Things you *don't* want to see in Civ7 and its expansions

[Boris Gudenuf]

What about being able to merge production from different regions to build wonders anywhere they can be built ?

This was/is a feature of the game Humankind, and IMHO it's a very good one. It adds to the feeling of a Wonder as Something Special instead of just another tick in a city's Production Queue.

On the other hand, it would make it difficult to build more than one Wonder at once (not a problem in Humankind, which required a massive Up Front cost to get the chance to build a Wonder, so it is generally One Wonder Per Era). Given that a certain percentage of us are Wonder Hogs, that could be off-putting.

All that aside, I'd like to see more Variation in Wonders. Looking at the Wonders in Civ VI alone, they range from entire regions (Ruhr Valley) to entire Cities (Angkor Wat) to individual parts of Buildings ("Big Ben" a single bell in a tower in a government structure). That, to me, cries out for some variation in their placement (as now) but also in the amount of space they take.

Some Wonders should take up an entire tile: The Pyramids, the original multi-acre Stonehenge Complex, Ruhr Valley (maybe even, like some Natural Wonders, Multiple Tiles?) etc. But note that those first two were also not built anywhere near a major residential area/urban area either. Many Wonders, like the museums, art galleries and 'cultural' buildings, Require people to visit for their effect: they have to be built near people, in an Urban setting. But many are also small enough that they should 'fit' inside a single District with Room left over - and possibly add extra Effects because they are, say, adjacent to another Wonder, or the Palace, or Neighborhoods, or whatever.

We could have both more specific requirements to get the maximum effect out of a Wonder, or even to build it in the first place (something I've posted on before) but also greater range of places we can put them. Prime site also has your only Iron resource? there should be other potential sites that don't give quite as good a Bonus, but are still buildable – if you also fulfill other requirements, like having a God King type government to build Pyramids or Terracotta Army

 

[Psychotronics]

1. Gandhi:
   Yes, nuclear Gandhi was fun, but it's a 10 year old meme at this point, let it die. Besides, even though Gandhi was a very important figure to India's history, he was never actually presided the country;
2. Secret societies / heroes:
   This is Civilization, not Age of Mythology. These have no place in a Civ game, even as an optional game mode;
3. Civ 6's World Congress:
   God, the World Congress sucks in this game. It starts way too early and it's just so boring. It gets even worse because the A.I. picks the same options every single time;
4. Pedro (either of them):
   I'm Brazilian. It was cool having both Pedros, but there's more to our history than the empire. Really hoping we get Getúlio Vargas this time around, he's the most important figure for understanding contemporary Brazil.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Pedro (either of them):
I'm Brazilian. It was cool having both Pedros, but there's more to our history than the empire. Really hoping we get Getúlio Vargas this time around, he's the most important figure for understanding contemporary Brazil.

It's the same Pedro II in both games. Just the Civ 6 version appears younger.

 

[reddishrecue]

It's the same Pedro II in both games. Just the Civ 6 version appears younger.

I noticed that.. I also noticed that Pedro in Spanish is Peter in English like the Russian leader.

 

[Psychotronics]

I noticed that.. I also noticed that Pedro in Spanish is Peter in English like the Russian leader.

Also in Spanish, yes, but Pedro's language is Portuguese.

It's the same Pedro II in both games. Just the Civ 6 version appears younger.

Oh, yeah, I always forget that it isn't Pedro I because they gave him the wrong hair/beard color, lol, it's darker than it should be.

 

[AffineConstant]

Some Wonders should take up an entire tile: The Pyramids, the original multi-acre Stonehenge Complex, Ruhr Valley (maybe even, like some Natural Wonders, Multiple Tiles?) etc. But note that those first two were also not built anywhere near a major residential area/urban area either. Many Wonders, like the museums, art galleries and 'cultural' buildings, Require people to visit for their effect: they have to be built near people, in an Urban setting. But many are also small enough that they should 'fit' inside a single District with Room left over - and possibly add extra Effects because they are, say, adjacent to another Wonder, or the Palace, or Neighborhoods, or whatever.

There could be a "City Center" slot where you could build certain types of buildings that would otherwise take up an entire hex. If you want to build an art museum or Big Ben or etc. they take up the "City Center" and so don't take up as much space, but aren't as powerful as buildings that do take up an entire hex.

You could even see your building added to the main city tile, look a tiny little Big Ben is now in your city center!

 

[pokiehl]

I like wonders taking up the tiles as they are. The challenge of placement is in balance to their bonuses, and I also think you have a lot of visual creativity to make something look beautiful putting a wonder in just the right spot. These other ideas seem like overcomplication.

 

[ombak]

When it comes to wonders occupying their own tile or being part of a city center, why not both? After implementing the new approach in 6, I think it's entirely possible they could conclude that they want both options in 7.

I suppose that any question along these lines that inspires a "let's use both approaches" answer would also require some serious consideration by the developers about whether it's too unwieldy, or complicates things unnecessarily, but I feel that it might make sense for wonders.

EDIT: And, come to think of it, in addition to the city center or their own tile, some wonders could fit in a specific district.

 

[AffineConstant]

EDIT: And, come to think of it, in addition to the city center or their own tile, some wonders could fit in a specific district.

Maybe they could be an upgrade to a district? EG a university/campus can be upgraded to the Oxford University wonder.

I don't think it's that complicated, each wonder still takes up a hex. You only have 1 city center slot, you can only build wonders that take up a city center slot in it, and when that gets filled you're done with that hex. It'd also add variety to wonder placement requirements/bonuses, while cutting down on the map getting overcrowded (a common complaint it would seem).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I honestly agree on WC being less than thought-out, though for different reasons. In particular in how it forms regardless of whether all civs have actually met each other or not (which is where I think it should form), but also in how both the the UI and underlying voting system makes it really unclear which propositions have passed or not. IMO, every hearing should've been two-staged, with the first deciding on which proposition to actually vote on, and the second on actually voting on the nominated proposition

Yeah, I think that two things they could have done would have made the WC perfect which is
1) Have the first world meeting when all the civs meet, or maybe at least the player meets all the civs, and has researched Diplomatic Service making it at least unlockable in Renaissance
2) Have a WC leader which is determined by Diplomatic Victory points, who at least has the chance to propose the either one or all the propositions.

 

[aieeegrunt]

If they are going to stick with Civ VI iteration of the world Congress I’d rather see it scrapped entirely. Not being able to select proposals and even the flavor of “First Congress of X” was very missed

The mod customization VI allows you to remove it and it improves the game a lot. This “feature” adds nothing to the game but board gamey gaminess.

The UN is a meme of uselesness for a very good reason

I am playing a game of civ vi now for the first time in a long time, and please no more emergencies. It feels extremely gamey and ahistorical and makes it so that if you want to play on a setting where natural disasters actually happen, diplomatic victory becomes the only type of victory. Better yet, throw out the entire world congress as seen in CIV VI.

See above.

In real life, empires that expand aggressively find it harder and harder to defend what they have, let alone expand further. Civ has never modelled that well. The pure 4x model says they shouldn't, that big should get bigger should get biggest. Personally, I hope Civ 7 finds a way to reflect in an interesting way the problems that come with expansion-by-conquest.

It’s awful, as both gameplay and historical role play the way, even with loyalty that conquored enemy cities simpky borgify and becone loyal clone citizens so easily.

Cities that you rule but didn’t found should function like vassals did in previous titles; you get a certain amount of yields from it but you don’t control production, and if things go south for the overlord they should have a capacity to break away, revolt, or even just “passive” resistance where you get zero yields but still pay maintenance.

One more thing I discovered that I really don't like about VI is the absurd ranged strength cities and encampents have. I don't mind cities having hit points or being hard to siege, but when they can wipe out your entire army sitting far away in the field then that feels so out of scope for what 'city defenses' actually are and makes warring a slog. I usually have the biggest army around but if someone declares war on me I usually do not retaliate but pillage a few tiles. Not because I am scared or couldnt defeat their armies, but because I am scared of their cities, and that makes no sense to me.

Again, I understand a city center tile hurting you if you attack it with urban warfare and all but just randomly taking out a unit every or every other turn seems extreme. As for encampments, they already have defensive bonuses and zone of control. Stick a crossbowman in there and it will be an invaluable improvement during war. But it shouldn't on it's own kill your army.

The root of the problem here is the root of just about every single problem with combat in Civ6. You have 1UPT AND low move allowance.

This leads to having to solve a sliding tile problem everytime you move your units, and it also means your units usually take multiple turns to awkwardly shuffle forward to attack, giving ramged fire many, many “free” shots at you.

We need either 1 UPT with double the current move allowance, or some form of unit stacking

Loyalty is the one thing that I don't care to return, at least the way it's implemented based primarily off of population.

It should be culture based like it was in Civ3, and individual population points should track cultural identity.

The main problem I have with grievances is that they prevent honest deals with the remaining civs. Like you have been invaded aggressively, you retaliate and take some cities or a capital, and you are denounced by others for the rest of the game. It's annoying. What could I do with all that excess lux resource copies ? That brings me to make me want a bonus for having multiple copies other than industries/corporations.
As to razing cities, I like the brutality of instant razing, if razing must exist this is for this.
I would also like to be able to puppet cities Civ5 style, but I have no clue how it would work in Civ6 because everything that is built including units, districts and wonders is maybe out of AI capability/player would not do like this if controlling the city directly. The only thing I can think of a puppet city could do is projects like science funding/other already existing districts related projects, if any.

This mechanic is good both for game and history role play purposes.

Taking cities from an aggressor goes beyond self defense and into you being just as bad. A city changing hands is also a major power balance shift.

The classic example is France and Alsace Lorrainr. France can spend two centuries repeatedly being the agressor and invading and pillaging Germany horiffically, but the Germans take a province back in self defense and suddenly they are the bad guys.

What about being able to merge production from different regions to build wonders anywhere they can be built ?

Domestic trade routes do this

 

[kaspergm]

Domestic trade routes do this

Actually they don't, domestic trade routes make production appear magically out of nothing.

 

[xehgre]

District adjacencies. Make the district bonuses city wide instead or make the bonus affect other tiles instead of affecting the district (Commercial building give +x gold to plantations), that way I don't need to super plan my city and it should be easier for the AI.

 

[Patine]

District adjacencies. Make the district bonuses city wide instead or make the bonus affect other tiles instead of affecting the district (Commercial building give +x gold to plantations), that way I don't need to super plan my city and it should be easier for the AI.

Better yet, go back to all city imprivements other than farms, mines, road/railfoads, resource colonies, etc. being IN the main city space, stacked in a zoom-in, like in Civ1-5.

 

[Xandinho]

Better yet, go back to all city imprivements other than farms, mines, road/railfoads, resource colonies, etc. being IN the main city space, stacked in a zoom-in, like in Civ1-5.

I believe that those improvements from Great People in Civ5 were already a kind of test for the future implementation of districts.

To be honest, I think districts are here to stay, I just wish they were more visually integrated into the same city rather tha disconnected pieces.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I believe that those improvements from Great People in Civ5 were already a kind of test for the future implementation of districts.

To be honest, I think districts are here to stay, I just wish they were more visually integrated into the same city rather tha disconnected pieces.

Yes. There are two options which I think would work:
The first would be to have a separate map for the city where you are able to place districts and most wonders. It can still be three ring hexes. Then the ones outside of the city would be the farms/mines/plantations just like how it currently has been for all other games.
The other option, which is more feasible, would be to have most districts locked to be built adjacent to the city center (things like encampments/military base would be an exception) until you research something like Urbanization in the Industrial Era.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I'll include this awful AI quirk from Civ 4

I'm playing on a HUGE map, and I'm on the OTHER SIDE OF THE CONTINENT, and Shaka HATES the Persians and Arabs, but still DoWs me . This + a stack of doom (thankfully none here) is by far my least fave aspect for Civ 4's AI, and I don't want it in any upcoming game of Civ

 

[Xandinho]

Yes. There are two options which I think would work:
The first would be to have a separate map for the city where you are able to place districts and most wonders. It can still be three ring hexes. Then the ones outside of the city would be the farms/mines/plantations just like how it currently has been for all other games.
The other option, which is more feasible, would be to have most districts locked to be built adjacent to the city center (things like encampments/military base would be an exception) until you research something like Urbanization in the Industrial Era.

I think the second option would work well. Each district would have to be built adjacent to the city center or adjacent to at least two other districts. Military bases, dams and harbors would be the exception. The city walls would surround the entire complex. Several small houses would be seen within the districts. This way, we would have an organic and interesting city that expands on the map and is visually integrated. At the end of the game, cities with more than 3 districts in addition to the city center would form large metropolises filled with skyscrapers. I don't think it would make sense to have skyscrapers in very small cities.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

Better yet, go back to all city imprivements other than farms, mines, road/railfoads, resource colonies, etc. being IN the main city space, stacked in a zoom-in, like in Civ1-5.

I would honestly go ever further in that direction, i.e. getting rid of the worker/builder unit, getting rid of the city distance requirement, getting rid of nearby tiles being workable by citizens, and making all the rural infrastructure built through the city construction menu. Worrying about cities potentially overlapping too much has honestly never been a fun part of the civ series, so it would be nice if each tile within the empire was treated as its own bespoke province/municipality, a la Europa Universalis, rather than a handful of city centres each surrounded by nameless, subservient exubrs that the city centers have to fight over

 

[Leyrann]

At this point we might need a separate thread for religion mechanics.

Moderator Action: New thread created. Please use the new thread for religious implication discussions for Civ7. leif