I quit for now

[j51]

I've had floods and natural disasters essentially rush wonders or units I badly needed. Those little food or production boosts can work magic. The UI needs a "repair all" button, though.

Or it just auto repairs and you loose some money?

 

[Isca Dumnoniorum]

I've had floods and natural disasters essentially rush wonders or units I badly needed. Those little food or production boosts can work magic. The UI needs a "repair all" button, though.

This would add so much to my quality of life. As would a button to get to see your current attributes from the legacies selection screen on age transistion without having to close out the window, click on my leader banner, click to the relationships tab and then click on the attributes button (if there's a more direct way that I'm missing, someone please tell me!)

 

[Smegger213]

This would add so much to my quality of life. As would a button to get to see your current attributes from the legacies selection screen on age transistion without having to close out the window, click on my leader banner, click to the relationships tab and then click on the attributes button (if there's a more direct way that I'm missing, someone please tell me!)

There's an Auto Repair mod available that can do the repairs for you.

Resource icon K

Auto Repair: Restore Your City Instantly

Feb 17, 2025

Automatically repairs damaged buildings and improvements at the start of each turn.

• koreyama
• Civ 7 - UI Mods

 

[Ogro]

I really wanted to like Civ 7, I tried.
I have come to expect that new Civ games are not really enjoyable until at least a year's worth of patches have been released. I get it, Civ games are complicated and difficult to make and balance. I understand that changes to the gameplay have to be made to make the game relevant for the future. I have no issue with that, I was looking forward to it and I think that Firaxis is roughly on the right track.
However, Civ 7 is just unacceptable. I feel that the minimum of playability (if there is such a word) has not been achieved before release. There are so many big and small issues that suck the joy out of this game as it is now that I won't continue to play for the time being.
I never thought I would join the choir of gamers complaining about being used/abused as Beta testers (I am a patient man) but f****** hell Firaxis, you have taken this much to far. I have played Civilization for roughly 10.000 hours since Civ II and maybe I am just an old fart but I do not remember things being this unfinished and frustrating on release ever before. I could sum up all the issues here but that has been done in other threads, you all know waht I am talking about.
I am off to give Old World or whatever a chance and will return to Civ 7 next year or the year after. Never again will I buy Civ pre-release, a lesson learned late but a lesson to remember.
Sincerely, enjoy the game everybody if you can and have the patience for it, I just can't right now.

Greetings,

I came to realize this game became as messed up as the most fanatical people in this forum. It is like a toxic marriage and I am glad I walked away.
I hope you can quit long enough to examine why you went thru all of this again, and again. Maybe try games like Factorio to bring your sanity back.


-Blessings of the universe to us all

 

[misesfan]

If floods aren't a big deal then they should be taken out of the game. And why give a bonus to a civ that negates them if they aren't a big deal?

This is true. Why add a mechanic if it isnt a big deal? Is it flavor? Adds depth? You can make strategic decisions? The whole point of the post was that there was a civ selected to prevent this disaster, but at the age reset the new civ selected didnt have the same capability, which begged the question of why...

 

[Siptah]

Floods are nice to have in general. There's a big upside (more yields as the age progresses) versus a small downside (gold for repairs, damaged units). The tradeoff is small, but it is there. For Khmer, it's the same upside but no downside at all. It's a nice bonus for the early game when gold isn't plentiful and a damaged unit isn't easily replaced when needed. I can't really follow what is hard to understand about that nor why it is bad if the civ in the next age gets to experience the downside again. It's like any other ability in civ: you had that bonus, now you get a new one. It's not different from, e.g., +15% production on navigable rivers in antiquity that you exchange for increased resource capacity for cities on rivers.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Floods are nice to have in general. There's a big upside (more yields as the age progresses) versus a small downside (gold for repairs, damaged units). The tradeoff is small, but it is there. For Khmer, it's the same upside but no downside at all. It's a nice bonus for the early game when gold isn't plentiful and a damaged unit isn't easily replaced when needed. I can't really follow what is hard to understand about that nor why it is bad if the civ in the next age gets to experience the downside again. It's like any other ability in civ: you had that bonus, now you get a new one. It's not different from, e.g., +15% production on navigable rivers in antiquity that you exchange for increased resource capacity for cities on rivers.

The problem is that there's almost zero choice involved. It just happens automatically and you need to do some clicking to proceed.

 

[misesfan]

Also, I think the post about flooding was regarding the lack of long term strategic planning involved in switching Civs from the Khmer who has flood protection to another Civ that doesnt. Why pick Khmer with this unique bonus and plan city placement on areas with potential flooding, when the next age automatically resets this ability. It ruins the immersion, and washes away any long term strategic planning regarding city placement.

 

[Siptah]

Also, I think the post about flooding was regarding the lack of long term strategic planning involved in switching Civs from the Khmer who has flood protection to another Civ that doesnt. Why pick Khmer with this unique bonus and plan city placement on areas with potential flooding, when the next age automatically resets this ability. It ruins the immersion, and washes away any long term strategic planning regarding city placement.

If you base your city placement on the Khmer's bonus you settle on navigable rivers. If you intend to keep this focus, you can choose a civ that also benefits from navigable rivers: Songhai, Shawnee, or Majapahit. I still don't see how flood protection differs from other bonus that depend on terrain. How is it different from Egypt's production on navigable rivers or Maya's science from vegetated tiles? You enjoy them for an age, and try to get something out of it - and then you turn to another bonus that you select because you think it would fit your current situation and what you envision for the future. Adapting to what the map offers is also a long term strategy, I would say.

 

[SDZald]

For me changing Civs every new age is the major problem with Civ 7. You should have kept the same Civ with perhaps minor changes due to the new age. IMHO they got it backwards, keep the same Civ but change the leader every new age, it would have felt a lot more fluid instead of feeling like I'm playing three entirely different games.

 

[misesfan]

If you base your city placement on the Khmer's bonus you settle on navigable rivers. If you intend to keep this focus, you can choose a civ that also benefits from navigable rivers: Songhai, Shawnee, or Majapahit. I still don't see how flood protection differs from other bonus that depend on terrain. How is it different from Egypt's production on navigable rivers or Maya's science from vegetated tiles? You enjoy them for an age, and try to get something out of it - and then you turn to another bonus that you select because you think it would fit your current situation and what you envision for the future. Adapting to what the map offers is also a long term strategy, I would say.

Hah - Siptaj is a glass is half-full kind of guy! I respect your moxie.

I don't think being adaptable to the map is really a 'long-term' strategy - its more of a trait that every gamer that has ever played Civ needs to develop. If I select Khmer as a starting Civ, should I purposely select flood tiles for city placement? If I do select these tiles I will be rewarded with flood immunity for one age. This flooding will affect my cities throughout the rest of the game, however. Thats the question that was posited - why should I choose a Civ whose ability gets nullified for 2/3's of the game. Flood tiles are good at times, I agree. But choosing Khmer for the purposes of negating the negatives of flooding is one of the reasons why it was chosen. So, I have to forgo this bonus for the rest of the game? Making the civ reset in this case just smacks of bad design, in my opinion.

 

[AD1730]

Hah - Siptaj is a glass is half-full kind of guy! I respect your moxie.

I don't think being adaptable to the map is really a 'long-term' strategy - its more of a trait that every gamer that has ever played Civ needs to develop. If I select Khmer as a starting Civ, should I purposely select flood tiles for city placement? If I do select these tiles I will be rewarded with flood immunity for one age. This flooding will affect my cities throughout the rest of the game, however. Thats the question that was posited - why should I choose a Civ whose ability gets nullified for 2/3's of the game. Flood tiles are good at times, I agree. But choosing Khmer for the purposes of negating the negatives of flooding is one of the reasons why it was chosen. So, I have to forgo this bonus for the rest of the game? Making the civ reset in this case just smacks of bad design, in my opinion.

It would have made sense to have civs retain some traits from the civ they were in the previous era. It’s very odd to have them seemingly forget everything about they were used to be.

 

[Yzman]

If floods aren't a big deal then they should be taken out of the game. And why give a bonus to a civ that negates them if they aren't a big deal?

You're missing the entire point of my post and looking at the variables instead of the formula. Just because you can choose X = 1 for the number of times you get stung by a bee this year instead of X = 100 doesn't mean that getting stung by a bee is a good mechanic.

What? They are a minor annoyance and can even be turned off. I do understand your point. You want bonuses to not change for the entire game...my point is why? You are talking about something so minor jn the grand scheme. And guess what? Then the next civ you pick should have cool new bonuses. I don't need a civs bonuses for the whole game, that is what leader bonuses are. I still stick with you are trying to find fault with something for the sake of it.

This is no different than in orevious games you had civs that only had bonuses for a while. But I don't want my unique spearman to go away as civ progresses! That is akin to what you are saying. And heck, lots of times civs like America had to wait all game before they got their unique stuff.

This game makes every era feel important. Some more than others, but balance will come.

I can use Persia's abilities, then switch to Mongolia's and then finally end it with Prussia. Unique things in all eras. Why is that bad?

 

[Yzman]

It would have made sense to have civs retain some traits from the civ they were in the previous era. It’s very odd to have them seemingly forget everything about they were used to be.

They keep traditions, unique buildings and unique improvements. How are they forgetting?

 

[Thormodr]

They keep traditions, unique buildings and unique improvements. How are they forgetting?

They forget how to protect against floods. That's the point.

 

[AD1730]

They forget how to protect against floods. That's the point.

Yes, exactly. It would be one thing if they migrated from the flood prone area and forgot. But, they still live there and it’s still a valuable skill. Doesn’t make sense for them to forget.

 

[Human Crouton]

If you base your city placement on the Khmer's bonus you settle on navigable rivers. If you intend to keep this focus, you can choose a civ that also benefits from navigable rivers: Songhai, Shawnee, or Majapahit. I still don't see how flood protection differs from other bonus that depend on terrain. How is it different from Egypt's production on navigable rivers or Maya's science from vegetated tiles? You enjoy them for an age, and try to get something out of it - and then you turn to another bonus that you select because you think it would fit your current situation and what you envision for the future. Adapting to what the map offers is also a long term strategy, I would say.

The issue with Egypt and Khmer is the same. As Egypt, I may settle a city near a navigable river that may otherwise lack in production if not for Egypt's bonus. But that city will be punished production-wise in later ages, and not give as much production as a city that had been placed considering only the base yields of the game without taking Egypt's advantages into account. In this way, I am actually encouraged not to consider Egypt's abilities.

So it is the same issue. There are just degrees to which that issue affects the game.

 

[Human Crouton]

They keep traditions, unique buildings and unique improvements. How are they forgetting?

They are forgetting their base skill that the player built the strategy of that current game around.

What? They are a minor annoyance and can even be turned off. I do understand your point. You want bonuses to not change for the entire game...my point is why? You are talking about something so minor jn the grand scheme. And guess what? Then the next civ you pick should have cool new bonuses. I don't need a civs bonuses for the whole game, that is what leader bonuses are. I still stick with you are trying to find fault with something for the sake of it.

This is no different than in orevious games you had civs that only had bonuses for a while. But I don't want my unique spearman to go away as civ progresses! That is akin to what you are saying. And heck, lots of times civs like America had to wait all game before they got their unique stuff.

This game makes every era feel important. Some more than others, but balance will come.

I can use Persia's abilities, then switch to Mongolia's and then finally end it with Prussia. Unique things in all eras. Why is that bad?

This isn't my point. In previous games, if I needed to wait to use America's abilities; I still knew what those abilities were ahead of time. I can still play the early game knowing what abilities I will exploiting later. And I can construct a strategy for that game where I can utilize them optimally.

The issue with VII is that optimum play in one era can injure you in another.

 

[Skojardu]

I have now officially quit. I was trying to finish the game i was playing last night because i hate leaving things unfinished and was just bored of another rinse and repeat game with no challenge i just turned it off. The only way i could think to make it more interesting was start rushing eras more but then i could probably complete a whole playthough in an evening rather than a couple of days. I realised then why they added era score to future techs and civics as it was a way to hide how little content there was and rush eras along.

I like strategy games as they take time, you have to plan, think about them, make choices and set up and develop a (grand) strategy which may not lay out for a long time. And good ones always feel different each play through. As i have got to grips with civ 7 everything just feels like the same bland box ticking exercise where nothing really matters and everything is throwaway. As the game is so easy i started to wonder if the lack of information given to the player was deliberate to hide how easy it is and make it seem harder. e.g. science victory in exploration era seemed like an interesting planning challenge to start with until i got the mod which showed what yields you got from social policy cards. My last few games i deliberately did science legacy without slotting any specilists at all to prove i consistently could and all i did was slot the policy card which add adjacency yields. And i didn't even have to think about it, i just saw a policy card game me 150 science/culture/gold/food which is obviously nice, slotted it and got legacy points because now all my district tiles had super yields. It became so easy i don't even bother about maximising adjacency anymore...Why bother when i get multiple future techs/civics and run out of things to do with 50ish turns left in an era?

On top of that, considering i have always played epic speed and also use long eras in civ 7 i can complete games quicker than using quick settings in previous versions so i have quickly seen everything, done everything and perfected everything.

Having eras as distinct mini games and swapping civs would be a great as an option for players who like to play certain eras or want to enjoy a quick game rather than it being the core gameplay concept. As i have got to grips with the game it feels more like an on the go, no time or atttention span mobile game rather than a strategy game.

Try playing Through the Ages: A New Story of Civilization. It has your nation change leader based on a finite lifespan.

 

[user746383]

What? They are a minor annoyance and can even be turned off.

How do you turn them off? Low intensity is the lowest setting as far as I know, and that’s the default one where they are constantly happening. Seems bugged to me but who knows with the design of this game.