Tune in January 30 for a new livestream: Multiplayer & Post-Launch

[Krikkit1]

Finally watched the stream. So anticlimactic. They kept building up who would win first, and then that. LOL. Yeah that needs fixing before release. Or multiplayer will be just unplayable in the modern age. You shouldn't have to click on longer ages for that to be playable. And it's not just multiplayer. I can see this being a problem in single player too. It seems like the ages go by too fast. I most certainly will be using the longer ages in my games. Most players will most likely focus on 2 paths simultaneously which will just increase the pace of the ages. Trying the length of the ages to this seems wrong to me, but I realize they have to tie it to something.

I mean a very simple thing would be for the “Victory Age” to not have the Age progression advance due to gameplay
(It doesn’t have a Crisis and the Victory itself will stop it from going too long)

 

[stealth_nsk]

Finally watched the stream. So anticlimactic. They kept building up who would win first, and then that. LOL. Yeah that needs fixing before release. Or multiplayer will be just unplayable in the modern age. You shouldn't have to click on longer ages for that to be playable. And it's not just multiplayer. I can see this being a problem in single player too. It seems like the ages go by too fast. I most certainly will be using the longer ages in my games. Most players will most likely focus on 2 paths simultaneously which will just increase the pace of the ages. Trying the length of the ages to this seems wrong to me, but I realize they have to tie it to something.

Score victory was always like this. I don't know if it's configurable from UI, but the best solution is to just move the score victory trigger further in the future for game speeds which are affected by this problem.

 

[UWHabs]

You need a score victory if at some point you reach a deadlock. But like a normal civ 6 game the score victory comes at like 500 turns while an "average" game might run 200-300 (or less). It should be similarly far out in the victory age in 7. Like, even if when the score victory kicked in in their game, if that started, say, a 50 turn counter (on quick, so like 100 turns on standard speed), to me that would be ok enough as a "brace in case of emergency tiebreaker"

 

[Lord Yanaek]

I think part of the issue here is that there's no crisis in the modern age!
When the crisis starts in previous ages, it's the sign the age is coming to an end and you better hurry-up on reaching your legacy points or it will be too late. And if you realize it's too late then you can try to prepare as best as you can for the next age by saving gold, settling a town or two ...
But in the modern age, if you don't keep a very close eye on the age progression (like say, because you're busy playing your game while explaining various mechanisms for those watching your stream), there is no warning that the age will soon come to an end. Their game ended on turn 83 but that was online speed. In a normal game that would have been turn 166 (out of a maximum of 200 turns for an age), so it wasn't actually that quick and unexpected for the age to end at that point, they didn't see it coming because there were no warnings.

But the real issue (which might be limited to online speed) is that reaching the last milestone of a legacy path (which is required to unlock a victory) progresses the age wayyyy to much. Age progression went from 82% to 92% when Tim received his last city from Rizal and then, naturally went from 93% to 100% (was probably 103% in fact) when Ed completed his own path. That's 10% of an age progress each time someone gets to their last milestone! Imagine that in a 5 players multiplayer match. If everyone progresses on their own path and reaches the end of their track that's 50% of age progress just from finishing each players legacy paths! You'd have to win before turn 50 to be able to get anything but a score victory! There's no way that's working as intended and i will reiterate that it's good this occurred during their play here as they will probably consider the issue and change how age progresses (at least for the modern age) if not for the day 0 patch, at least for one of the first post-release patches.

 

[Krikkit1]

I think part of the issue here is that there's no crisis in the modern age!
When the crisis starts in previous ages, it's the sign the age is coming to an end and you better hurry-up on reaching your legacy points or it will be too late. And if you realize it's too late then you can try to prepare as best as you can for the next age by saving gold, settling a town or two ...
But in the modern age, if you don't keep a very close eye on the age progression (like say, because you're busy playing your game while explaining various mechanisms for those watching your stream), there is no warning that the age will soon come to an end. Their game ended on turn 83 but that was online speed. In a normal game that would have been turn 166 (out of a maximum of 200 turns for an age), so it wasn't actually that quick and unexpected for the age to end at that point, they didn't see it coming because there were no warnings.

But the real issue (which might be limited to online speed) is that reaching the last milestone of a legacy path (which is required to unlock a victory) progresses the age wayyyy to much. Age progression went from 82% to 92% when Tim received his last city from Rizal and then, naturally went from 93% to 100% (was probably 103% in fact) when Ed completed his own path. That's 10% of an age progress each time someone gets to their last milestone! Imagine that in a 5 players multiplayer match. If everyone progresses on their own path and reaches the end of their track that's 50% of age progress just from finishing each players legacy paths! You'd have to win before turn 50 to be able to get anything but a score victory! There's no way that's working as intended and i will reiterate that it's good this occurred during their play here as they will probably consider the issue and change how age progresses (at least for the modern age) if not for the day 0 patch, at least for one of the first post-release patches.

One point, the Legacy age progressions only happen when the First player reaches that milestone.
So if all 4 paths are completed by anyone that adds a total of 40% (and an additional 30% from earlier milestones) regardless of the number of players.

There are a few issues with it
1. “rushing through the Crisis” the age progression is backloaded, so once you get to the Crisis is when you will likely push through it so you spend less turns in Crisis (although this can be adjusted by having the Crisis start earlier)

2. Warning factors…definitely agree that if there is no Crisis, there should be a “End of History” warning

3. Victory being Rushed…partially just balancing so that if there is a Victory in an era it doesn’t progress as fast from Legacies (say instead of 2.5, 5, 10 its 2.5, 5, 5)

4. Technology /Civics of Era not used
(probably best by adjusting costs of Technologies/Civics)

5. Years (adjustable by having the years that pass in a turn affected not only by turn, but also by age progression.)