They didn't stand the "Test of Time". Features from previous games that won't be in Civ7

[RedCourtJester]

Strangely enough I won't, though I know they are cute and beloved feature - I just absolutely don't need from civ series this SimCity tycoon builder feel that was so prevalent in civ6; for me it was just clashing tone and scale

I think there's a way the idea could be refined in a theoretical fourth era, especially if they skip the atomic/information era and skip straight to futurism.

 

[Disgustipated]

Armies Civ 3 style never came back. Yes we have army commanders now, which are similar. But I just remember armies being something I loved in Civ 3. I don't remember much about that game, but that is one thing I remember. And yeah the ai didn't use them well, which is why they never returned I suspect.

 

[Isengardtom]

Strangely enough I won't, though I know they are cute and beloved feature - I just absolutely don't need from civ series this SimCity tycoon builder feel that was so prevalent in civ6; for me it was just clashing tone and scale

I agree
Most of these were a bit too much late game filler stuff that doesn’t add any strategy , just more distraction.
I’m sure a lot of this will be added in dlc and expansions though.

I could see them flesh out the legacy paths / victory conditions with these kind of things
Example : religious art work and sculptures in exploration age .

 

[Professor Phobo]

I feel like World Congress should be an optional feature, and only in multiplayer games. Then it could maybe be refined to work as intended as a meta layer of strategy.

I also, sadly, feel like natural disasters and climate change fit in this category (and plagues/health). I love all of these concepts, particularly their ability to encourage awareness of these larger systems which humanity has to navigate together; but until some breakthrough can make them fun they just make the game frustrating.

Surprisingly, I think rivers are going to prove to be a bit of a fun-killer in VII unless/until they diversify civs' abilities to compete without rivers.

The tabletop game "Twilight Imperium" had a neat take on the idea, where votes in the Galactic Congress would meaningfully alter game rules in some way, or change victory conditions. Could be fun to explore that idea in Civ.

 

[stealth_nsk]

The tabletop game "Twilight Imperium" had a neat take on the idea, where votes in the Galactic Congress would meaningfully alter game rules in some way, or change victory conditions. Could be fun to explore that idea in Civ.

The main problem here is inequality between player and AI. Tabletop game is not designed to have inflexible AI opponents manipulated by humans, but computer game should. And things like this are very likely to be exploitable.

 

[pokiehl]

Chop cheesing?

Oh great point. DEFINITELY glad to see chopping gone!

 

[Krikkit1]

The main problem here is inequality between player and AI. Tabletop game is not designed to have inflexible AI opponents manipulated by humans, but computer game should. And thinks like this are very likely to be exploitable.

The new diplomacy model may help here.

Pay to vote (the more influence you pay to vote on something, the more votes you get …discount on the first N votes equal to your CS)

Endeavors +Sanctions that are multilateral

No “diplomatic victory” (since that really breaks the AI/human divide) but diplomacy to help in other victories.

 

[raider980]

While I don't miss chop cheesing for sure, I find I do miss workers. Granted I've only played one day, but it feels like I, the player, am not actually doing much; like most of what I'm doing is responding to prompts. At least Workers gave me something to do.

 

[Pfeffersack]

I haven't played myself, but from viewing LPs: Is it true that hills are not a terrain feature anymore? There are mountains, a cliff structure and a visually rasing terrain the more you get away from coast, but I didn't spot any oldstyle hills.

 

[Siddorm]

One of the dumbest things was those leader agendas. For example, the Norwegian leader would appear and scold me for not building enough boats.

 

[Elhoim]

I haven't played myself, but from viewing LPs: Is it true that hills are not a terrain feature anymore? There are mountains, a cliff structure and a visually rasing terrain the more you get away from coast, but I didn't spot any oldstyle hills.

Kinda, in game code they are referenced and it's basically the "rough" terrain. The map is no longer flat, and some tiles are a bit higher and have rocks in them.

 

[Civinator]

I just remember armies being something I loved in Civ 3. I don't remember much about that game, but that is one thing I remember. And yeah the ai didn't use them well, which is why they never returned I suspect.

The AI handling of armies in Civ 3 now is greatly improved by the C3X mod.

 

[Angry_shroomish]

One of the dumbest things was those leader agendas. For example, the Norwegian leader would appear and scold me for not building enough boats.

They are stil in the game, the leaders will just no longer say that you broke their agende (you can see it in their diplomatic status though)

Edit: also I wished they would never return

 

[TheGrayFox]

I still have no idea who thought agendas were a good idea for diplomacy but whoever it was they should be fired

 

[ThichN]

I still have no idea who thought agendas were a good idea for diplomacy but whoever it was they should be fired

Haven't these been in Civ since Civ5?

 

[TheGrayFox]

Haven't these been in Civ since Civ5?

No arbitrary agendas started in Civ VI

 

[ThichN]

No arbitrary agendas started in Civ VI

Well that's a distinction: agenda vs arbitrary agenda. I'm pretty sure Shaka, for example, in Civ5 likes fellow warmongers. And I think some science-loving civs will like you if you are below them in the tech tree. This may have been a soft start to agendas. I think even IV had this to some degree.

Interestingly, the different SMAC factions disliked / liked you if you adopted certain social engineering policies.

 

[TheGrayFox]

Well that's a distinction: agenda vs arbitrary agenda. I'm pretty sure Shaka, for example, in Civ5 likes fellow warmongers. And I think some science-loving civs will like you if you are below them in the tech tree. This may have been a soft start to agendas. I think even IV had this to some degree.

Interestingly, the different SMAC factions disliked / liked you if you adopted certain social engineering policies.

No, V didn't have agendas, V had a warmongering as a diplomatic malus and leaders simply had different threseholds for how upset aggresive expansion would make them based on how militaristic they were but there were no agenda system like "you have less science I hate you" or "I don't like you if you have less ships". that's wholly a Civ VI invention and a far cry from what was actually in V

 

[canadamufc]

Agendas returning are genuinely laughable. Who asked for Pachacuti hating you for the entire game because you settled a city beside like 2 mountains. And this time, there's his counterpart: Amina, who will resent you for the crime of... settling flat tiles.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

Agendas returning are genuinely laughable. Who asked for Pachacuti hating you for the entire game because you settled a city beside like 2 mountains. And this time, there's his counterpart: Amina, who will resent you for the crime of... settling flat tiles.

I mean, sure, if you have a bunch of mountain Settlements right next to him, Pachacuti should probably want to conquer them, but there has to be a way of doing that that doesn't make a landlocked Realm of the Four Parts cut off diplomatic relations with a nation on another continent for having similar terrain. I mean, cut the diplomatic phrasing, there is a way to do it: just have add an extra modifier when playing Pachacuti hidden in the system that weighs AI behaviors, like how AI were more likely to do certain actions based on set values in games before VI. Telling Amina to hate people in desert and plains is a fine way of encouraging her to fight battles in places that activate her bonuses if all you can give her is a single Agenda, but there's no reason that a single Agenda has to determine her behavior.