So anyway, place your bets: when will civ7 arrive?

[queenpea]

Is there a way to create a poll on this forum so we can all vote on when we are expecting VII?

Personally, I can't see it coming until (at least) one year has passed the last delivery of leader pass, so March 2024. Living in the U.S., where most product launches are grouped towards the end of the year to maximize holiday sales, I would guess somewhere between September 2024 and December 2024 as the earliest release date.

 

[pokiehl]

Is there a way to create a poll on this forum so we can all vote on when we are expecting VII?

Personally, I can't see it coming until (at least) one year has passed the last delivery of leader pass, so March 2024. Living in the U.S., where most product launches are grouped towards the end of the year to maximize holiday sales, I would guess somewhere between September 2024 and December 2024 as the earliest release date.

You can create a thread with a poll, but I'm not sure how interesting you'll find a bunch of random guesses about a release date to be

Any guess on Civ 7 from anyone here is going to be purely speculative with no basis in anything but personal feeling.

 

[queenpea]

You can create a thread with a poll, but I'm not sure how interesting you'll find a bunch of random guesses about a release date to be

Any guess on Civ 7 from anyone here is going to be purely speculative with no basis in anything but personal feeling.

I love polling feelings. Let's do it.

 

[vorlon_mi]

I work in the IT division of a large manufacturing company. I will echo and affirm what @Quintillus wrote about the effects of the pandemic on knowledge workers. It has been very challenging to bring new people onto my team, when we never get to actually meet. Lots of "quiet quitting"; lots of questions about how and when people are actually working. I have the best work relationships with, and get the most productive work from, those people whom I knew from before, when we were all in the office.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I have my doubts (or perhaps hopes) that the release date is effected more by getting quality AI and other persistent problems in civ 6 right in civ 7 then the pandemic. Not that the pandemic had no effect, just not the major reason.

My 2 about WFH is that it doesn't effect someone's personality. People that would be communicative in the office are the same online and the same goes for a quiet person. I've had great work relationships with people i've never met in person, and one time I walked around looking for someone in the office only to find they had left the company two months earlier.

 

[Nikolai II]

I started on Civ 1, but missed 2 and 3. I jumped back in with 4 and continued with 5 and 6.

I prefer 6 over all because it has complex ability suites that densely flavor the civs, more so than 5. I disdain 4's "2 generic traits" setup, although I do slightly prefer the Stack of Doom to the Carpet of Doom. I find maneuvering a swath of units through terrain and fighting wargame style to be a bit tedious.

Started on Civ2 myself, then SMAC(still best Civ ever!), then I checked out Civ1 while waiting for Civ3. Civ3 was a huge letdown, but I played it a lot. Then Civ4,5,6 as they came out. Never got into CtP, but tried CtP2 and went back to the "real" Civ games.

 

[nzcamel]

My younger brother's friend had Civ 1 and that was as close as I got to it. My old man must have noticed my significant interest though cos he bought Civ 2 without being asked! Played them all since.

I am the only one who still hope to get some huge DLC for Civ 6? New civs, modes maybe, etc. I mean, all of us wanna get Civ 7 but whats the point? It will be unplayable about 1-2 years cuz of empty Vanilla game with no content as usually

Sorry, but vanilla Civ 6 had twice as much going on in it as Civ 5 did with all it's expansions. Boy the first game of it was intense!!

That would make seven years since Civ6 was released (2016 - 2023) which makes it even harder for me to believe we'd have to wait even longer. It is hard for me to believe that the pandemic work from home and video conferences would slow down the process more than a few months at most, it didn't slow down the rest of video game/Internet/entertainment industry that much. Do we even have some concrete examples of video game release X being pushed back explicitly Y amount of months because of covid? The entire industry was releasing massive hits during the freakin apocalyptic 2020. You know, little indie games such as Doom Eternal and its DLCs, Cyberpunk, Death Stranding, Crusader Kings III, Total War Troy, 15th Assasins Creed and 57th Call od Duty etc.

I think people are underestimating inflation in all this. I see nothing to suggest it's going away anytime soon or even slowing down. This eats into the customer base significantly, as computer games are luxury items. 2K and Firaxis both know that the years ahead are going to be challenging in terms of sales.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Civ 2 on floppies also for me… not civ 1 though, not THAT ancient

thing is, I also liked civ 3 but really completely skipped civ 4… bought it, played a little and gave up on civ forever (or so I thought)

Then came civ V and I got hooked again. I know 1UPT has much hatred on this forum, but for me it brought me back into the fold… I realized later that I just hated stack of dooms… didn’t understand that was the real reason until V and 1UPT came along and showed me a different way to do things.

With all it’s flaws, VI is my favorite… I guess that’s because I’m not much into playing old games when new ones are available, so I guess I’ll like VII better, but it!s certainly not guaranteed with the trend taken by video games companies in the last 5 years… hope CIV VII resists the trend, but what I’ve seen from NFP has made me wary…

I started on Civ 1, but missed 2 and 3. I jumped back in with 4 and continued with 5 and 6.

I prefer 6 over all because it has complex ability suites that densely flavor the civs, more so than 5. I disdain 4's "2 generic traits" setup, although I do slightly prefer the Stack of Doom to the Carpet of Doom. I find maneuvering a swath of units through terrain and fighting wargame style to be a bit tedious.

“Stack of Doom” vs 1 UPT is a false dichotomy

1 UPT with a low movement allowance is awful. You end up having to solve a sliding tile puzzle every time you move your units. It’s also awful historical roleplay; the only time historically you had this kind of unit density was world war one in France

Finally the AI is terrible at it

Civ4 style stacks of a dozen units is pretty tedous and mechanically clumsy

Oh noes, whatever shall we do

Wait, isn’t there an entire range of numbers between “1” and “10”?!? I AM TEH GENIUS

Wait, isn’t optimum stacking a problem hex based Consim games also faces, and they rapidly iterated to 3 unit stacks? I AM TEH EXPERINCE

There is a mod for Civ6 called ARS - Improved Movement V2.2 that both increases moves by one or two and also allows you to stack one unit of each “class” (melee, ranged, cavalry) per hex

It is redonkulus how much this improves the game

 

[Zaarin]

Sorry, but vanilla Civ 6 had twice as much going on in it as Civ 5 did with all it's expansions. Boy the first game of it was intense!!

100%. Vanilla Civ5 was a train wreck, and Ed Beach worked an absolute miracle on that train wreck with the expansions--but he was still building on a train wreck. Civ6's expansions were less transformative because they didn't have to be as transformative--they were building off a game that was good in the first place. Could Civ6's expansions have been more ambitious? Yes, though I'd argue that, as is the case with so much in Civ6, a lot of Civ6's problems were more from implementation of the ideas than the scope of the ideas themselves. Ultimately, I'd much rather see expansions be iterative than transformative assuming the base game starts as a good experience.

 

[Krajzen]

“Stack of Doom” vs 1 UPT is a false dichotomy

1 UPT with a low movement allowance is awful. You end up having to solve a sliding tile puzzle every time you move your units. It’s also awful historical roleplay; the only time historically you had this kind of unit density was world war one in France

Finally the AI is terrible at it

Civ4 style stacks of a dozen units is pretty tedous and mechanically clumsy

Oh noes, whatever shall we do

Wait, isn’t there an entire range of numbers between “1” and “10”?!? I AM TEH GENIUS

Wait, isn’t optimum stacking a problem hex based Consim games also faces, and they rapidly iterated to 3 unit stacks? I AM TEH EXPERINCE

There is a mod for Civ6 called ARS - Improved Movement V2.2 that both increases moves by one or two and also allows you to stack one unit of each “class” (melee, ranged, cavalry) per hex

It is redonkulus how much this improves the game

It's amazing to me how powerful is this falsy dichotomy of 1UPT vs SoD, as if there weren't tons of turn - based strategy games with all sorts of vastly different combat systems which are neither. With many of those combat systems not being as horribly tedious, time - consuming, traffic - jam - inducing, AI - crippling, anticlimactic* as 1UPT, or as detached, mindless and boring as SoD.

Sometimes I'm wondering how many people out there genuinely love 1UPT and would be in arms against changing the combat system, because discussions about it seem to be not divided between "haters vs lovers" but "haters vs people who are used to it". It is hard for me to recall many spontaneous outbursts of joy "guys I like this combat system so much" during the lifetime of civ6, it's much more often this reactive response to people criticizing it "no please guys don't change it to something worse" which in itself doesn't seem to be too enthusiastic acclaim lol

If civ7 is announced with 1UPT remaining in essentially the same form I'm gonna weep, it's my #1 problem with civ6 - I just don't enjoy combat with this system, it turns it into tedious work with no climactic payoff. Combat difficulty in civ6 mainly comes from the logistical nightmare of trying to take cities in the rough terrain, which is merely tedious and madness inducing for human being and incredibly hard for AI in this system. So AI is unable to threaten human players offensively, removing a lot of tension and meaning from the game (esp diplomacy); AI is bad at conquering other AIs (making the world boring); while human players have to input a lot of tedious work of purely logistical nature of moving units, not even getting some great battles in return.

* - tell me, how often do you have the feeling of Huge, Epic, Decisive Battle with 1upt? Very rarely - it makes the entire warfare dissolve into small skirmishes between individual units

 

[Caesar of Bread]

Me who spams settlers and warrior every single game:

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Sorry, but vanilla Civ 6 had twice as much going on in it as Civ 5 did with all it's expansions. Boy the first game of it was intense!!

THat is... absolutely untrue. That is not accurate at all. I'm sorry

While Civ 6 inherited A LOT of systems from Civ 5, they were often washed down, with the exception of few

- Great Works in 6 was a much more boring system than in 5, not only were they fewer of them, but they removed ALL themeing bonuses that made chasing them in 5 fun, in 6, you only had theming bonuses from Museums ONLY.
- Archeologists were also much washed down since they only dug up, and you only have 1 per Museum, meaning you can end up with A LOT of unclaimed sites without Theatre Squares.
- No World Congress in 6 without Gathering Storm, no Golden Eras even.
- Buildings are a lot lackluster in Civ 6 than they were in 5, even with the Districts.
- No late game ideology system (though that's understandable).
- Diplomacy was much more plain than in 5, leaders no longer taunt you as much (they only talk about their agendas).
- Trade Routes are also a much simpler, no more resource diversity, you just send Trade Routes and that's it.
- Terrain is slightly less exciting in 6 than in 5, in 5, certain resources and terrain types would remove yields, for example, a hill would not have any food on it, while in 6, all terrains are cumulitive (meaning you can get some pretty strong tiles, I never if ever build farms that aren't Wheat, Maize or Rice).
- Units were more sparse, no more Composite Bowmen or Landships.
- Tech Tree and Civic Trees in 6 was such a bad design, you can beeline so easily, and the dead-ends don't really do much. The layouts feel weird and awkward (though this is more a personal choice)
- City States feel a lot more nuanced, sure Envoys are nice, as are their suzerain bonuses, but you can't really do much with them, there's no competition between them, influecne doesn't decay,and are pretty much responsbile for yield overflow.
- Spies might not have been the most exciting in 5, but they were absolutely not exciting in 6 either.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

It's amazing to me how powerful is this falsy dichotomy of 1UPT vs SoD, as if there weren't tons of turn - based strategy games with all sorts of vastly different combat systems which are neither. With many of those combat systems not being as horribly tedious, time - consuming, traffic - jam - inducing, AI - crippling, anticlimactic* as 1UPT, or as detached, mindless and boring as SoD.

Sometimes I'm wondering how many people out there genuinely love 1UPT and would be in arms against changing the combat system, because discussions about it seem to be not divided between "haters vs lovers" but "haters vs people who are used to it". It is hard for me to recall many spontaneous outbursts of joy "guys I like this combat system so much" during the lifetime of civ6, it's much more often this reactive response to people criticizing it "no please guys don't change it to something worse" which in itself doesn't seem to be too enthusiastic acclaim lol

If civ7 is announced with 1UPT remaining in essentially the same form I'm gonna weep, it's my #1 problem with civ6 - I just don't enjoy combat with this system, it turns it into tedious work with no climactic payoff. Combat difficulty in civ6 mainly comes from the logistical nightmare of trying to take cities in the rough terrain, which is merely tedious and madness inducing for human being and incredibly hard for AI in this system. So AI is unable to threaten human players offensively, removing a lot of tension and meaning from the game (esp diplomacy); AI is bad at conquering other AIs (making the world boring); while human players have to input a lot of tedious work of purely logistical nature of moving units, not even getting some great battles in return.

* - tell me, how often do you have the feeling of Huge, Epic, Decisive Battle with 1upt? Very rarely - it makes the entire warfare dissolve into small skirmishes between individual units

Honestly, I'd rather have 1upt over what Civ 4- had, because I never liked that system. There's some tactical advantage over knowing that you don't need a huge army to take a city, but in 4- I've never really got the grip on the "how many units is too many, and how many units is enough" game.

 

[Leucarum]

It seems like amies might have been intended as a way of handling unit stacking. Technically you are stacking multiple units on one square. But with the civics not being especially low on the tech tree and low incentives to build encampments - they don't show up as often as they could. Strategic resource upkeep late game limiting unit numbers also probably plays a role in making them rarer.

 

[pokiehl]

It seems like amies might have been intended as a way of handling unit stacking. Technically you are stacking multiple units on one square. But with the civics not being especially low on the tech tree and low incentives to build encampments - they don't show up as often as they could. Strategic resource upkeep late game limiting unit numbers also probably plays a role in making them rarer.

You know, the complete forgettableness of corps and armies is exactly why I feel like stack of doom vs carpet of doom IS in fact a correct dichotomy.

They tried to meet in the middle with corps and armies in Civ 6, but they're really not that integral to the military gameplay, and moreover, they don't feel different. I still feel the same need to have more units on tiles.

 

[InsidiousMage]

Strategic resource upkeep late game limiting unit numbers also probably plays a role in making them rarer.

Corps and Armies don't actually use more per-turn strategic resources. A tank, tank corps, and tank army all use one oil per-turn.

 

[Leucarum]

Corps and Armies don't actually use more per-turn strategic resources. A tank, tank corps, and tank army all use one oil per-turn.

I was thinking more that there are less units to merge into armies floating around but I also did not know that!

 

[InsidiousMage]

I was thinking more that there are less units to merge into armies floating around but I also did not know that!

Yeah, if I'm going domination then I'll get the Grand Master's Chapel and faith purchase units to combine with my pre-existing units instead of combining existing units together.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

Sometimes I'm wondering how many people out there genuinely love 1UPT and would be in arms against changing the combat system

Back when I was playing civ 6 multiplayer a lot I 1UPT felt very intense because of how many moves and decisions had to be made in a short time.

* - tell me, how often do you have the feeling of Huge, Epic, Decisive Battle with 1upt? Very rarely - it makes the entire warfare dissolve into small skirmishes between individual units

I made a defensive stand on 6 armed snowflake against two opponents. It was glorious.

I do see your point though. 1UPT has a niche and it is not against the current AI. It's often not MP either tbh.

 

[DImensiondog]

Sometimes I'm wondering how many people out there genuinely love 1UPT and would be in arms against changing the combat system

if your saying SoD again, then your wrong, the only good thing i see about humankind was it’s combat and wouldn’t mind changing to that. That being said i still thing 1upt was a great improvement over civ 4