I don't know why whether or not the player stats are bad is really a contention point.
There's no point in overcomplicating it by saying that each of the players is, in fact, secretly playing for like an hour, then switching with another, just to inflate the count.
Or for example, suggesting that there is a secret horde of thousands of Civ7 console players that are not accounted for.
Fyi, the console players probably only make about equivalent numbers to PC by my guesstimation, if at all (likely to be less than).
The reality is, these factors, while they might be true to an extent, doesn't really affect the bigger picture.
The big picture is that the count is dwindling overall, due to various factors that they need to address.
It's up to the developers to figure out amongst all the noise which factors are the critical problems, and the fixable problems, and to work quickly.
And it's up to us, the playerbase, to communicate our general grievances with the game, if any.
It helps too, to debunk the idea that the player stats don't matter however. Just because it's predominantly a SP game doesn't mean the count doesn't matter.
It's not a play-once story game like GTA or God of War, it's a (replayable) strategy game.
The way they've structured this game, is essentially reminiscent of live-service. It needs constant updates and DLC to become complete.
But if no one plays the game, then who is going to buy the DLC, pay for the updates and the team?
However, to play devil's advocate, let's be frank. They will be fine. Why? Because it doesn't cost that much to run, and DLCs are very profitable, so even with a small playerbase it will be self-sufficient.