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

[BuchiTaton]

I mean, that's also a result of actual geopolitics. India and China are, here, now, actual unified countres, and Europe is not (and has never been, and even partial unifications were mostly short-lived except the Romans), so there's an assumption that India and China are naturally unified civilization, and Europe is made up of a wide disparity of different people.

It's wrong, but it's a natural assumption given recency bias.

The Arab world is a bit of an exception, but the Arab World a)was famously united for a long, long, long time and b)is often lumped together in modern popular perception in a way almost no other part of the world is.

I think Hispanic countries are in a similar situation that Arabic ones:
- Quite fast conquest of a huge area and population, followed by 300 year of direct domination.
- Forced religious conversion an subsecuent gradual acculturation (included language).
- From the perspective of the adverage outsider these countries seem to be very similar and from the inside there is an official recognition of a common history.

The main difference is that the fragmentation of Arabic Caliphates was older and dynastic related while the Spanish Empire suffered nationalistic "anti-homeland" movements, hence open "hispanic-pride" (proper hispanic not in the contradictory USA view of "hispanic") movements are worse perceived than "arabic-pride" demostrations.

 

[Patine]

I think Hispanic countries are in a similar situation that Arabic ones:
- Quite fast conquest of a huge area and population, followed by 300 year of direct domination.
- Forced religious conversion an subsecuent gradual acculturation (included language).
- From the perspective of the adverage outsider these countries seem to be very similar and from the inside there is an official recognition of a common history.

The main difference is that the fragmentation of Arabic Caliphates was older and dynastic related while the Spanish Empire suffered nationalistic "anti-homeland" movements, hence open "hispanic-pride" (proper hispanic not in the contradictory USA view of "hispanic") movements are worse perceived than "arabic-pride" demostrations.

Bolvar's dream of a united South America fell apart VERY quickly - within his lifetime. Even attempts regional unity initiatives with Spanish America are either projects of egotistical generals (twice in 19th Century Central America, specifcially), trade agreements always divided between the Revolutionary Socialists and Clerical Big Landowner-Dominated Conservatives in terms of Governments, and three regional elected Parlaiment (Central America, the Andes, and Mercosur - the last currently inoperable), which were all meant to be in the vain of the European Parliament, but, in practice, have very limited effective authority. Castro and Guevarra, also, had a vision of a Latin America unified under an Anti-U.S. Revolutionary Socialist/Communist Government that his support for the Sandinistas, the FLMN, the URNG, the 14th of June Movement, the New Jewel Movement, the ELN, EPL, and FARC, the MAS-IPSP (electorally), the Fifth Republic Movement (electorally), the Tupamaros, and numerous facitions in the Mexican, Argentinian, and Chilean Dirty Wars were obviously in pursuit of this goal.

 

[PaperPaulo99]

Epidemics as a special disaster event that triggers at high populated cities without adequate Housing and spread through trade routes, much like Black Death, Covid Pandemics and other Pandemics. (This can be implemented at Civ 6, if devs wish so...)
And there could be a new District aswell, as a Healthcare District, from which you can train Physician/Medic/Supply Convoy units, and also provides Housing, Food and increases nearby units healing per turn.
That District has 3 building tiers for increased Housing and Food, and a repeatable project of Vaccine, which when completed will slowdown or even stop an ongoing Epidemy.
That District would be available together with Apothecary (Tier 1), and its other two building tiers are Hospital (Tier 2) and Medical Laboratory (Tier 3)
Healthcare District and Apothecary requires Education (Medieval Era), Hospital requires Sanitation (Industrial Era) and Medical Laboratory requires Plastics (Atomic Era)
And there could be a new Strategic Resource aswell, named at moment as Medicinal Herb
Medicinal Herb is revealed at Irrigation (Ancient Era), require a Plantation to be worked by City and is required to build a Physician, a Medic, and a Supply Convoy
Also, Supply Convoy would require Plastics instead of Combustion, which moves this unit one era ahead, for this not being a complete nerf but a tweak Supply Convoy would heal more per turn (30HP instead of 20HP)
And the Physician is a weaker Medic line support unit by healing only 10HP per turn instead of normal 20HP per turn that Medic does (but is available 2 Eras earlier than Medic)
An Apothecary is required to build Physician Units, a Hospital is required to build Medic Units, and a Medical Laboratory is required to build Supply Convoy Units
Siege Tower upgrade path isn't anymore into Medic but to Observation Balloon instead
Observation Balloon would require Steam Power instead of Flight, being available 1 era earlier (Industrial Era)

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

honestly the best way to avoid people complaining about civilizations not getting into the game is to make it so it's possible to build any civilization from the get go. have a civilization game where you start as essentially cultureless hunter gatherers who might develop into several cultures over the course of their history, influenced by their environment.

that's what i want in civ7.

 

[Evie]

If people didn't want to debate what civs to include, we wouldn't. The very fact that those discussions are happening and by far the most in-depth discussion on the forum should spell out pretty clearly how popular new civs discussions are and how much people enjoy them.

It's at this point a real mystery how some people are so arrogant to think that people enjoying those discussions is a problem in need of solutions.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

honestly the best way to avoid people complaining about civilizations not getting into the game is to make it so it's possible to build any civilization from the get go. have a civilization game where you start as essentially cultureless hunter gatherers who might develop into several cultures over the course of their history, influenced by their environment.

that's what i want in civ7.

That's not a bad idea in of itself, but it would not work for the Civilization series. Most of the hype comes from people guessing which civilizations and leaders are making it into the game, and engagement and visibility is driven up by people debating which civs and leaders should be included. Firaxis would never drop something that has proven so fruitful for them, much less something that has become emblematic for the series.

For an actual implementation of the idea you proposed, see 'Humankind'. It's not the best-rated game.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

honestly the best way to avoid people complaining about civilizations not getting into the game is to make it so it's possible to build any civilization from the get go. have a civilization game where you start as essentially cultureless hunter gatherers who might develop into several cultures over the course of their history, influenced by their environment.

that's what i want in civ7.

So, you just mean Humankind?

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

That's not a bad idea in of itself, but it would not work for the Civilization series. Most of the hype comes from people guessing which civilizations and leaders are making it into the game, and engagement and visibility is driven up by people debating which civs and leaders should be included. Firaxis would never drop something that has proven so fruitful for them, much less something that has become emblematic for the series.

For an actual implementation of the idea you proposed, see 'Humankind'. It's not the best-rated game.

fair enough.

 

[Sostratus]

I do miss the internal road network connection mechanic and the general importance of linking your cities.

Twas a glorious day in Civ5 when I managed to finish a major road link.

I also really miss two kinds of improvements from past games: the cottage/village/town from civ4 for the concept of a tiered improvement and the more advanced improvements from Beyond Earth for the concept that improvements sometimes cost upkeep. But I would only put those in civ7 if it meshed with the rest of the system. But imagine being able to build a "village" in civ6 that provides +2 housing and some gold; these being the only tiles you could build towns on which offer +3 housing, and then you could plop a neighborhood over those which would start half constructed (and pretend all neighborhoods offer gold like Mbanzas do.) There is unexplored design space there.

 

[pineappledan]

I miss villages too.

Not enough space on the map for both districts and villages. If disctricts and villages are to make it into a single game, districts will have to be pared back and the default map size might have to increase

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I miss villages too.

Not enough space on the map for both districts and villages. If disctricts and villages are to make it into a single game, districts will have to be pared back and the default map size might have to increase

Districts should be 'pared back', though: the geographical 'footprint' of the huge majority of ancient/classical/medieval - pre-Industrial - Cities was an order of magnitude smaller than post-Industrial. I've mentioned before, a friend and I walked most of the circuit of the walls of ancient Athens in one afternoon. Today the city and its suburbs stretch clear across the Attic peninsula to Marathon!

So, for most of the game a city with all its districts should be no more than about 3 tiles wide, and all contiguous - the disconnected 'districts' scattered all over the map are, bluntly, ridiculous if they are supposed to be part of a city, and taking up the space for villages, hamlets, towns, settlements or other distinct political entities if they are not supposed to be part of the base city.

I like the concept of Districts and I like having most of the game on the map, but they gotta be done right - or at least, better - in Civ VII.

 

[Patine]

Districts should be 'pared back', though: the geographical 'footprint' of the huge majority of ancient/classical/medieval - pre-Industrial - Cities was an order of magnitude smaller than post-Industrial. I've mentioned before, a friend and I walked most of the circuit of the walls of ancient Athens in one afternoon. Today the city and its suburbs stretch clear across the Attic peninsula to Marathon!

So, for most of the game a city with all its districts should be no more than about 3 tiles wide, and all contiguous - the disconnected 'districts' scattered all over the map are, bluntly, ridiculous if they are supposed to be part of a city, and taking up the space for villages, hamlets, towns, settlements or other distinct political entities if they are not supposed to be part of the base city.

I like the concept of Districts and I like having most of the game on the map, but they gotta be done right - or at least, better - in Civ VII.

This is true. Also, no Civ iteration has every tackled, or really acknowledged, the suburban, twin city, and conurbation issues without just declaring it, "one single growing city in that area." But, perhaps that could be done as towns or villages turning, at a later point, into one or several more specialized city districts around a bigger city.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

This is true. Also, no Civ iteration has every tackled, or really acknowledged, the suburban, twin city, and conurbation issues without just declaring it, "one single growing city in that area." But, perhaps that could be done as towns or villages turning, at a later point, into one or several more specialized city districts around a bigger city.

I've argued for a 'special district' of a Settlement that does not have to start out contiguous to the 'City Districts' but might become part of a growing city later. Metropolises absorbing smaller towns and cities later is common: the Bronx and Brooklyn used to be entirely separate cities from New York City, and Berlin now includes the formerly separate settlements of Spandau and Potsdam. And, of course, Buda and Pesht used to be separate establishments on opposite sides of the Danube, now all one great metropolis of Budapest.
More to the game point, Cambridge, Mass. is now part of Greater Boston, but was originally an entirely separate 'Campus' with first Harvard, later MIT as a concentration of Science points almost unmatched anywhere else in the USA. Likewise, what better way to represent the towns of Oxford and Cambridge in Britain than as separate Campus districts with regular or Wonder Universities in them?

 

[BuchiTaton]

In some way improvements (farms, mines, pastures, etc.) could be seen as different kinds of villages (farming village, mining village, pastorial village, etc.). Still I would like a system were districts and improvements are unified in a consistent settlement mechanic. Like this...

• The function of workers/builders is absorbed by Settlers, it makes more sense that the "build charges" are part of the settlers that found villages. So for example the Settlers have 4 base "charges" that could be spended on the direct foundation of a city (cost 4), on districts (cost 2) or on villages (cost 1). Others workers/builders actions could be done at some cost by Settlers and Villages instead of spend "charges".
• Villages could be improved with buildings (like Districts), for example well, shrine, granary, sawmill, etc.
• What about the chance to turn Villages into Districts when they are right next to a City(included their others districts)? This is closer to what historical happened with a lot of towns that were absorbed by growing cities.

Also I agree with the idea that pre-industrial cities size (number of districts) should be notoriously smaller than the contemporary megalopolis.
The problem here is that the monothematic districts (science, culture, amenities, militar, etc.) avaible since early game are intuitive and usefull for the average player beyond any historical realism.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Just merge the concept of district and improvement. Would streamline a lot of things.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Also I agree with the idea that pre-industrial cities size (number of districts) should be notoriously smaller than the contemporary megalopolis.
The problem here is that the monothematic districts (science, culture, amenities, militar, etc.) avaible since early game are intuitive and usefull for the average player beyond any historical realism.

I think the solution is to either
1) limit the placements of most districts to be adjacent to the city, until you reach the Industrial Era or Urbanization
or 2) have a separate district map within the city center, that way outside of the city could be used for improvements/villages.

On the topic of villages it would be interesting if they were a type of upgrade for simple improvements like the farms/mines etc. as long as you have like 3 or more adjacent to each other. As a result of building a "farming village" trade routes to this city will receive more food and even be enhanced once you build a market, or food market, building.

 

[BuchiTaton]

The need to put districts directly adjacent to the city center or another already built district in the same city seems to be the most realist option. But again it comes the question if this is the more "gameplay wise" way, since it could limit more the options to maximize adjacence bonus. Personally I would prefer the more limited historical way over the hideous disconected classical megalopolies in CIV6, but I am not a "minmaxing" player anyway.

So with the acknowledgement that "ugly" CIV6 cities have a gameplay mechanics justification. I would still like to limit the size of cities in historical terms:
- Agree with @Boris Gudenuf suggestion of limit the distance from the city center that a district could be placed, this linked to cargo tranportation techs and terrain features like navigable bodies of waters.
- Have early "theme-mixed" districts in opposition to late "theme-specialized" districts. For example in most cultures historicaly city centers have right next each others things like the goverment palace, some main temple, central market, etc. So what about City Center as the early source of science, culture and money. Or the Neighborhood where traditional Workshops are pretty much the own workers houses, contrary to the massive specialized Industrial Zones.
- Some districts like Holy Site should be more unique For example inverting their relation to religion founding, so you can establish a Holy Site only by action of a Great Prophet at the moment a religion is founded.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The need to put districts directly adjacent to the city center or another already built district in the same city seems to be the most realist option. But again it comes the question if this is the more "gameplay wise" way, since it could limit more the options to maximize adjacence bonus. Personally I would prefer the more limited historical way over the hideous disconected classical megalopolies in CIV6, but I am not a "minmaxing" player anyway.

So with the acknowledgement that "ugly" CIV6 cities have a gameplay mechanics justification. I would still like to limit the size of cities in historical terms:
- Agree with @Boris Gudenuf suggestion of limit the distance from the city center that a district could be placed, this linked to cargo tranportation techs and terrain features like navigable bodies of waters.
- Have early "theme-mixed" districts in opposition to late "theme-specialized" districts. For example in most cultures historicaly city centers have right next each others things like the goverment palace, some main temple, central market, etc. So what about City Center as the early source of science, culture and money. Or the Neighborhood where traditional Workshops are pretty much the own workers houses, contrary to the massive specialized Industrial Zones.
- Some districts like Holy Site should be more unique For example inverting their relation to religion founding, so you can establish a Holy Site only by action of a Great Prophet at the moment a religion is founded.

I've posted before: drop the adjacency bonuses from Districts down to Buildings/structures in the Districts so the placement of the Districts is not artificially constrained as it is now.

That also ties in neatly with the idea of "theme-mixed" districts: you might start out with a City Center that includes the Palace (mandatory), a Temple, a Ceremonial Square/Monument, and a central Market. Later, the Market moves to a separate District, gets an adjacency bonus for being next to the City Center AND when you build, say, a Caravanserai (Trade Increasing building) in the same District both it and the Market get adjacency bonuses. By crafting the various bonuses well, the combinations of structures within Districts or in adjacent Districts should change as transportation and technology change, and possibly even with Civic and Cultural changes, so that your cities remain in a state of dynamic flux rather that static, as now in Civ VI.

Eventually, a large city might well end up with 'themed' Commercial, Harbor, Science/Educational Districts. etc, maximizing the adjacency bonuses in each, but that should normally be nearly impossible with a starting city.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

- Have early "theme-mixed" districts in opposition to late "theme-specialized" districts. For example in most cultures historicaly city centers have right next each others things like the goverment palace, some main temple, central market, etc. So what about City Center as the early source of science, culture and money. Or the Neighborhood where traditional Workshops are pretty much the own workers houses, contrary to the massive specialized Industrial Zones.
- Some districts like Holy Site should be more unique For example inverting their relation to religion founding, so you can establish a Holy Site only by action of a Great Prophet at the moment a religion is founded.

I'd rather the "theme mixed" districts be reserved for unique districts for certain civs, rather than making them generic for all civs. It would also help to make unique districts feel more unique than they did in Civ 6. They already experimented with Gaul having an Industrial Zone being able to defend itself like an Encampment, but they could take the next step and make it to where you can choose to have both a workshop and an armory. Korean Seowons could have both a shrine and a university etc.

 

[BuchiTaton]

I'd rather the "theme mixed" districts be reserved for unique districts for certain civs, rather than making them generic for all civs. It would also help to make unique districts feel more unique than they did in Civ 6. They already experimented with Gaul having an Industrial Zone being able to defend itself like an Encampment, but they could take the next step and make it to where you can choose to have both a workshop and an armory. Korean Seowons could have both a shrine and a university etc.

This is another option I have also some examples like:
> MAIN STREET (American UD)

* Its buildings are Town Hall (Meeting House), Saloon (Theater) and General Store (Bank).​

* Double immigrant attraction.​

> CALPULLI (Aztec UD)

* Its buildings are Chinampa (Farm), Telpochcalli (Barrack) and Tianguis (Market).​

* Can be build on lakes for extra food.​

> WITZOB (Maya UD)

* Its buildings are Observatory (Library), Ballcourt (Arena) and Pyramid (Temple).​

* Extra science from adjacent natural wonder.​

> TAMBO (Inca UD)

* Its buildings are Kallanka (Fort), Qullqa (Granary) and Acllahuasi (Worshop).​

* Can be build on mountains linking trade routes.​

> HACIENDA (Mexican UD)

* Its buildings are Ingenio (Plantation), Capilla (Shrine) and Lienzo (Stable).​

* Extra production from adjacent farm or pasture.​

> MEDINA (Berber UD)

* Its buildings are Kasbah (Fort), Riad (Resort) and Zawiyah (Monastery).​

* Double the yield from Dyes, Olives, Citrus and Salt in the same city.​

Still this problem about regular specialized distritcs is that some of them feels kind of forced, particularly early game. Futhermore the bonus they provide causes the need to build them in absurd number and positions since early game. For example ancient Campus occupying a tile with only a Library constrats with real ancient libraries that were mainly part of a Royal Pallace or Temple (after all early scholars arised from scribes and priests), even the Roman Public Libraries were more an exception than a rule for the classical world so they will fit more as part of some unique Roman district. Similarly the Monastery could be avaible to religions with the Monasticism tenet, leaving the science specialized Campus distric (University Building) as avaible only until Medieval Era.