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

Iconian

Chieftain
Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
73
I haven't heard of even a tiny little rumour that anything Civ-like is being developed, so I would guess we will have to wait a long long long time. Anything before 2026 would surprise me.
Or they have just given up the franchise. I already found it remarkable that they refused to patch at least the biggest bugs that this 6 year old game of Civ6 still has.

I've kind of been thinking the same thing. It may be that they've moved on to other projects, feeling that the existing Civ's are enough. Looking at the timeline of the main games:

Civ 1 came out in 1991
Civ 2 in 1996
Civ 3 in 2001
Civ 4 in 2005
Civ 5 in 2010
Civ 6 in 2016

And at this point it's been 6 years since Civ 6. So, in the first 14 years they came out with 4 Civ games. In the last 16 years they've come out with 2. Perhaps we will see another in the next few years . . . but unless it's really a big improvement over the previous title, why should people play it, especially with the inflation we're seeing these days?
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,378
Location
Texas
I've kind of been thinking the same thing. It may be that they've moved on to other projects, feeling that the existing Civ's are enough. Looking at the timeline of the main games:

Civ 1 came out in 1991
Civ 2 in 1996
Civ 3 in 2001
Civ 4 in 2005
Civ 5 in 2010
Civ 6 in 2016

And at this point it's been 6 years since Civ 6. So, in the first 14 years they came out with 4 Civ games. In the last 16 years they've come out with 2. Perhaps we will see another in the next few years . . . but unless it's really a big improvement over the previous title, why should people play it, especially with the inflation we're seeing these days?
I mean it's also only been one year since they released any new content, which means that they were still developing things for the game last year. It's no surprise that as each game gets bigger with more content, release times between new iterations will be longer.
 

_hero_

King
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Messages
807
Betting when Civ 7 will arrive?
I haven't heard of even a tiny little rumour that anything Civ-like is being developed, so I would guess we will have to wait a long long long time. Anything before 2026 would surprise me.
Or they have just given up the franchise. I already found it remarkable that they refused to patch at least the biggest bugs that this 6 year old game of Civ6 still has.

I've kind of been thinking the same thing. It may be that they've moved on to other projects, feeling that the existing Civ's are enough. Looking at the timeline of the main games:

Civ 1 came out in 1991
Civ 2 in 1996
Civ 3 in 2001
Civ 4 in 2005
Civ 5 in 2010
Civ 6 in 2016

And at this point it's been 6 years since Civ 6. So, in the first 14 years they came out with 4 Civ games. In the last 16 years they've come out with 2. Perhaps we will see another in the next few years . . . but unless it's really a big improvement over the previous title, why should people play it, especially with the inflation we're seeing these days?

Civ 6 sold more than any previous civ game with at least 11 million copies sold. It would be extremely weird from a business standpoint for them to not make another civ game.

As for the lack of any sort of noise, it has been their strategy for a while now to not announce the game too far out. Civ 6 was announced in May 2016 and released in October 2016 only 5 months later. Civ 5 was announced Feb 2010 and released Sept 2010 only 7 months later. If you want to talk about rumors, back in November they had a job posting for a "narrative lead with a passion and knowledge of world history" for the studio's "next AAA strategy title." Maybe that's not Civ 7 but it sure sounds like it could be. Interestingly, Anton Strenger who many thought was a prime candidate for Civ 7 lead dev left the company in December. Strange timing that they'd post a job very similar to Anton's right before he left the company.
 

reddishrecue

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
5,761
I basically mean something similar to Humankind's Neolithic Era, which would take place before the founding of permanent cities. Maybe using the term Neolithic would be better as that's what I would want represented, the end of the Stone Age and most humans going from a hunter and gathering societies to a more urban and farming
Hk has outpost which isn't really a town during Neolithic but as times pass it turns into one. Farms become better sources of food than hunting and gathering even though they're sometimes still available.
 

Linklite

Emperor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
1,536
Civ 6 sold more than any previous civ game with at least 11 million copies sold. It would be extremely weird from a business standpoint for them to not make another civ game.

As for the lack of any sort of noise, it has been their strategy for a while now to not announce the game too far out. Civ 6 was announced in May 2016 and released in October 2016 only 5 months later. Civ 5 was announced Feb 2010 and released Sept 2010 only 7 months later. If you want to talk about rumors, back in November they had a job posting for a "narrative lead with a passion and knowledge of world history" for the studio's "next AAA strategy title." Maybe that's not Civ 7 but it sure sounds like it could be. Interestingly, Anton Strenger who many thought was a prime candidate for Civ 7 lead dev left the company in December. Strange timing that they'd post a job very similar to Anton's right before he left the company.
Exactly, and rather than looking at iterations, we should be looking at periods between final release of content and the next iteration. We still have time before we even start being overdue.

And you know, there was an tinsy winsy spanner thrown in the works a couple of years ago.

With the exception of Civ IV, that gap has always been 2 years. Civ VII, even without accounting for COVID would be due in 2023.

Nothing to stress about.
 

bryanw1995

Emperor
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
1,467
Location
San Antonio, TX
Every Civ game in the regular series (i.e., not counting Test of Time , Colonization, and other variations) came out in September or October except Civ II, which came out in February. I agree that it's too late for an announcement and run up to a release this September or October, so I suspect it will be 3Q of 2023, and probably a year later than originally planned due to the COVID disruption.



I assume you are referring to the continent-spanning cliffs in Humankind, which effectively turned continents into a collection of sub-divisions, since virtually no regular land units could cross them (there is one Emblematic Mountain-type late-game unit that can, I believe). I suspect they were designed to make the map effectively larger, since with the movement rates in Humankind (about 50% longer than Civ VI) you would otherwise be able to scamper a scout from one end of a continent to the other in about 6 turns, and all your home continent scouting/reconnaissance/exploration would be over before you got out of the first Era!
You can set the map generation to Rough but Fewer Cliffs and it actually gives you a much more reasonable map, but you shouldn't have had to use special settings to get a reasonable map in the first place.
Civ VII still needs more variety of land forms and detailed terrain and biome than Civ VI, IMHO.



1UPT only makes sense in a Tactical Game and is ludicrously out of scale in a strategic or 4x Grand Strategic game like Civ. I've already posted one alternative at Combat System for Civ VII, which is even based on data from a group of professional Combat Modelers at the Dupuy Institute.

If they can't come up with anything better than 1UPT for Civ VII it will show the basic inability of Firaxis to design a game, and it will make Civilization VI the last Civilization game that I buy or play or comment on.
I like 1upt more than the infinite SOD from civ 4, though I wouldn't be averse to seeing something different from both of them.
 

reddishrecue

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
5,761
It seems that they're taking a while to make civ7. If they were to cancel its production, then they would've announced it-I guess since they have let us speak up about it for a few years. There have also been other games around that one could play while civ 7 arrives.
 

Iconian

Chieftain
Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
73
I like 1upt more than the infinite SOD from civ 4, though I wouldn't be averse to seeing something different from both of them.

I don't know about Civ 6, but Civ 5 has mods for 3 units per tile, like this one:

 

Hakan-i Cihan

Emperor
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,449
Location
Netherlands
For me 1UPT > SOD (as in civ 3 and 4).
One of the reason is that units fighting one by one doesn't feel right on one hand, and the defending unit chosen by strength (in defense) seems also weird. When two stacks are fighting they both should act as combined armies.
I know the solution of games like endless legend and humankind with combat on two different layers. Initially this is fun but it will soon get bored for full game.
So currently my choice is 1UPT. But if a stacked army combat is enhanced, still not too complex (too many parameters) and combat between two stacks is a direct fight between two whole armies I could like that even more...
 

Sherlock

Just one more turn...
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
1,321
Location
Eagle, Idaho
On the one hand I'm excited about a Civ VII.
On the other hand I kind of hate CiVI so I'm not excited about Civ VII.
On the gripping hand (obscure science fiction reference) Maybe VII will not just be a tarted up VI so yeah, bring it on.
 

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,281
Location
Poland
On the one hand I'm excited about a Civ VII.
On the other hand I kind of hate CiVI so I'm not excited about Civ VII.
On the gripping hand (obscure science fiction reference) Maybe VII will not just be a tarted up VI so yeah, bring it on.

Evolution from civ5 to civ6 was very conservative for this series standards, jumps from civ4 to civ5 or from civ3 to civ4 were far more revolutionary. There are many fundamental problems with civ6, or outdated and stale mechanics, which didn't change for a decade. I am hope that devs gonna see this bigger picture and dare to make civ7 very different from civ6.
 

Iconian

Chieftain
Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
73
For me 1UPT > SOD (as in civ 3 and 4).
One of the reason is that units fighting one by one doesn't feel right on one hand, and the defending unit chosen by strength (in defense) seems also weird. When two stacks are fighting they both should act as combined armies.

You don't have to go with stacks of death or one unit per tile. There are more than two choices.

Like, if you have Civilization 5, get these two mods:


and


My mod, Fantastic Ancients, also has 3 units per tile. To me, 3 units is about the ideal number. It's not so many that it begins to become to unmanageable, and it's enough to easily maneuver all your units around.

Have your cake and eat it too :)
 

8housesofelixir

Emperor
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
1,550
Reporting from the other end of the industry: Ed Beach was busy working on a new wargame (boardgame) on Early Modern Anglo-Scottish border reivers for the entire course of the past couple of years - that is, during NFP's development (NFP's lead designer was Anton). Currently the wargame is at the "Final Art and Proofing" stage of the production. Of course I don't know if Ed will return and be in charge of Civ VII's design, while it implies that he might have a bit more time in his hands as of now.
 

Xur

Prince
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
468
Reporting from the other end of the industry: Ed Beach was busy working on a new wargame (boardgame) on Early Modern Anglo-Scottish border reivers for the entire course of the past couple of years - that is, during NFP's development (NFP's lead designer was Anton). Currently the wargame is at the "Final Art and Proofing" stage of the production. Of course I don't know if Ed will return and be in charge of Civ VII's design, while it implies that he might have a bit more time in his hands as of now.
Ed’s love of boardgames is exactly why I hope someone else takes the lead on civ7. Perhaps someone with a love of PC gaming. Civ6 is drenched in boardgame mechanics.
 

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,281
Location
Poland
Finally someone said it.

I mean... It has been years since a small cabal on this forums, in which I may or may not have participated, reached a consensus that - at least for some people - one of the fundamental problems with civ6 was how it went too far into full abstracted, arcade, board game style and substance, too far away from such notions as the "simulation of history", "leading civilization", "gravitas and epic" etc. Obviously everybody knows that series never took itself too seriously or too simulation...y? (idk if English has an adjective like that, maybe it's time to invent it!) but the perception has been that it went too far to this side of a spectrum.

For me civ6 has far greater feeling than civ5 of the game design screaming at me, at every corner "this is Board Game you play for Points and those are Big Tokens on the Board and here you get Small Colourful Tokens to fill your buckets so in Your Turn you can make a Move against another playing the Board Game and meta - conspiring how to win". Instead of the notion which I greatly prefer, when games like this are trying their best to idk how to describe it, organically arrange their mechanics so you feel immersed as if you were building an actual empire in the actual very simple simulation of world history. It's just omnipresent in everything, from art direction through simple mechanics to, I feel, deeper dynamics of the game, just profound sense of artificiality.

Though I admit it's largely subjective and hard to pinpoint in words, especially regarding my intuition that it seeps down all the way to deeper mechanics. One example I can say outright from my head is how "meta" diplomacy with leaders feel in civ6. In civ5 leaders had their (wonderful, I'd love them to come back) hidden and complex personality spreadsheets, dictating their biases in behaviour and strategies, and interacting with them ingame felt more authentic, as those biases were completely hidden and diplo reactions were displayed through immersive, sensible, real life political diplo talk. After some games and especially once you went to game's wiki and actually checked the spreadsheet you could sort of guess what tendencies given leaders would have, but it was never set in stone but more like probabilistic, and those biases made in - universe sense. Meanwhile in civ6 you have political leaders coming to you in the medieval era with childish meta - tantrums, literally openly complaining to you that you transcended some quotas of ecology or whatever anachronistic nonsense designed to automatically make them hate you, compeltely irregardless of realpolitik strategic interests of their countries. It's like board game design of non - player mechanics designed to keep 'real' players in check through stiff, strict rulers, not even pretending that those are supposed to be political leaders from across history, having sensible political postulates, first and foremost caring about vital interests of their countries.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom