What leaders and/or nations do you want in Civilization VII?

[pokiehl]

I think, therefore, that especially in regards to Unique aspects, the game has to find a way of better balancing specific historical aspects of the Civs with the requirement (or the preference) that they be at least marginally applicable over a much wider time span than they actually were.

I don't think this is a valid point against civs designed around one period/era/whatever. The only ephemeral aspect of a civ's design is really the unit. Infrastructure is permanent from its unlock, and abilities are game-spanning as well.

 

[pineappledan]

As you say, an additional unique unit adds a lot of unique flair without adding feature bloat.

the UA/ULA designs in civ 6, like much of the rest of the game, were ungodly hodgepodges; piles of disconnected and half-baked ideas thrown together. As an example, The Maori UA has 7 sub-abilities and Kupe’s ULA has an additional 4. However, I think the UA/ULA split was a good idea done poorly. More components can be done well if they give fewer, stronger bonuses.

Furthermore, the place to cut systems is not on civs, who need powerful and unique bonuses so they play differently from each other. This gives dept h and replay value to the game. The place to cut bloat is in policies, unique city-states, adjacencies, unique great people, etc.

 

[pokiehl]

I don't know what "sub-abilities" refers to, and I think Maori was actually one of the most fun and interestingly designed civs in the game. They are really popular in general so it's strange to point them out as bad.

I don't think reducing ability bloat is cutting down on gameplay systems. When civ and leader abilities are so overtuned and unwieldy, it railroads players into a singular style with that civ, often heavily dependent on the map start, leading to a lot of frustrating rerolling. I think tuning down civ/leader abilities should be among the top priorities of the devs for Civ 7, and it seems like they already know that. Ed Beach himself has commented that Civ 6 abilities got too complex and strong as the game went on.

 

[pineappledan]

I don't know what "sub-abilities" refers to, and I think Maori was actually one of the most fun and interestingly designed civs in the game

Maori:

• Starts with Sailing and Shipbuilding unlocked and the ability to enter Ocean tiles.
• +5 Combat Strength and +2 Movement for embarked units.
• Unimproved Woodsand Rainforests grant +1 Production, increasing to +2 Production with Mercantilism and +3 Production with Conservation.
• +1 Food from Fishing Boats.
• Building a Fishing Boat triggers a Culture Bomb, claiming surrounding tiles.
• Resources cannot be harvested.
• Great Writers cannot be earned.

Kupe:

• Starts the game in the Ocean.
• +2 Science and +2 Culture per turn before the first city is settled.
• The first settled city receives a free Builder and +1 Population.
• The Palace grants +3 Housing and +1 Amenity.

You decry the bloat, yet think one of the most bloated civs is well-designed? Sounds like we disagree on what bloat means, and what it means when a dev says the abilities are too “complex”. Complex /= powerful. You also cite how abilities are dependent on starts, yet say you like one of the most map-dependent civs.

 

[pokiehl]

Maori:
Starts with Sailing and Shipbuilding unlocked and the ability to enter Ocean tiles.
+5 Combat Strength and +2 Movement for embarked units.
Unimproved Woodsand Rainforests grant +1 Production, increasing to +2 Production with Mercantilism and +3 Production with Conservation.
+1 Food from Fishing Boats.
Building a Fishing Boat triggers a Culture Bomb, claiming surrounding tiles.
Resources cannot be harvested.
Great Writers cannot be earned.

Kupe:
Starts the game in the Ocean.
+2 Science and +2 Culture per turn before the first city is settled.
The first settled city receives a free Builder and +1 Population.
The Palace grants +3 Housing and +1 Amenity.

You decry the bloat, yet think one of the most bloated civs is good? Sounds like we disagree on what bloat means. You also cite how abilities are dependent on starts, yet say you like one of the most map-dependent civs.

Maori's design has a lot of components to it, but a lot of that revolves around the interesting maluses. I don't really consider them map-dependent at all because the ocean start lets you choose your own way. Ocean start is the star of the show here. Makes them very exciting to play. It feels different than just picking Russia, not seeing Tundra, and hitting "reroll."

I don't get the sense that you've ever played Civ 6 from your posts, and your focus on Civ 5 in your post history; if you have, have you ever played as Civ 6 Maori?

 

[pineappledan]

Ah yes, Russia, the civ with 4 abilities in its UA. Māori are dependent on forest and fish, and are blocked from generating great works, and must instead depend on culture from the map. That makes them map dependent.

But no, I haven’t actually played a game with the Maori. And no, I haven’t played more than a few games of civ 6, because it didn’t feel like an improvement over civ 4 or 5.

 

[pokiehl]

Ah yes, Russia, the civ with 4 abilities in its UA.

You don't need to always be so sarcastic. There's a whole lot more to a Civ being bloated, too terrain-dependent, or otherwise unfun than the number of words used in it's ability description.

And no, I haven’t played more than a few games of civ 6,

Yeah I figured. It's hard for me to consider your criticisms from that perspective because you don't really have a lot of experience with it. It's silly to me to be so dismissive of Maori just by counting how many words their ability has. Reading is one thing, but seeing how it feels when you play is another thing. That's why making good mods requires a lot of playtesting beyond theorycraft.

Māori are dependent on forest and fish, and are blocked from generating great works, and must instead depend on culture from the map. That makes them map dependent.

This is case in point about not really understanding the game. They aren't dependent on fish at all. Fishing Boats aren't just for Fish, and forests are all over the map. Even if they were map dependent, the Ocean beginning lets you find the right spot without endless restarting. It keeps you more engaged. Also, Great Works are not a major source of Culture in general--Faith is really more important in general for Culture.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

My opinion:
Civs, or at least 80% of them, should be map independent, or not have to rely on the map, as @pineappledan said earlier.

Also, who would you add as a leader of Germany?

 

[pineappledan]

Yeah I figured. It's hard for me to consider your criticisms from that perspective because you don't really have a lot of experience with it.

I don't need to play several hours of Maori to see that a civ design that needs 11 different abilities before even accounting for the tech-locked components is not hanging together well. It's emblematic of a larger problem with civ 6 design, too many layers of small bonuses and mechanics congealed together. Complexity for its own sake.

I have played enough civ 6 me to consider it a failed experiment re: 4X design, and in general a step back for the series. One of the few redeeming ideas I think that game had was the UA/ULA split, which allows the franchise to depict both the broad and specific aspects of a given civ.

That's why making good mods requires a lot of playtesting beyond theorycraft.

This isn't a discussion about modding civ 6 though, it's about what you'd want to see in an entirely new civ 7. While testing and theorycrafting in civ 6 is valuable perspective, it's not more valid than modding experience with another civ game, or any other 4X game, for that matter.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

This isn't a discussion about modding civ 6 though, it's about what you'd want to see in an entirely new civ 7. While testing and theorycrafting in civ 6 is valuable perspective, it's not more valid than modding experience with another civ game, or any other 4X game, for that matter.

Dan here is true

 

[pokiehl]

I don't need to play several hours of Maori

You should probably at least play something period before criticizing the gameplay elements of it though.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Am I the only one here who actually like relatively broad-spectrum civs that draws on multiple aspects of a people or area's history, and is not enamored of narrow-focused civs that are all about representing the one very specific political incarnation of the same region or people?

For the most part, no. There are some exceptions.

If civ 6’s UA and ULA dichotomy is used in a more coherent fashion you can have both the broad and the specific. Civ 6 already introduced a 2nd UU tied to certain leaders, but didn’t give them to everyone, and didn’t give leaders unique infrastructure.

Both Pachacuti and Kristina got their own unique infrastructure. I'd like to see more get them in civ 7.

Furthermore, the place to cut systems is not on civs, who need powerful and unique bonuses so they play differently from each other. This gives dept h and replay value to the game. The place to cut bloat is in policies, unique city-states, adjacencies, unique great people, etc.

Does anybody else want to get rid of unique city-states or unique great people and go back to generic ones? I sure don't.

Maori:

• Starts with Sailing and Shipbuilding unlocked and the ability to enter Ocean tiles.
• +5 Combat Strength and +2 Movement for embarked units.
• Unimproved Woodsand Rainforests grant +1 Production, increasing to +2 Production with Mercantilism and +3 Production with Conservation.
• +1 Food from Fishing Boats.
• Building a Fishing Boat triggers a Culture Bomb, claiming surrounding tiles.
• Resources cannot be harvested.
• Great Writers cannot be earned.

Kupe:

• Starts the game in the Ocean.
• +2 Science and +2 Culture per turn before the first city is settled.
• The first settled city receives a free Builder and +1 Population.
• The Palace grants +3 Housing and +1 Amenity.

You decry the bloat, yet think one of the most bloated civs is well-designed? Sounds like we disagree on what bloat means, and what it means when a dev says the abilities are too “complex”. Complex /= powerful. You also cite how abilities are dependent on starts, yet say you like one of the most map-dependent civs.

I can agree with you that the Maori probably are the most bloated civ, when it comes to abilities in the game. But that doesn't mean they aren't fun.
If anything, I'd move the fishing boat abilities to Indonesia and it would be just as fitting. But otherwise, I think they are fine.

Also, who would you add as a leader of Germany?

Frederick the Great

 

[Caesar of Bread]

For the most part, no. There are some exceptions.

Both Pachacuti and Kristina got their own unique infrastructure. I'd like to see more get them in civ 7.

Does anybody else want to get rid of unique city-states or unique great people and go back to generic ones? I sure don't.

I agree with you. Currently arguing with the co-creator of the Civ game we’re creating over Unique GP (I like Unique Great People, he doesn’t)

I can agree with you that the Maori probably are the most bloated civ, when it comes to abilities in the game. But that doesn't mean they are fun.
If anything, I'd move the fishing boat abilities to Indonesia and it would be just as fitting. But otherwise, I think they are fine.

True

Frederick the Great

A fellow Frederick fan.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Say what you might about the Maori, they have one quality that sets them apart from the other Civ VI Civs: they always start on terrain that makes use of most of their Uniques, namely the Sea. Oh, you can get stuck in a land-locked Arctic sea sometimes, and may have to spend several turns trying to find someplace to plant your first city, but you are still 'way ahead of, say, Russia or Norway in the middle of a desert at the equator on a continental land mass: Russia's Tundra bonuses and Norway's ocean-going benefits become so much garbage.

Friedrich II is what pops into everybody's mind as a Leader of Germany (possibly after Bismarck), but I'd go back two generations:

Friedrich Wilhelm, der Große Kurfürst ("The Great Elector"). He really put Prussia on the map as The Great Power in northern Germany with an efficient bureaucracy and strong emphasis on trade and domestic manufacturing, welcoming in a mass of Huegenot tradesmen driven out of France by one of Louis XIV's more idiotic decrees, started the excellence of the Prussian Army, and was no mean general himself, although overshadowed by his grandson in the following century.
Potentially, then, a German Leader who emphasizes Trade as well as Industry, welcomes Immigration, and gets more and better military units out of his taxes than most leaders in any Era.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I agree with you. Currently arguing with the co-creator of the Civ game we’re creating over Unique GP (I like Unique Great People, he doesn’t)

My main complaint is that Great Prophets only do one thing, found a religion. I hope they can do more in Civ 7. I've made up a list of possible abilities for the current Great Prophets in Civ 6.

Say what you might about the Maori, they have one quality that sets them apart from the other Civ VI Civs: they always start on terrain that makes use of most of their Uniques, namely the Sea. Oh, you can get stuck in a land-locked Arctic sea sometimes, and may have to spend several turns trying to find someplace to plant your first city, but you are still 'way ahead of, say, Russia or Norway in the middle of a desert at the equator on a continental land mass: Russia's Tundra bonuses and Norway's ocean-going benefits become so much garbage.

To be fair, one of my best Russian games I ever had was with Desert Folklore as a pantheon.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

My main complaint is that Great Prophets only do one thing, found a religion. I hope they can do more in Civ 7. I've made up a list of possible abilities for the current Great Prophets in Civ 6.

Can I see?

 

[Patine]

Am I the only one here who actually like relatively broad-spectrum civs that draws on multiple aspects of a people or area's history, and is not enamored of narrow-focused civs that are all about representing the one very specific political incarnation of the same region or people?

I defintely agree with you on this, and always have. UU's, UA's, and UI's, as well LUA's, LUU's, and LUI's, together should have a significant amount of usefulness, collectively across a large arc of history, not just the snapshot of the given leader's life and times, with no meaningful strong abilities before or after. I admit, though, it does tend to handicap civ's with much smaller attested history, but creativiity is key, there, I think (like, as a random example, some hunting bonus for Lakota or Cree could translate, effectively, to a preservationist eco-hunting in the Atomic Age without necessarily having to change the specific bonus).

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I defintely agree with you on this, and always have. UU's, UA's, and UI's, as well LUA's, LUU's, and LUI's, together should have a significant amount of usefulness, collectively across a large arc of history, not just the snapshot of the given leader's life and times, with no meaningful strong abilities before or after. I admit, though, it does tend to handicap civ's with much smaller attested history, but creativiity is key, there, I think (like, as a random example, some hunting bonus for Lakota or Cree could translate, effectively, to a preservationist eco-hunting in the Atomic Age without necessarily having to change the specific bonus).

- As an example, the Nez Perce just southeast of me have re-established horse breeding ranches on land in their old homeland in eastern Oregon and are teaching their kids how to properly raise horses - something the tribe was famous for Back in the Day. In other words, a Unique related to horse breeding and use, which would be appropriate for a Nez Perce Civ, could also translate into a Happiness/Culture modifier after 'Horse' no longer has much use as a Strategic Resource.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Here are different things.
Civ covering different periods is OK, as also is the use of historical inspiration for some bonus or mechanic even when those do not fit the historical period.

The whole point was that the in-game "Indonesia" was clearly inspired by the Majapahit period turning the use of the name Indonesia gratuitous when there are not proper elements from the contemporary country. If Firaxis at least tried to add some clearly contemporary elements to their design like they do with India the whole "we use this name because nobody know what Majapahit is" would be less in the face.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Also, who would you add as a leader of Germany?

Frederick II, not the Great of Prussia, but the Holy Roman Emperor:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_II,_Holy_Roman_Emperor?wprov=sfla1
He could lead Italy or Sicily or both as well