Update 1.3.0 is on the horizon + a message from the devs!

[Evolena]

View attachment 746040

This hightlighted part is intriguing.

The previous balance pass didn't touch any Civ beside the Abbasid, so that was expected.

 

[Hawke9]

Hey Firaxis, how about bringing back the d*mn whales?

I'm tired of crabs and fish. And these new resources are fine. But the people want whales!

Where my whales?

Whales were confirmed in the discord!!!

 

[Pistol90]

I'm not particularly thrilled about the inclusion of the Pirates as a separate civ because:

1. They’ve taken the place of civilizations with greater historical significance
2. I’m worried about Civilization leaning too far into fantasy...

That said, I’m open-minded and willing to reconsider my stance once I see how they fit in-game along with other changes to exploration

Yeah, this thing with pirates should be really carefully taken.

We dont need non-historical civs, or vampires, magicians (like in Civ6).

It is free, yes, great ... but why spend time making something like that (mods are fine).

Civ 7 is already too far from Civ formula, no need to go further into that direction.

 

[m_mus]

Proposal for those feeling uncomfortable with the pirate-civilization: see them as an upscaled and radicalised version of the privateer-feature coming with 1.3.0. This feature could really spice up naval settling and fighting, as well as especially the economic path in Exploration-Age.
The feature is very welcome, and maybe at some point Civ7 will allow certain civs to be excluded from the pool the AI chooses from when transitioning into the Exploration Age. As Civ6 did as well toward the end of its development.

 

[GIO888]

"we're internally playtesting ways to play as one civ continuously through the ages"

HUSSAH!

 

[onslaught49]

awesome, good to see the team being dedicated to making the game great, and them looking into making a mode with no civ switch has me major excited

 

[Pistol90]

Its good they are admitting mistakes (kind of) and trying to reverse them (like Civ switching).

If they could make ages transition feel like just another turn (not jumping in history, not forcing civ-switch, not restarting everything but making whole Tech and Civis trees continous) ... it could end up somewhere good.

There are many little things they can fix meanwhile, like making maps mean something - not every terrain giving you something ... make rivers more important etc etc.
In Civ7 map feels not-important compared to Civ6.

 

[stealth_nsk]

After thinking a bit about the changes, the thing I found cool is that now peaceful players like myself will have much more fun, at least in exploration. While I don't want to divert my resources to a full-scale war (and thus I invest into avoiding wars), combat is still a very fun part of Civ7, so now the part with attacking enemy treasure fleets with privateers or defending against privateers will bring combat gameplay.

 

[Evolena]

and maybe at some point Civ7 will allow certain civs to be excluded from the pool the AI chooses from when transitioning into the Exploration Age. As Civ6 did as well toward the end of its development.

As each Collection Civ is its own DLC, it's at least doable for the non-base game Civs

 

[Sagax]

After thinking a bit about the changes, the thing I found cool is that now peaceful players like myself will have much more fun, at least in exploration. While I don't want to divert my resources to a full-scale war (and thus I invest into avoiding wars), combat is still a very fun part of Civ7, so now the part with attacking enemy treasure fleets with privateers or defending against privateers will bring combat gameplay.

Assuming AI is competent at raiding and plundering, I do wonder how the game pacing and balance play out with all these additions. As it stands, the Exploration Economic path is already on the slower side, with many struggling to complete it within the turn limit. Add in the additional disruption tools, and it will just aggravate the situation.

Still too soon to tell, as we don’t know the full patch notes, but a callout nonetheless.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Assuming AI is competent at raiding and plundering, I do wonder how the game pacing and balance play out with all these additions. As it stands, the Exploration Economic path is already on the slower side, with many struggling to complete it within the turn limit. Add in the additional disruption tools, and it will just aggravate the situation.

Still too soon to tell, as we don’t know the full patch notes, but a callout nonetheless.

In my latest games I usually had no troubles fulfilling economic legacy path after I adopted my playstyle to the new maps. But yes, I expect changes to resource allocation coming as well, including, probably, sea-based treasure resources. This should make this LP easier.

 

[Krikkit1]

Assuming AI is competent at raiding and plundering, I do wonder how the game pacing and balance play out with all these additions. As it stands, the Exploration Economic path is already on the slower side, with many struggling to complete it within the turn limit. Add in the additional disruption tools, and it will just aggravate the situation.

Still too soon to tell, as we don’t know the full patch notes, but a callout nonetheless.

The biggest thing they could do for this is extend the Age...
if instead of 5-10-20 Age progress for the Milestones it was 5-5-10 like in Antiquity... there would be more time in the Age and you would get higher scores for the Economic Legacy (since you generate Convoys over time)
make some of the tech/civics a bot more expensive and you got it.

 

[Liksomkatt]

OK, maybe the next update will have hotseat

 

[marinesciencedude]

I'm too open-minded and grand-strategy-pilled* to view the Pirate malarky as anything other than how the civ/leader split unconstraining them in some aspects of game design results in novel and creative ideas - do I seriously wish to argue that expanding the freedom of creativity is inherently a good unto itself in complete dismissal of how polarising this design is?
basically for me it's repeating the Victoria 3 thing all over again, games so damn polarising given what the predecessors frame expectations for what consitutes a true sequel, and yet I'm getting so enticed in part by exactly that which is has ended up polarising that I'm diving into it in blind faith that a game can be (made) good

I'm pointedly looking back at Civ V as a reference for the pricing though, since the current basegame price is £20 and then add another £20 for one of the expansions
consider that Civ VII on sale is £42
so I'm basically seeing 2K/Firaxis decide that throwing us a bone with subsidising this collection for a few months = acting like the Tides of Power collection is equivalent in worth to a traditional expansion
The truth is I'm really not that cynical and am certainly liable to throw away such a wad of cash on a whim just to jump onto the Civ VII ship 'at last', as I'm truly down in the dumps accepting the reality that in this modern AAA gaming scene there's not going to be a better deal anytime soon

struggling to accept any of this as real, absolute impossibility the prophecy "For 2k and Firaxis: Give away a DLC for free." would come true - certainly that's not the nature of corporations!

*there's a strange observation about this release coinciding with the innovation of naval-based countries we will soon get our hands on in Europa Universalis V, is that why I see Pirates as more exciting for Civ than detrimental?

 

[stealth_nsk]

OK, maybe the next update will have hotseat

In theory even this update could have it. We didn't see full patch notes yet.

 

[pjotroos]

The biggest thing they could do for this is extend the Age...
if instead of 5-10-20 Age progress for the Milestones it was 5-5-10 like in Antiquity... there would be more time in the Age and you would get higher scores for the Economic Legacy (since you generate Convoys over time)
make some of the tech/civics a bot more expensive and you got it.

I think the pacing is currently right for the other three paths, and the overall science, culture and production pacing, though. Economic Legacy is the outlier. The faster fix is to change the requirements - instead of 10/20/30, it should be 10/15/20.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

them looking into making a mode with no civ switch has me major excited

I hope it goes well but if it's just "play this civ the whole game" then they're back to the problem they were trying to solve with civ switching of early bonuses always being better.

 

[Krikkit1]

I think the pacing is currently right for the other three paths, and the overall science, culture and production pacing, though. Economic Legacy is the outlier. The faster fix is to change the requirements - instead of 10/20/30, it should be 10/15/20.

Disagree about the overall pacing. The age is usually over in 50-70 turns which doesn’t give enough time for that age, especially with travel time to Distant Lands.

 

[TomSpren]

I hope they allow us to increase more players for the small and standard map sizes.

 

[pjotroos]

Disagree about the overall pacing. The age is usually over in 50-70 turns which doesn’t give enough time for that age, especially with travel time to Distant Lands.

For the age to be over in 50 turns, you either need future techs and civics, or enemy civilizations wiped out, and no 10 turn countdown. The only game when I finished exploration in less than 60 turns on standard speed, it was by conquering the whole map.

To put it differently - what else are you normally unable to do in the exploration age? Do you ever struggle to get 12 relics? Do you struggle to get 5 yields to 40? Are you missing on critical infrastructure?

Then again, I am of the view that in normal games we should be completing 2 legacy paths on average, 3 at most. Getting all 4 done just means the objectives and the pacing are too generous.