Millennia: First gameplay video on Monday January 29!

[The_J]

The Millennia Twitter account has announced that on Monday 29th, at 14:30 CET you will be able to watch the first gameplay video.
The video will be streamed on their youtube channel.
No further information has currently been provided.

EDIT:
Recording:

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

For those who, like me in a Time Zone where the video started at 0530 on a Monday morning, didn't get to see the video, they've announced that from 5 to 12 February (next week!) we will be able to play a 'demo' of the first 3 Ages on Steam.

Knowledgeable speculation on the Millennia Discord channel is that this will be with a fixed map, but that should still allow us to get a good hands-on feel for the game mechanics they've been discussing.

 

[Nikolai II]

Main take away: This game unfortunately feels uninspired and like a cheap take on the Civ franchise.

You've got the worst part of the 20-odd years Call to Power 1 and 2, the battle screen that does nothing other than getting you out of the game flow. And it looks like it was made back when CtP was made. If the game was far away, this could be temporary programmer art, but since we're getting a demo in one week, it does sound like the game is pretty far along.

The game feels from watching it like FreeCiv (free clone of Civ2) mated with Civ3 and Civ5 (the worst Civ titles, both pretty old by now). It feels cheap, possibly well made, but a direct clone and probably made on a very small budget. It just feels cheap and uninspired.

The village feature sounds promising, but it doesn't seem to be more than named districts from Civ6?

Pro: The undo feature from Old World (Civ competitor made by Soren Johnson, the man behind Civ4), which is pretty neat.

I hope the game feels better in person when I try the demo next week.

Oh yeah, and I am cautiously optimistic about the age progression feature.

 

[user330977]

Hello folks,
unfortunately I have to agree that the game looks vile. The aesthetic is absolutely appalling and I've no idea what they are aiming for. They have some serious cojones showing off that battle screen as it is in 2024. Mechanics beat graphics every time but man, it's such a poor impression.

I'll certainly play the demo to get a feel of the mechanics myself, but I'm not too excited there either. The Ages system seems like a baffling attempt at railroading, causing frustration and breaking immersion. The Age of Blood, for example, forces all players into war with each other, simply because you killed an arbitrary number of units in the previous Age. Does this mean you should avoid war in the preceding age? Why would I be forced into war with a civilisation on the other end of the continent just because I killed a predefined number of units?

Maybe it'll all "click" and work well in the game but... I'm not hopeful.

 

[Civinator]

Civ3 and Civ5 (the worst Civ titles, both pretty old by now).

Nikolai II, in my eyes it would really not have been necessary, to discriminate here other versions of the Civ series for a report about a video. If you at least would have written, that in your opinion these games are the worst Civ titles - but you have written it in an absolute form, what is completely wrong, especially as the Civ title, that was choosen in a poll by hundreds of civers as the - by far - worst Civ title, is missing in the list of your propaganda post. The only thing, that here seems to be completely outdated, is your knowledge about the present state of Civ 3.

So my post has nothing to do with the video either, that I haven´t seen yet, it had to be written against the not needed and wrong Civ 3 bashing in your post.

 

[Revolutionist_8]

... Civ3 and Civ5 (the worst Civ titles, both pretty old by now) ...

Both of them were successful and very well liked by a lot of people, just look at how many mods have been made for them, even today. Just because you do not like something personally, there is no need to speak in absolute terms. Also, a game's age has nothing to do with its quality and impact.

The village feature sounds promising, but it doesn't seem to be more than named districts from Civ6?

A feature that is also generally well liked by a lot of people, and a good experiment in the genre (one can argue that it even "set the course" for it, or at least heavily influenced it).

Pro: The undo feature from Old World (Civ competitor made by Soren Johnson, the man behind Civ4), which is pretty neat.

Indeed. A feature that is also very well liked by a lot of people, and a clever experiment in the genre (one can argue that it will "set the course" for the genre, or at least influence it significantly).

Main take away: This game unfortunately feels uninspired and like a cheap take on the Civ franchise.

I understand your point, and agree to certain extent (like barbarians and food have been totally the same in borderline every 4X since... forever?! Just to name two examples...).

But we haven't seen the price tag yet, nor the complete potential that the game may offer. Considering that Paradox will publish it, it may or may not be a little bit overpriced, but I'll hold my judgement and not rush into early conclusions.

 

[Revolutionist_8]

The Ages system seems like a baffling attempt at railroading, causing frustration and breaking immersion. The Age of Blood, for example, forces all players into war with each other, simply because you killed an arbitrary number of units in the previous Age. Does this mean you should avoid war in the preceding age? Why would I be forced into war with a civilisation on the other end of the continent just because I killed a predefined number of units?

If I understand the system correctly, you do not have to choose Age of Blood, for example, you can. It's up to you.
(but someone please correct me if I'm wrong)

 

[The_J]

The first player to reach an age threshold may choose. So the AI might if you're faster. Or you may.

Unrelated: No bickering about Civ version please.

I don't see that this was recorded and/or published yet, no?
EDIT: Found it

For those who, like me in a Time Zone where the video started at 0530 on a Monday morning, didn't get to see the video, they've announced that from 5 to 12 February (next week!) we will be able to play a 'demo' of the first 3 Ages on Steam.

Thanks, this will now go into a separate thread .

 

[Revolutionist_8]

The first player to reach an age threshold may choose. So the AI might if you're faster. Or you may.

Unrelated: No bickering about Civ version please.

I don't see that this was recorded and/or published yet, no?

Yes, you're right (if you're slower )!
But then - in my opinion - it's partially your fault, for not being the most "scientific" (or whatever you call it) Nation, giving an edge for such Nations (is it really necessary to give them even more buffs is another question )

It's published on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/live/3l7-cf7607w?feature=shared

(weirdly not by C Prompt, but by Paradox)

 

[user330977]

If I understand the system correctly, you do not have to choose Age of Blood, for example, you can. It's up to you.
(but someone please correct me if I'm wrong)

The first player to reach an age threshold may choose. So the AI might if you're faster. Or you may.

Unrelated: No bickering about Civ version please.

I don't see that this was recorded and/or published yet, no?
EDIT: Found it

Thanks, this will now go into a separate thread

[/URL].

I see. I'm not sure having such game-changing impacts be out of the player's hands is a good thing. "Be better at science" is all well and good, but makes the game sound extremely one-dimensional. Be good at science or be instantly plunged into war with all your neighbours. Urgh.

 

[The_J]

Only if the AI decides to, because it's in their interest. So 100% not a given .

 

[Revolutionist_8]

If I understand the system correctly, you do not have to choose Age of Blood, for example, you can. It's up to you.
(but someone please correct me if I'm wrong)

I see. I'm not sure having such game-changing impacts be out of the player's hands is a good thing. "Be better at science" is all well and good, but makes the game sound extremely one-dimensional. Be good at science or be instantly plunged into war with all your neighbours. Urgh.

Only if the AI decides to, because it's in their interest. So 100% not a given .

Hahh, apparently we were wrong, and @Ita Bear understood it correctly?!

Youtuber says about it at this part:

and here are two screenshots from that section:

Spoiler pictures :

Hmmm, this changes things a bit...

 

[Nikolai II]

One Proud Bavarian mentioned the first civ to reach the next age chooses the type of age.

 

[Revolutionist_8]

One Proud Bavarian mentioned the first civ to reach the next age chooses the type of age.

Yes, that was clear from the dev diary, but for me it's new that when a crisis age unlocks, you must choose that. I'm not necessarily against it, buuuut it's a bit... hmmm

 

[user330977]

Naming seems somewhat inconsistent. Is it the Blood Age, or the Age of Blood?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Naming seems somewhat inconsistent. Is it the Blood Age, or the Age of Blood?

I think one is the Age of Blood, the other is Blood Age Crisis. The Crisis is part of the name too, which serves as a reminder that its a Crisis era.