New to Civ - V, VI, or VII for Learning the Ropes?

[Skyfox]

I've always wanted to try the Civilization series, but never got around to it. I recently discovered I own Civ V and VI on Steam. Now that I have some free time, I'm trying to learn.

I started with the Civ VII tutorial, but it was awful. Is there a manual? As a newbie, I'm overwhelmed by the numbers, exploration, and constant notifications. I build what I'm told, but then get bombarded with more pop-ups. My archers are slow to move, and I keep getting attacked by barbarians. I've even lost units because I didn't realize how weak they were alone. My city is unhappy, despite a happy face icon. It's all very confusing!

This early access experience with Civ VII is frustrating. I own the standard edition.

I've researched which Civ game is "best," but that's subjective. I'm looking for the game with the best tutorial for learning 4X strategy. Does Civ V or VI have a better tutorial? I know V has a manual on Steam.

Any advice? I'll wait until February 26th before deciding on upgrading to the Civ VII Founder's Edition, hoping for some patches by then.

Thanks for your time

 

[TheGrayFox]

Honestly past civ titles never had good tutorials but all the older titles had extensive manuals which you could read that would teach you all mechanics. I also think we live in an age where youtube tutorials and beginner lets plays do a pretty good job of helping someone learn the basics of most games.

I'd say V is pretty straight forward, has a manual, would probably be the easiest game in the series to learn. VI built off a lot of the foundation that V built and it's AI is honestly so bad it's easiest entry in the series.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

If you want to try Civ VII again I would suggest trying your hand at Civ VI. The biggest feature of Civ VI was unstacked cities and that gameplay carries over into Civ VII.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Maybe it's just because it's new, but it feels to me like there's a lot more going on with vanilla 7 than the previous ones.

 

[teakbois2112]

I feel VII would be the best of the three
Its got the best tutorial, though thats not saying a whole lot. It also has the worst civilopedia. However, you can break the game down into just the first age and practice that until you get the hang of things.

The thing with Civ VI is that the first 50 turns can be really overwhelming, and there is a very strong chance you have a barbarian problem to deal with.
The flip side is that once you learn Civ VI it has a TON of content.

That said, If you havent played any Civs I would recommend toughing it out in VI, find some youtube videos to help. Civ games tend to take 2 years or so before they hit their stride so if you havent played VI to death, thats where you should go imo.

Just know learning to play one isnt going to make the other not have a learning curve, the games change a lot between different versions by design,

V is tougher to recommend at this stage honestly. So Id stick to VI or VII

 

[Skyfox]

Very good posts everyone, Thank you

Since many of you mentioned the tutorial for 7 - isn't this it only - https://civilization.2k.com/civ-vii/news/civilization-vii-beginners-guide/ It doesn't really teach me what all those icons mean, some I get but so much I am just randomly clicking. I didn't know barbarians will randomly come...stuff like that.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

If it's any consolation most people need to play a lot of hours of civ to understand how all of it works.

 

[Qiubov]

Rather than choose the game with the best tutorial/guide, it may be best to choose the game that peaks your interest the most from a conceptual perspective. You'll find plenty of great YouTube videos for Civ 5/6/7, and lots of great written content for Civ 5/6.

But conceptually, they are all very different.

Civ 5 and 6 have similarities but are quite different in some key areas. Civ 6 adds a little more complexity when planning and building cities because it introduced districts and adjacencies. Districts are the reason I love Ci v6 so much (I know some avid Civ 5 fans hate them). But for me, they add a layer to the game that I always feel I miss when I go back to Civ 5.

Civ 7 is very, very different to Civ 5 and Civ 6. It's a radical departure from the core gameplay mechanic of allowing your Civ to free-play single tech/civic trees. Instead, Civ 7 splits the tech tree into 3 distinct 'ages', so Civ 7 becomes 3 mini-games rather than one long single game. Each age has its own learnings and nuances, so you could master the first age (Antiquity) independent of the latter two ages.

Add to this the fact that Civ 7 allows you to mix/match leaders and Civs, and change Civs at each age, it offers a very different experience over Civ 5 and 6. Though it's worth noting that Civ 7 is still quite rough around the edges, it will need time to evolve.

I'd recommend starting with Civ 7, watching a bunch of YouTube tutorials. If you enjoy it, probably no need to try Civ 5 and 6. But if you don't feel it scratches that dopamine itch, then don't discount Civ 5 or 6, they are completely different experiences.

For me, I purchased Civ 7 on advanced release, played it for 3 days, and haven't gone back to it due to a number of gripes, but still remain optimistic it will resonate at some point in the future.

 

[Qiubov]

p.s. I'd recommend the YouTube channel, One More Turn, for Civ 7. It's a new channel but already has 15k subscribers, and he seems to break down core gameplay ideas very well.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I'd say there are 3 branches of civs:
1. Civs 1-4 are classical. Generally Civ4 is the best from the line with Civ3 having some appeal. A lot of people think Civ4 is the best of all.
2. Civ 5-6 are "one unit per tile" civs, unfolding stacks of units and (in case of Civ6) cities on the map. In general Civ6 is supposed to be superior, but it has its own issues, so some people prefer Civ5.
3. Civ7 seem to start a new branch.

It's hard to tell from which to start, because each branch provides quite different experience.

 

[MasterPaw]

I don't remember the tutorials, but civ7 ui is confusing
I'll recommend you try the 6 vanilla until 7 get it's patches. I find civ 6 good enough without extension and it will be simpler to learn without them.
I like the 5 complete edition better but it will be easier to carry knowledge from 6 to 7

This games take some time to learn, maybe watching a YouTube video can serve as manual, there are plenty for civ 6

Also about barbarians, yes they can come for you, it's an early threat.You can be prudent and fortify a warrior or two on your border with archers behind to deal damage. In civ7 you can bribe them with influence to get them on your side by clicking on their city. Usually in civ lowering difficulty will also reduce the aggressiveness of AI players and give you bonus to help you while you are learning the game

 

[Leyrann]

There's no such thing as a great tutorial but I'd probably recommend starting with Civ VI.

Civ 1-3 are very old and janky in certain ways.
Civ 4 is a great game, but it can be unforgiving when you make a mistake.
Civ 5 is, in my humble opinion, an absolute dumpster fire. And it most definitely isn't a fun learning experience, and a lot of the gameplay revolves around penalties for doing things wrong, rather than rewards for doing things right.
Civ 7 is currently very rough around the edges. It's still great, and I think it will become unquestionably the best game of the series given time, but right now it has a number of confusing aspects, and I feel like a lot of my understanding of the game comes mostly or even exclusively from having played previous games in the series. In other words, I think it'll be supremely confusing to a new player.

That leaves Civ 6. Civ 6's biggest issue is probably that the AI isn't very good, but for a new player learning the ropes that's not a big deal (although I do want to note, just because the AI isn't great that doesn't mean you can get away with a very high difficulty start as a new player). It has very good readability, although you may want to turn on the hex grid and tile yields, and in general it is a very streamlined experience with all aspects of the game sorted into neat little boxes. Science? Goes into the Campus district box. Culture? Goes into the Theater Square district box. Naval stuff? Goes into the Harbor district box. Et cetera. Oh and don't get too hung up about adjacency bonuses. Maximizing those is something for advanced players. Even if you don't think about them beyond the immediate 'high number good', you'll do perfectly fine.

 

[Skyfox]

What an excellent thread. Thank you to everyone for giving a newbie like me some excellent pointers. I am sure this thread will help other newbies also.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I'd say there are 3 branches of civs:
1. Civs 1-4 are classical. Generally Civ4 is the best from the line with Civ3 having some appeal. A lot of people think Civ4 is the best of all.
2. Civ 5-6 are "one unit per tile" civs, unfolding stacks of units and (in case of Civ6) cities on the map. In general Civ6 is supposed to be superior, but it has its own issues, so some people prefer Civ5.
3. Civ7 seem to start a new branch.

I think of the 3 branches slightly differently, 1-4 I agree. Civ 5 stands on it's own, first in the series with 1UPT but before the city unstacking we see with 6&7.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think of the 3 branches slightly differently, 1-4 I agree. Civ 5 stands on it's own, first in the series with 1UPT but before the city unstacking we see with 6&7.

Civ5 stands out only in its specific approach for tall game. And I wouldn't say unstacking cities is actually that big of a change. Your building order is restructured and city specialization is approached differently than in previous games, but it doesn't affect the actual gameplay that much. I'd argue that policy cards are even bigger change in terms of decisions (and micromanagement).

 

[playshogi]

The best way to learn Civ7 is from the You Tube streamers. My favorite for this purpose is "One More Turn". I've long forgotten how to play Civ1-6 and no desire to go backwards.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Civ5 stands out only in its specific approach for tall game

I think Civ5 stands out for a number of reasons to be honest but I went with unstacking as that's a clear thread from 6 to 7 and clearly differentiated from previous versions.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'd say there are 3 branches of civs:
1. Civs 1-4 are classical. Generally Civ4 is the best from the line with Civ3 having some appeal. A lot of people think Civ4 is the best of all.
2. Civ 5-6 are "one unit per tile" civs, unfolding stacks of units and (in case of Civ6) cities on the map. In general Civ6 is supposed to be superior, but it has its own issues, so some people prefer Civ5.
3. Civ7 seem to start a new branch.

It's hard to tell from which to start, because each branch provides quite different experience.

I think of the 3 branches slightly differently, 1-4 I agree. Civ 5 stands on it's own, first in the series with 1UPT but before the city unstacking we see with 6&7.

What about 4 branches?
Because I think Civ 5, Civ 6, and Civ 7 all brought something fundamentally different to the series, which is 1UPT, unstacked cities, and finally civ switching every new age.