Two things that I hope Civ 7 will fix

[Markus5]

I would modify 1upt. You can have one unit of each type on a tile. So, a max stack would be something like 1 melee, 1 anti-cav, 1 ranged, 1 light cav, 1 heavy cav, 1 siege, 1 support, etc. Less carpet-y.

 

[pokiehl]

I would modify 1upt. You can have one unit of each type on a tile. So, a max stack would be something like 1 melee, 1 anti-cav, 1 ranged, 1 light cav, 1 heavy cav, 1 siege, 1 support, etc. Less carpet-y.

Then every stack would end up exactly the same, it’d remove the strategic differences between unit types, and we’d be right back at square one with all the deficiencies of 1UPT to boot.

I just don’t understand limited stacking arguments, especially if they result in complete uniformity.

 

[civviefan]

Ideally, the new iteration of policies will be a little less specific and more flavourful and evocative of the type of society you lead. Linking effects might be one way to do this. Seafaring, for example, might reduce the maintenance cost of naval units and boost trade yields from ocean-going trade. Mercantile might increase the gold yield from markets and lower the cost of hiring mercenaries. Monastic could improve resistance to foreign religious pressure and improve stability/happiness.

Having negative consequences associated with a policy is likely still an anathema to the current dev team, but linking multiple related effects could help break the feeling that policy cards exist solely to give you a 15% discount on artillery when you feel the need to build artillery. Especially if limited swapability means the policy cards stay in place for long periods and encourage you to specialize your empire.

strongly endorse this suggestion.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I think this is part of a game design philosophy that suggests that you should put as much on the map or grid or whatever gamespace it is (for any particular game) as possible to increase the number of interactions.

Eg. putting Wonders on the map lets players pillage wonders for example. Or maybe Wonders could have a bonus while units are on it.

I think what they were going for is making the map more meaningful. I don't know, I'm not advocating for anything

 

[BackseatTyrant]

I see a sort of weird imbalance between clogging the map, but also having the map and terrain as arguably a limiting factor. Like, yes, wonders do take up space on the map. But at the same time, that adds an extra level of decision for them. There's definitely times where I consider whether to build a wonder, but then the space it takes makes me decide against it.

But the problem is that the scale of civ is skewed. Like in a standard game, the entirety of France is more or less a standard city radius. So when you end up slapping districts and wonders on every tile, it can definitely make the game feel very crowded. You can run out of space for farms, never mind keeping any areas "natural". I'd love to be able to actually be able to like build a "city park" like Central Park that actually shows up on the map and takes space, but sort of fits into the space around it. Or actually have lands nearby to cities that are actually undeveloped and still raw forests even into the modern era.

Hitting the nail on its head with my sole complaint regarding 1UPT: the maps don't have enough tiles! If I recall correctly, the mantra Firaxis seems to hold about keeping the maps relatively small, dates back to the Microprose days of the Civ franchise, when playtesters complained about the initially quite large maps making the game feel too stretched out thin and boring to play. All fine and well back then, but also, Civ I and Civ II had a lot fewer systems and features for the player to interact with, compared to where the game franchise is nowadays. Culture for example, was almost entirely abstracted, something the player themselves had to basically roleplay in their own head; write down as an original story if committed enough. In general, that's largely the direction the franchise has taken with each new iteration: away from sweeping abstractions, and towards the game doing the heavy-lifting when it comes to making the gamer world feel lived-in.

So again, that'd be my solution to the whole debate: just make the maps bigger and/or more granular!

 

[DeckerdJames]

About the clutter on the map, part of the problem is the yield icons. You tend to need them on in Civ 6. The reason is because natural disasters and world wonders alter the yields of tiles and without the yield icons on, you can miss that. To make the best choice about city settling, you need to see the yields. Now this could be modded in Civ 6, or be a setting in Civ 7, to only show yield icons when a settler is selected but it doesn’t solve the whole problem. Suppose a scout passes close to a natural wonder. If yield icons are turned on, you will know you are close to a natural wonder if the natural wonder alters the yields of adjacent tiles. Then you might direct the scout to reveal the map around the natural wonder. If the yield icons were off, you might pass right by a natural wonder and miss it until later.

I suggest that there be a setting that shows yield icons only when they are altered from their default values. For example, normal grassland is worth 2 food. If such a setting were turned on, normal grassland would not display the 2 food icons. However, suppose a normal grassland tile was affected by drought. Since the tile no longer yielded food at all, it would display 2 red food icons indicating that the tile yields less food than normal. If a grassland tile had been affected by some natural cause or an adjacent building and now yielded 3 food, that tile would show 3 food icons, but other normal grassland adjacent to that tile, if not affected, would not show yield icons.

This would clean up all the yield icons from normal tiles.

Secondly, you might experiment with some refinements to such a system. The world may still seem cluttered with yield icons if yield icons are shown on tiles whose yields are altered by adjacent buildings, policies, or other normal game mechanics which can be learned by experienced players. I suggest a further option to turn of yield icons on tiles that are affected normally by such game mechanics and only display yield icons on tiles affected by natural wonders and alterations by random occurrences such as natural disasters or any game mechanic that produces a tile with unpredictable yields so that yield icons would need to be displayed to understand the value. In such a system, a normal grassland tile affected by drought would not display red yield icons because a drought predictably removed the 2 food yields.

This would clean up yield icons from all tiles except those with unpredictable yields.

 

[DeckerdJames]

Maybe it would just be too hard to distinguish the districts if the buildings were too small, but cities would look more interesting if they looked like cities from a aerial view.

 

[reddishrecue]

Maybe it would just be too hard to distinguish the districts if the buildings were too small, but cities would look more interesting if they looked like cities from a aerial view.

Civ 6 does this by having the city center as a downtown.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Hitting the nail on its head with my sole complaint regarding 1UPT: the maps don't have enough tiles! If I recall correctly, the mantra Firaxis seems to hold about keeping the maps relatively small, dates back to the Microprose days of the Civ franchise, when playtesters complained about the initially quite large maps making the game feel too stretched out thin and boring to play. All fine and well back then, but also, Civ I and Civ II had a lot fewer systems and features for the player to interact with, compared to where the game franchise is nowadays. Culture for example, was almost entirely abstracted, something the player themselves had to basically roleplay in their own head; write down as an original story if committed enough. In general, that's largely the direction the franchise has taken with each new iteration: away from sweeping abstractions, and towards the game doing the heavy-lifting when it comes to making the gamer world feel lived-in.

So again, that'd be my solution to the whole debate: just make the maps bigger and/or more granular!

Agree about bigger maps helping to reduce the crowding problem but the 1UPT have others issues like the chore that is the combat system especially at late game. To me moving carpets of AT infantry teams and support units all around the maps to do the conga line "combat" is anything but immersive or enjoyable, neither are unlimited stacks slapping each others a la JRPG. Instead a system of less but more significative and personalized composite armies could works for CIV scale.
Also the city cluttering is independent of the crowding issues. The need for districts to be contiguous to others linked to the city center would provide a more natural and neat city growing and pleasant maps.