to discuss something else once in a while

I mean we're still arguing over 1UPT in every other thread. I expect this will run for a while...

 

[j51]

Seriously? There’s other places for this. I want to hear what people want on a potential roadmap, when the roadmap might happen, etc.

 

[Leucarum]

Seriously? There’s other places for this. I want to hear what people want on a potential roadmap, when the roadmap might happen, etc.

The devs have confirmed that they are working on updating how we identify with Civs as a high priority. I'd say it's fair to expect/hope for tweaks or updates to Civ switching in the roadmap. I'd expect them to be pretty intertwined unless the devs don't want to spill any beans.

Personally I'm hoping for the ability to transcend your civ a-la Humankind.