Strategy speculation: path-maxing/turtle vs growth/Rush

I think it will be a bit of a balancing act, to try to develop without hitting the milestones "too early", if you find yourself too far ahead, maybe go build some warehouses all over, get those timeless/ageless buildings online.
I'm fairly certain I'm going to select for Long ages, glad to see that as a feature as well.
 
I think it will be a bit of a balancing act, to try to develop without hitting the milestones "too early", if you find yourself too far ahead, maybe go build some warehouses all over, get those timeless/ageless buildings online.
I'm fairly certain I'm going to select for Long ages, glad to see that as a feature as well.
Warehouses you can always build.
Unique buildings you can’t.
(same with Wonders but they aren’t a “rush all over” type of thing)
 
Warehouses you can always build.
Unique buildings you can’t.
(same with Wonders but they aren’t a “rush all over” type of thing)
I meant in the sense that your warehouses won't shove the legacy path or age deadline closer Also build your uniques to make sure you have as many sticking around.
 
With the changes to military victory, one viable strategy is to capture some settlements at ancient era and exploration era here and there, by modern era you build up a large expedition force and capture the final settlements
 
Great topic! Thanks to the OP and to the contributors. I am looking forward to learning how the age transitions curb any snowball effect, and am hopeful it allows the game to retain more fun factor throughout the game. As to legacies, are those earned per game, or is that the new "currency" that you earn across your entire gameplay?
 
this is neither here nor there but i love how the brainrot lingo has reached here and the title says path-maxxing
 
I feel misled. I came here looking for a discussion about Rush, but there was no mention of them at all. No 2112 or Moving Pictures, not even my daughter’s favorite album Fly By Night.
 
First of all, like all civ games, any victory becomes easy if you first get a quasi-domination victory early.
Assuming you let your opponents live though it feels a bit more tricky to predict and that's what I'm intrigued by for civ7. The optimal path doesn't look as clear from previews as it was in their latest games. The only thing clear is that getting towns/cities to at least your limit is probably optimal. But then there are a lot of options:
* Should they be switched to cities considering you will have to also pay in the next age ? The prod->gold conversion is probably bad so transforming into cities may make these more productive but maybe using towns for higher main cities is a better strategy.
* How much over the limit can we push ?
* Is it worth pursuing legacy paths not well aligned with your objectives ? For example in Age 1, it seems reasonable to expand and develop trade routes anyway but the culture legacy requires a much bigger investment if you have no strong interest in getting a legacy culture point.
* What value will science and culture have into accelerating age transitions ? I would imagine that people will want to trigger these once they want to accelerate their games to win as fast as possible but it could be that having a solid empire and accelerating through the legacy paths is a better strategy for antiquity and then blazing through Exploration and Modern for your chosen victory.
 
First of all, like all civ games, any victory becomes easy if you first get a quasi-domination victory early.
This, I think is the real problem. The Crisis needs to be better at "resetting" that... ie big empires* should face much stronger Crises, the type that would actually remove some/many of their Settlements (smaller empires shouldn't get hit as hard)

*Both human and AI (Human more with increasing difficulty)
 
Taking cities away from opponents and simultaneously adding to your empire is always the easiest and most guaranteed way to win and you will likely gain codices, wonders and resources along the way, achieving the other legacy paths without really trying.
I doubt conquering cities containing Wonders counts those Wonders towards completing the cultural legacy path.
 
I doubt conquering cities containing Wonders counts those Wonders towards completing the cultural legacy path.
Maybe but the Legacy task just says "House 7 Wonders in your empire." Either way it doesn't change the answer to the OP's question... the "meta" best strategy always has been and always will be aggressive conquest.
 
And that will be one of the ways to success: Keep your commanders fighting and keep them alive. They are one of the few things left which really snowball.
Fortunately they are immortal (if they die they come back... although it may take time+production)
 
Maybe but the Legacy task just says "House 7 Wonders in your empire." Either way it doesn't change the answer to the OP's question... the "meta" best strategy always has been and always will be aggressive conquest.
Otter’s stream showed that they do not count.

And agree with aggression being optimal 100% of the time historically. Ideally though, there is a counterbalance approach that’s as competitive this go around.
 
Maybe but the Legacy task just says "House 7 Wonders in your empire." Either way it doesn't change the answer to the OP's question... the "meta" best strategy always has been and always will be aggressive conquest.
They need to change the wording to reflect the actual mechanics.
(and make sure that early territorial success doesn't carry over too easily)
 
Two things that might slow down conquest:
In civ 6 you would get inspirations and eurekas from the buildings and wonders you capture. I don't think that's true in 7.
If you capture a city in 7 it turns into a town. Towns don't have specialist so this should greatly reduce the science and culture yields you will get.
 
If you capture a city in 7 it turns into a town. Towns don't have specialist so this should greatly reduce the science and culture yields you will get.

And how much will it reduce the science and culture for the civs that you are taking those cities from?

Anytime you take cities (or towns) from your opponents you are strengthening yourself and weakening them at the same time. This is not a criticism of Civ7, it's just the nature of how all 4x games work. Conquest is always the strongest option.
 
Waging war and conquering cities has an opportunity cost so it's not always true. It depends on that cost. If conquering is easy and with little penalties then it's usually the best option, if it kills your engine and gives you a lot of negative effects then it may be a worse option. You could easily design a 4X game that has high opportunity costs for conquering like civ5 where it's clearly not always the strongest option for non domination victories.
But yeah in the case of civ7, conquests look really good especially if you can do it at a low cost by abusing commanders.
 
I think you can influence progression. I saw a stream where the player slotted in the last codecs which ended the age before he completed his 7th wonder. Then he reloaded, completed the wonder and slotted in the last codecs to complete all legacies. So if you are the one ahead, you could force an early or delayed transitions I think.
Yeah I've done this a number of times. I usually play, Online Speed and Standard/Long Age length. If I see the counter is approaching 80% I hold off on slotting resources, codicies, relics or placing that last wonder/popping trade fleets. Harder to do it for military unless you want to just sit outside that last town waiting to conquer it.
 
Back
Top Bottom