Hopes/Focus Points of the Next Update?

[Porry]

Two very useful things:
- Modernization should allow you to see which building to overlay in districts with two obsolete buildings.
- In the diplomatic screen, if I select an independent power, the view should center on it.

 

[Krikkit1]

more UI improvement*/bug fixes
Religion improvements
Age Transition improvements
Victory/Just one more turn in Any Age (set at beginning of game)
Keep/choose Name of civ

 

[Lazy sweeper]

THE BASICS

Start all civs since Antiquity.
Retain all units and buildings at Age pass.
Introduce Leaders scramble as an option (thus re-enable fixed Leaders for each civ) and Kings and Queens units with a health bar and movement. (sort like a Hero of Civ VI)
Allow civ switch ONLY if your civ conquer another Civ LEADER ( King or Queen or whatever)

FOUR SIMPLE THINGS.

The Map Editor
True Start Location Earth Map
Allow tree planting and natural tree growth.
Re-introduce animals Barbarians in the game

FOUR EXTREMELY UNLIKELY THINGS

Sell the game for 49 EUR, Physical Release, DVD, and a good old Civilopedia printed instruction.
Reintroduce Crusaders, special Relics like the Ark of the Covenant, and replace the Treasure Fleet railroad gameplay with something unique for every Civ...
Hero Leaders: Crusaders could be mercenaries, raised by the King special unit, which would work as a special Commander and a Civ VI hero.
END game Minimap with voice over narrator, Palace overview, Space Colony overview or Seabed cities overview (if it would be a project similar to the Space race)

ONE REALLY UNLIKELY THING

Start the game with the Fall of Atlantis in 11.960 B.C and continue the game into the Future with Orbital Colonies, Seabed colonies, with the world
suffering an Apocalypse event that could put it underwater or under fire ( All Soil turned to Desert ), with End game in 2550 AC.

 

[stealth_nsk]

THE BASICS

Start all civs since Antiquity.
Retain all units and buildings at Age pass.
Introduce Leaders scramble as an option (thus re-enable fixed Leaders for each civ) and Kings and Queens units with a health bar and movement. (sort like a Hero of Civ VI)
Allow civ switch ONLY if your civ conquer another Civ LEADER ( King or Queen or whatever)

FOUR SIMPLE THINGS.

The Map Editor
True Start Location Earth Map
Allow tree planting and natural tree growth.
Re-introduce animals Barbarians in the game

FOUR EXTREMELY UNLIKELY THINGS

Sell the game for 49 EUR, Physical Release, DVD, and a good old Civilopedia printed instruction.
Reintroduce Crusaders, special Relics like the Ark of the Covenant, and replace the Treasure Fleet railroad gameplay with something unique for every Civ...
Hero Leaders: Crusaders could be mercenaries, raised by the King special unit, which would work as a special Commander and a Civ VI hero.
END game Minimap with voice over narrator, Palace overview, Space Colony overview or Seabed cities overview (if it would be a project similar to the Space race)

ONE REALLY UNLIKELY THING

Start the game with the Fall of Atlantis in 11.960 B.C and continue the game into the Future with Orbital Colonies, Seabed colonies, with the world
suffering an Apocalypse event that could put it underwater or under fire ( All Soil turned to Desert ), with End game in 2550 AC.

Honestly, almost all of this is somewhere in extremely unlikely area, except for:
- TSL. Quite likely to come eventually
- Map editor. Could come
- 49 EUR price during sales we'll probably see around this Christmas or a bit later
- Saving all units could potentially be, but it will depend on other systems

 

[moondog385]

- More seamless age transition, which they said they’ll do. Allow saving at the end of the age so I don’t have to select a civ, load up the next age, and then save and quit the game
- Allow for a blend of architectural styles. If I go from Maya to Songhai, I want to see Mayan and Songhai buildings, rather than have the architectural style do a complete shift from one age to the next
- Border (empire) lens. Unclear where my towns and cities begin and end sometimes so I’d like this back
- Pacing still needs some work. Antiquity goes by so quick which is funny considering it spans the longest time irl

Agree with things previously mentioned like bringing back religious pressure, swapping tiles between settlements, legacy path balancing, and revisiting ideology.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Honestly, almost all of this is somewhere in extremely unlikely area, except for:
- TSL. Quite likely to come eventually
- Map editor. Could come
- 49 EUR price during sales we'll probably see around this Christmas or a bit later
- Saving all units could potentially be, but it will depend on other systems

I mean the civ switching is a kind of experiment, we've seen this.
The change proposed wouldn't ditch it completely, but it would make sense, as your civ is now in charge of another civ,
it could adopt its feat... so finally peeps would get to start with USA and to finish with Rome all in one go...
It's an almost complete overhaul, but at least it makes sense, to me...

Hero-Leaders then could come as part of the next big chunk of DLC, if things get better. Civ re-wiring is vital.
It needs to be done asap in my mind.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I mean the civ switching is a kind of experiment, we've seen this.

I wouldn't use the term "experiment" here. Experiment suggests you're ready for both positive and negative results, while civ switching is Civ7 core mechanics and not something you could throw out. It's "bold decision", not "experiment". In my book experiments were Civ6 game modes. And, for example, Barbarian Clans were treated as successful experiment and became a basis for CIv7 independent powers.

The change proposed wouldn't ditch it completely, but it would make sense, as your civ is now in charge of another civ,
it could adopt its feat... so finally peeps would get to start with USA and to finish with Rome all in one go...
It's an almost complete overhaul, but at least it makes sense, to me...

There are 2 problems:
1. As you correctly pointed out, it's a complete overhaul, which is generally not gonna happen, because nobody expects Firaxis spending 5 more years building new game with the same assets.
2. The things you're proposed are based on historical simulation and are pretty subjective. I don't think the majority of players would enjoy them and I doubt it makes sense to make any more or less large changes if you don't expect the vast majority of players to like it.

Hero-Leaders then could come as part of the next big chunk of DLC, if things get better. Civ re-wiring is vital.
It needs to be done asap in my mind.

Yep, those are pretty subjective things.

 

[Luxerne]

In addition to things others have noted here (commanders teleporting to inconvenient locations, UI improvements, religion improvements, etc),

I'd like to see the city graphics actually reflect the civs I've been playing as. It's annoying how, unless you do a very specific route, your previous era buildings will randomly change graphics to a different civ's.

For example, if you play as the Normans, your antiquity buildings will all have the Roman models no matter who you played as in antiquity. Then, if you swtich from Normans to America, all your exploration buildings will use the Shawnee models!

If I'm playing a Native American run to America or Mexico, it's great seeing America with the Shawnee and Mississippian buildings or Mexico with the Inca and Maya buildings (and hopefully Aztec when they arrive), but if I'm playing a "colonial" run, why can't I have Mexico with Spanish buildings or America with Norman buildings?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I'd like to see the city graphics actually reflect the civs I've been playing as. It's annoying how, unless you do a very specific route, your previous era buildings will randomly change graphics to a different civ's.

For example, if you play as the Normans, your antiquity buildings will all have the Roman models no matter who you played as in antiquity. Then, if you swtich from Normans to America, all your exploration buildings will use the Shawnee models!

If I'm playing a Native American run to America or Mexico, it's great seeing America with the Shawnee and Mississippian buildings or Mexico with the Inca and Maya buildings (and hopefully Aztec when they arrive), but if I'm playing a "colonial" run, why can't I have Mexico with Spanish buildings or America with Norman buildings?

Better yet, arrange/identify the current architectural styles not only by Civ, but also by Age and Region, and let the gamer pick the style that approximates what they want to play.
So, for example:
Mississippian could also be North American Woodlands Antiquity
Shawnee North American Woodlands Exploration
Norman as North European Exploration
and so on.

And just possibly you are, in your mind, playing as a developing "Europeanish" Civ and so your Mississippian Antiquity becomes Shawnee in Exploration, but with "North European" architecture - Norman, and you quickly rename all your Settlements using an Anglo-Saxon city list.

The more agency they can give to the gamer to play the kind of game - no matter how fantastical - that the gamer wants to play, the better. Let us choose if we want our buildings to in the style of Frank Lloyd Wright or Frank Lloyd Wing Fat or Frank Lloyd Stumbling Buffalo . . .

 

[ombak]

Looks like patch 1.2.3 will address a couple of things that should make for smoother transitions (unit locations and a countdown to transition).

I've been playing a more planned/deliberate game lately, by that I mean starting the game knowing what I want to try in the next age, largely to get myself to play civs or objectives I haven't before or get more XP for certain leaders. I come away with the feeling that the disconnect between legacy paths from age to age is a part of what keeps me from playing through in a more casual, less planned playthrough.

Unlike the unit and countdown updates, I am sure this will require an expansion (or large DLC) to address. So I second the religion rework, but also a rework of all the legacy paths in later ages to make them feel more connected to your previous paths. I realize that they probably didn't want that because it might be too easy to fall into something that leads to snowballing, but I hope that with feedback and data from months of gameplay, they can do something that makes things feel more connected from one age to the other, without falling back on just boosting the next legacy path.

As for smaller updates, with the announcement of 1.2.3 I'm hoping to see more about the next DLC soon, and see continued polish to the UI, to independent states and things that indicate a move towards smoother continuity.

 

[j51]

Yeah this update is nice but we really need more content. Like even more than the RtR stuff we should have gotten by now. We need a lot more civs for games to not feel repetitive. I hope we get some soon.

 

[Gorbles]

The problem is content puts polish and improvements on hold (particularly to unplanned / rough areas like the UI, etc). It all comes out of the same resource bucket, which is unlikely to have increased from what was allocated to the post-launch period.

This is why publishers should be more mindful of release windows, instead of speedrunning quarterlies. Especially for games the publisher itself admits tend to have long tails (e.g. longterm revenue recouping via lifetime sales).

 

[Lord Lakely]

Every single time i see this topic's name flash by when opening the subforum my silly brain reads it as "Hocus Pocus for the next update".

 

[Leucarum]

Every single time i see this topic's name flash by when opening the subforum my silly brain reads it as "Hocus Pocus for the next update".

I'm glad I'm not alone there

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Every single time i see this topic's name flash by when opening the subforum my silly brain reads it as "Hocus Pocus for the next update".

Any and all Improvements will be accomplished by magic?

 

[sethjohnson]

I would like to see the ability to build canals brought back - i think there would be a nice synergy with using them to extend navigable rivers further inland so you can have cities quite far in able to get out to the sea

 

[GeneralZift]

I would like to see the ability to build canals brought back - i think there would be a nice synergy with using them to extend navigable rivers further inland so you can have cities quite far in able to get out to the sea

It would be pretty cool if a Civ game allowed you to build massive canals, perhaps with some type of restriction, so that you can produce new trade lanes or something. Then you could get Gold from trade routes that go through

 

[shaglio]

Every single time i see this topic's name flash by when opening the subforum my silly brain reads it as "Hocus Pocus for the next update".

I’ve been meaning to post the same thing but I was too embarrassed. Thank you for breaking the ice for people like me who weren’t brave enough to admit it.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I would like to see the ability to build canals brought back - i think there would be a nice synergy with using them to extend navigable rivers further inland so you can have cities quite far in able to get out to the sea

Yes, Yes, Yes.

Canals to extend navigable rivers (the Nile) were being built in Egypt in Antiquity, and China's 1700+ kilometer-long Grand Canal turning almost every river in north and central China into part of a navigable system was started in the 6th century CE (Exploration Age). That one could be a Wonder, but the Pharaoh's Canal linking the Nile with the Red Sea was built in Antiquity and refurbished with locks in early Exploration Age, so there is lots of room and examples for canal-building for all three Ages.

Canals linking navigable rivers/coasts/lakes or extending the navigable portions of rivers date back to Antiquity in several parts of the world such as Egypt, Greece, China and Florida (yep, the Mississippians' cousins down south built a canal linking two bodies of water. It was only big enough for canoes, but the principle remains the same). Making them extend Trade Routes would also help keep trade routes important in Antiquity when, especially on the larger maps, Civs are frequently out of range of each other at first.

 

[Pfeffersack]

Canals are probably the thing (in terms of a distinct feature or element) from Civ6 I miss most in Civ7. I guess the reason is the impact on picking settlement spots - as soon as you allow extending the "canaling ability" beyong the city tile itself, suddenly more tiles come into consideration when placing a city. To weight e.g. the access to resources or optmized spacing vs. the "canal potential" of a settlement is just one of those "major decisions" which would fit so neatly into Civ7 big vision "of less, but more relevant clicks/decisions"