My assessment for the developers (hopefully they see this)

Pontifex7

Chieftain
Joined
Mar 16, 2025
Messages
3
Civ VII Pros/cons

Pros:
I love the new units, that there are more entities and they are diversified- and each one is done to suit the civilization and not all spearmen, except special units like phalanx, look alike. Even all the different type of tanks/planes look unique. So really well done and kudos! Nice to have more than just 3 entities of any unit. One of the main reasons I even considered giving civ 7 a chance when I saw on the first in-game trailer. I've always loved the "naval battles" in civilization.

I'm torn about the break up of ages and the rotating civilizations, but ultimately I think it's more of a good thing than a bad one. I loved civilization but I found it very longwinded and tedious after a while. I think this helps to break up the game and allow for a bit more fun- able to mix and match leaders/civilizations. Doesn't always have to be the exact same one, but can be if you choose. BUT I do not like that because the age changes, you can no longer build certain buildings like bank, university, barracks, etc. Especially when you don't get to build certain new towns/cities under after exploration.

Going to that, I much prefer the districts now compared to Civ VI. However, you should be able to choose which one you're building over. It usually defaults to one building; but I may wish to keep the university when say I rather get rid of the observatory for roleplay reasons. And wanting to upgrade a medieval bridge to modern bridge and it wants to overbuild the wharf and have me with two bridges is ridiculous.



Cons:
I realize influence is trying to be a thing, but the costs are way too high. And you only get about a handful of buildings that give you more until the end when it almost doesn't matter anymore. Diplomacy is pretty basic and barebones, and that is a shame. I prefer diplomacy from civ IV and V, when you could trade technologies, settlements, and be able to see your allies' land. Actually having defensive and military alliances. Often I'll beat down an enemy city for my ally to take and they just won't- so would be at least nice to give/sell it to them afterwards.

Ideologies is pretty horrible! You could be allies for three ages, and then because they choose a different ideology, you get a -300 penalty! When the usual relationships are maxed out at +/-90. That is just stupid. Every game becomes world war 3 after about 70% complete.

I think in the last patch Artifacts were reduced so there would not be so many and now I'm averaging about 5 per large continent (that's if I even get them first). While I'm not usually trying to get a cultural victory, it's impossible now and then explorers become useless quite quickly. Adding the natural wonders did help a bit. Would be nice if they at least refreshed every set of turns (by searching in a museum/uni).

Himiko and Friedrich's agenda don't make sense. Not building culture and happiness buildings? You'll never be able to overcome that negative relation. And for him, I've built wonders in my capital and it still goes negative. While he hates Confucius who has a ton of wonders. All the agendas are ridiculous when it can go beyond -150 (haven't noticed +150) when the average tops out at 90.


Suggestion Notes:
Please allow to add more ai players to the game (even if you limit it to 4 or 5 extra). I've ended up in the third age with open land to be settled. Limited civs and settlement limits leaves open space where the ai will settle a single town that gets 6 tiles.

When I've had multiple allies, it seems every time, two of my allies go to war (even when for most of the game they didn't hate each other). And they don't have opposing ideologies yet. Seems as though it's just the game trying to wreck your campaign. Quite annoying.

There should be some type of preservation improvement because otherwise everything just becomes a district or other improvement that removes the trees. And it is nice to have some trees. I know in civ VI, there was a mechanic like that for national region but honestly I never understood how to use it. Never worked for it, always said there was an issue. So please just create a simple "national park" improvement.
 
Welcome! :wavey:

Ideologies is pretty horrible! You could be allies for three ages, and then because they choose a different ideology, you get a -300 penalty! When the usual relationships are maxed out at +/-90. That is just stupid. Every game becomes world war 3 after about 70% complete.
I believe this is working as intended. (I generally avoid taking an ideology myself; I find it's more of a disadvantage than an advantage. But hey, maybe that's realistic, too.)
 
I reckon a better system would perhaps be a multiplier -- i.e. when you gain some relationship, you might gain 75% instead because of differing ideologies, and when you lose relationship you lose 125%.
In the real world, nations of differing ideologies occasionally were on the same side when united by common cause (eg. one enemy).
Nothing about differing ideologies necessitates that countries be total and immediate enemies, just that they might have more reason to disagree than agree.

Precedence set by Civ5 Ideologies -- AI player sometimes stayed decent friends with you even though Ideologies differed. Sometimes your Ideology (Culture) is so strong it caused a rift in a player's society which forced them to switch, or broke down relationships in an effort to protect their own Ideology.

In other words, it's possible for something softer, but perhaps there is some design idea behind the system they currently have in Civ7.
 
Welcome! :wavey:


I believe this is working as intended. (I generally avoid taking an ideology myself; I find it's more of a disadvantage than an advantage. But hey, maybe that's realistic, too.)
Thanks.
Yes, I agree. Sometimes I delay picking an ideology to see what my allies will take. And then sometimes based it off of that. But I tend to have more than one, and they don't always pick the same ones. hence why I feel it is too harsh (because often they are allies too).
 
Back
Top Bottom