What is missing in civ6 that you would like in civ7?

[planetfall]

This may be pointless, but let's try anyway. Maybe firaxis gets some ideas from our discussion

First part is what is missing in civ6 that hurts your game play experience?
Not add new units and other features of the game, but the actual play experience. Such as hard to find XYZ, or turns are too slow, or too many steps to complete a task.

The second part is what is missing in civ6 that would make this a more enjoyable gaming experience?


I'll start with my takes on both:
FIRST
Game controls:
-- not able to zoom out to see world
-- items listed in city build queue that are not dimmed so you have to go to civopedia to find the missing prerquesite. Some function like technology tree selection color highlights for availability clue, would be fantastic.
-- zoom out get stuck and have to move around map to get some function back. Particullarly at end of turn
Game graphics:
-- city name labels cover too much of map and toggle mini size/regular size not available
-- resources too hard to quickly locate. Should be able to find for those without 20/20 vision
-- enhancements not clear: difficult to see at a glance if tile has any active improvements
-- sliding fog of war/unexplored fog map leaving are too slow.
-- non active units are too hard to locate without mouse over


SECOND
The developer/designed assumes we just want to play a vanilla game. But once play in godlike mode, it opens up so much more. A boring game can become exciting with just a few: what if we changed the way the game plays?
Why should easy mods only be available to techperts? If I were designing and marketing, I would have a $10 addon that would allow multiple toggles of effect changes.
Here are some of the changes that are fun to play and experiment with:
-- change prerequisites of XYZ
-- change costs of XYZ
-- change yields: money, power, food, culture, etc of XYZ.

It should be simple to add a drop down check list/number box in allowing changing of game play values with of course, a reset to defaults option when got too crazy.
Examples,
swordmen only need one iron resouce, not two
movement ranges of naval units increased by one with every upgrade. Just to speed up game play
changing the movement range of scouts

So, what do you think?

 

[cknwo]

For me it's about immersion into the game. Tying into what you said about city names and resources... Once I bring a scout to the borders of another civilization I want to SEE their architecture w/o having to zoom in. I want to know I've reached a unique people.

It would be nice to commission our own World Wonder. Have a list of perks that can be applied to: Bonus, Yield type, placement and look. Each Civ gets the opportunity to build 1 during each game.

Also the return of Assyria and Ashurbanipal

 

[Henri Christophe]

Also the return of Assyria and Ashurbanipal

Speaking about civ who should be add, I am missing a lot civ from the tier Blacks Outside Africa.
An important empire as Haiti never was in game before, and I also they could add others civs as Palmares or Ahmadnagar Sultanate.
Also could have Seminoles leading by Black people as John Horse.

 

[pineappledan]

ideologies from civ 5 is a big one, imo. The policy mechanics in civ 6 are overall a distinct downgrade from the previous game.

 

[AldebaranTraveler99]

I would like to see more idiosyncratic expression.
First, each civ should have it’s own government types, especially early on. A Shogun is not the same as a Chinese Emperor, Roman Emperor, Caliph, Mongol Khan, Pharoah, etc.
Campuses, encampments, commercial zones and especially holy sites should not all look the same.
Be bold and have religions really make a difference- make it hard to manage religious pluralism before the enlightenment.
More detailed trade.
Let pops be unpredictable under certain circumstances- mass migration, taking to the sea, triggered fanaticisms, loss of faith.
Allow cities to decline, decay, be abandoned.
But above more ways for each civ to be unique- appearance, govs, inclinations, leader types…
Give Great Persons more agency- disruptive Great Persons, unpredictable or controversial Great Persons.

 

[AffineConstant]

ideologies from civ 5 is a big one, imo. The policy mechanics in civ 6 are overall a distinct downgrade from the previous game.

I'm not sure either one is perfect. Ideologies were very limited in 5, but they worked better than 6 in that you had to think about where you were putting your culture points instead of just spraying them everywhere.

6's policies had a lot more flexibility and options, but again you only had to think about "which options do I want active right now", as which policies you were "researching" felt a bit arbitrary and not like a super important decision.

I'd love to see the strengths of both combined. More options than 5, and the idea of "government types" just felt neat and more "historical' overall. But try and keep the "this decision actually matters" by making it a real investment in the culture you have, rather than just something you can swap out almost for free as you go along.

Maybe if the government type you went with cost a lot of culture points, and changing policies at all cost culture points, or hapiness, or some sort of resource... as well differentiate the policy tree from the tech one even more. Any sort of policy tree should feel like it really matters what unlocks you're getting, unlocking the whole policy tree, or even half of it, shouldn't even be possible most games.

 

[pineappledan]

You have limited slots to put policy cards into, and then unlock policy cards via a progressive tech tree. That means that later policy necessarily have to be stronger or else what's the point of having some unlocked earlier/later than others? And then you unslot the old ones -- policy cards you paid hundreds or thousands of culture to attain -- and they do nothing for the rest of the game. Or maybe the ones you unlocked to something else just never were worth replacing your existing policies for. So you are made to fill buckets of culture to unlock things that have absolutely no value aside from progression to the next thing. It's quite the mess of a system; extremely spotty and unrewarding in places. At least with the old civ 5 version of policies, your culture investments always resulted in some cumulative bonus in addition to progression towards the end game.

In civ 7, they should go back to a system more similar to civ 5's, but with a twist: you should be able to "abolish" cultural policies in order to boost progression/lower the cost towards your next policy. Then you have a choice between accumulating more and more policies, allowing their bonuses to stack on your empire, or remove older, weaker policies in order to advance faster into later, more powerful ones. Neither choice is wrong, so you would have to find the balance between the two approaches to maximize your policy bonuses.

 

[AldebaranTraveler99]

I also keep picturing some new looks...like where you could just zoom in to your lands and instead of a big temple at 10,000X on the big map you'd see your holy site and temple atctge edge ofcthe woods outside your city, market stall across the river, all in a much smaller presentation.

Also, customizable style for more generic wonders- sure we like the classical Grrek look...but wouldn't a temple to the goddess of the hunt look different forcthe Zulu's, the Koreans etc...there could be a customizable option.

Customizable governors and advisors who change appearance over time...

 

[ViterboKnight]

My biggest concern in Civ6.... (very good game, but.... TOO MANY things to run after!).

Make some features to be selectable game options (espionage, religion, world congress....).
If some players (like me) like to play a game a bit less complex, they should be allowed to (removing aspects that they don't like or don't want in that game).

 

[9gkj548hkm20vk79dj689bnj4]

let's start at the very beginning: may I please have a "play now" option which simply launches a game with all of the settings from my previous game?

 

[dagriggstar]

A revolution/civil war mechanic.

I actually really like the idea of using the unhappiness system from old world, which basically functions like a "revolt" timer. Then, give us the choice to play as the revolutionaries or the loyalists.

 

[AffineConstant]

A revolution/civil war mechanic.

I actually really like the idea of using the unhappiness system from old world, which basically functions like a "revolt" timer. Then, give us the choice to play as the revolutionaries or the loyalists.

Well, not that exactly. But it would make sense that if a city becomes too unhappy it revolts. Then it might choose to join a neighboring civ if that civ has enough culture (like in 6) or just become a city state if that's not applicable. While revolting it could spew barbarian units to defend itself/screw everything up. Such revolts aren't uncommon throughout history. Good mechanic expansion of what's already there.

 

[pineappledan]

if a revolution pulled a significant proportion of your cities into a new civ, that would basically be a re-roll. the support for this mechanic idea seems evergreen, but I can’t understand it; it would basically ruin a game if it ever happened to a player.

 

[Haig]

Stuff I would like to see return from previous games:

Civ III:
big artillery bombardment left craters to ground! Would look cool in Civ VII too.

Civ IV:
Apostolic palace mechanic
Drafting units
Goverments had bonuses but also restructions

Civ V:
Ideologies
World congress
Gifting units
Threatening citystates for gold

 

[Itiseye]

The only thing I can think of for now is bring back various Barb levels

 

[dagriggstar]

if a revolution pulled a significant proportion of your cities into a new civ, that would basically be a re-roll. the support for this mechanic idea seems evergreen, but I can’t understand it; it would basically ruin a game if it ever happened to a player.

I view it more like how you might play Rhyes and Fall as Rome, set up a bunch of cities in France, planning to switch to them the entire time. Like, I want a revolution mechanic that isn't optional, it will happen every game, but you as the player know this and will plan accordingly. I see it more as adding world building and dynamism to the game.

 

[pineappledan]

Like, I want a revolution mechanic that isn't optional, it will happen every game, but you as the player know this and will plan accordingly. I see it more as adding world building and dynamism to the game.

Perhaps I’m too accustomed to playing multiplayer, but it seems to me like my strategy would basically be the following: be the last civ to have that revolution go off, and wait for all the other civs to tear apart, then mop them up individually.

As far as I can tell, this sentiment for a revolution mechanic comes from American’s perception of history, but the thing that happened with the American revolution is exceptional in almost every respect and is NOT the kind of thing that can, or should, be extrapolated from and generalized to all cultures.

Conceiving Roman Gaul’s transformation into France as a ‘revolution’ is not only inaccurate, it’s the polar opposite of what happened. The existing free city mechanic more faithfully reflects a much more common and pervasive historical phenomenon.

 

[dagriggstar]

I don't think a revolution necessarily implies civs tearing themselves apart. What if I said "rebellion" mechanic instead. I want something that would cover
a) You switch/change your government, causing rebels spawn. You can play either side of the civil war. ("French tradionalists vs French radicalists").
b) A group of cities declare their independence (This could spawn a new civ, Byzantium - Rome or Khmer - Sri Vijaya or Carthage - Phoenicia, but it could also mean new city-states or free cities or whatever)

I'm more in favour of almost a revolt timer rather than a happiness system, because I think it's easier to understand "x unrest until rebels spawn" than "my people are happy/content/unhappy". But that's a bit separate from just having the concept of revolution/rebellion in the game.

I don't envision a mechanic that only has bad consequences. Like if you play the "no revolts" strategy, simulate like historical hermit kingdoms, you should just be left behind because you never upgraded your government/culture, because staying stable means not being open to new ideas. I also don't envision a revolution as something that lasts more than 5-6 turns, not long enough for another player to conquer you. You should be stronger for having gone through the revolution than you were before.

 

[pineappledan]

Funny, you basically described a unique ability for China that I came up with, as a way to gamify the Mandate of Heaven:

Pdan's Civ 7 Civ list.xlsx

Civilizations Food/Growth,New,Food/Growth Production,Returning (or slightly changed),Production Gold/Trade,Returning from civ 6,Gold/Trade Science,Science Culture/Great People,Culture/Great People Faith/Religion,Faith/Religion Military,Military Continent,Civilization,Civ Trait,Civ infrastructure...

docs.google.com

Every time China changes governments, all of their cities take a massive loyalty hit, and have a high probability of breaking off as Free cities. But then this is counterbalanced by a large scaling bonus for population on empire, and a bonus towards reconquering those rebelling cities, so China has strong incentives to still go as big as possible.

 

[arik24]

1 keyboard controls for every option including numpad support for unit movement
2 better in game mod incompatibility reporter not "a mod is incompatible with this game version please remove one or more mods before playing"
instead it should have. "A mod is incompatible with this game version " Real Vampire" is conflict with the current game version consider removing or " Real Vampire" is in conflict with Real Roads consider removing or changing mod priority.

.