What needs to be done?

[Krikkit1]

I'm fairly new to the game, but I'd say one of the things that I find the most frustrating at the moment is that there are a lot of game mechanics where you just can't find proper info on how it actually works in the game. I get that Civ is no longer a PC game first and foremost, which explains the overall direction they take with the UI, but even so there is still so much information that is just not available at all. If you want to actually understand the game mechanics and what drives them, then you're currently just out of luck. There are too many headscratchers right now.

There are also many systems, such as setting up trade routes, that just feel very clunky at the moment.

Again, I'm aware that I won't be getting a PC-centric UI overhaul ala Old World for the game, but there really needs to be more clarity about the game mechanics.

Always been a problem with civ…doesn’t make it any less of a problem though.

 

[Smegger213]

I'm fairly new to the game, but I'd say one of the things that I find the most frustrating at the moment is that there are a lot of game mechanics where you just can't find proper info on how it actually works in the game. I get that Civ is no longer a PC game first and foremost, which explains the overall direction they take with the UI, but even so there is still so much information that is just not available at all. If you want to actually understand the game mechanics and what drives them, then you're currently just out of luck. There are too many headscratchers right now.

There are also many systems, such as setting up trade routes, that just feel very clunky at the moment.

Again, I'm aware that I won't be getting a PC-centric UI overhaul ala Old World for the game, but there really needs to be more clarity about the game mechanics.

With Trade Routes. At least, now, all you have to do is when you build a Merchant. You just pick which town / city you want to send the Merchant to. Then the Merchant automatically goes there. Then you activate the start trade route option when the Merchant gets there.
Before, you used to have to manually send the Merchant to the Town / City.

 

[aieeegrunt]

AI in Civ took a massive nosedive after IV. This is an area that should be the priority

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Water sources seems a good idea...
always if water is actually wet...
some unit could get some xp and learn to traverse shallow water, by swimming maybe.
A tanky knight should just drown on the other hand...
China had the Great wall?
Europe had Castle with water MOATS!

new unit, the WANDERER, can search for natural water seeps, get an initial well, instead of a STUPID ALTAR,
and maybe get some meaning of life in the meantime...

ROME was founded on a SACRED HOT, FRIZZY WATER spring, hence the secret, sacred name of ROME..

if 1UPT is to survive then AI needs to evolve WING commander formations tactics, scorpion tactics, and a WHOLE LOT MORE.
This will naturally alter the foremost semplicity which was given by a 2D map reading, and no need for AI formations.
Just point A to point B and IF there is impassable terrain (water) then you need a HARBOUR to produce transport ships.

1UPT AI will have to deal with the 1UPT complexity and static ships with no more move should still be able to embark or transfer, disembark, possibly DOUBLE the cargo capacity for each passing unit (LAND BRIDGE)

A Commander could add tactics, NOT BONUSES. To Air, Land, or Sea units.
Some sea ships suould basically LEARN to behave like LAND WORKERS that needs to build a ROAD... Sea WORKERS basically needs to get on the line between point A and point B and allow troops to move.

Sea, land, and Air bridges, spearheads AI TACTICS are needed because 1UPT is too fragile to break a chockepoint defence line (make Mountains PASSABLE will EASE the process!!! )Because it will always be 1 VS 1... so ONE strong unit can in theory STALL an entire PERSIAN WAR ELEPHANTS ADVANCE with one SPARTAN. (maybe some archers up a Mountain could EASE the path...)

This path design was taken AGES ago. When did Civ V come out?

What needs to be done is to GET RID of Civ V mechanics and MOVE ON.

But start from the BASICS.... a WWII scenario, an ancient Mesopothamia scenario, Middle age Japan...
at least 10 Basic scenarios... TLS Earth... and SIMPLICITY...
if the AI isn't SWIFT, there's something wrong... Simplicity means GAMEPLAY...

End game minimap and other embellishments are satisfactory and give a sense of rewards...
I've never heard gamers fatigue in finishing games prior to Civ V - VI. Never.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Re-start from scracth, evolve, end Civ VII complete roll-out in one more year MAX
(3x Main updates, paid EXPANSIONS, 1x each semester)

Now move on from the old Civ V 2D board map, and actually try make a proper
Civ VIII, with EVERY feature that was in Civ IV.

Retain new Voronin map gen,
Reduce all assetts to a bare minimum library from civ IV, and evolve those for the new engine
Translate the new post V assets and do the same thing.

Throw away all the complicated rules introduced with V and go back to semplicity.
Passable Mountains
Water is wet
etc.

Civ VII is done as it is.
There's too much to change in the mindset that got up to here.

Moderator Action: This is outside the scope of this thread. Please do not threadjack. leif

 

[Gorbles]

Re-start from scracth, evolve, end Civ VII complete roll-out in one more year MAX
(3x Main updates, paid EXPANSIONS, 1x each semester)

How would you, uh, resource this?

 

[aieeegrunt]

How would you, uh, resource this?

I mean it sounds awesome, but ya I don’t know if you can do that in a year

 

[StargazingDog]

To answer the question “what needs to be done”: offer full refunds and take a year to actually finish the game. Stop browsing Reddit and Discord to crowdsource the game, and find someone with the will to create an actual 1.0 version of the game.
Moderator Action: Please read the OP, this is not within the scope of this thread. There are plenty of thread to post this in, this is not one of them. leif

 

[disjointaccount]

Random, non-exhaustive wishlist of things I'd like added/changed in no particular order (and to be clear, I really like the game in its current state):
- Espionage is the biggest thing that's in need of a total overhaul imo. Currently feels so unengaging and flat. Quite liked VI's system; it wasn't perfect but it'd be a big step up from the current one
- Religion very closely follows espionage on the list of things needing reworks
- More flexiblity around legacy paths. I don't hate them as much as some do, but more options are always appreciated. Even just more civs having unique ways to complete a given path would be nice
- More civs, to fill out the "historical" path options, as well as cover parts of the world that are still a bit underrepresented. And Scotland
- Fourth age. I know this is contentious, but I'm a believer and I think if done right (and with a bit of TLC shown to modern in the process), its implementation could work wonders for the endgame. And it just pains me a bit to not have the Cold War
- Scotland
- Edit: Oh and more Steam achievements. Ones for the DLC leaders as well as a "challenge" achievement for each leader or civ like VI had

I think those are all my biggies? Past that it's just like, continual UI/UX/QoL stuff, which they've been pretty consistent with so far anyway. I think Scotland should definitely be added to the game though.

 

[Haig]

I would like to see the attribute skill tree removed or become optional.

Does the game really need another layer of bonuses to yields and such.

I feel the game is too bloated with bonus skills and abilities.

 

[Xandinho]

I would like to see the attribute skill tree removed or become optional.

Does the game really need another layer of bonuses to yields and such.

I feel the game is too bloated with bonus skills and abilities.

I believe many people enjoy bonus trees. This started with the Social Policies in Civ5, which many players liked, and it returned as Governors in Civ6. The attribute trees are simply Civ7’s version of that concept, but without the tedious micromanagement of Governors.

 

[MutilationWave]

I believe many people enjoy bonus trees. This started with the Social Policies in Civ5, which many players liked, and it returned as Governors in Civ6. The attribute trees are simply Civ7’s version of that concept, but without the tedious micromanagement of Governors.

I like the attribute trees and how they relate to narrative events. Hated the governors.

 

[Leucarum]

Governors were fine. Attributes are less fiddly at least

 

[stealth_nsk]

I like the attribute trees and how they relate to narrative events. Hated the governors.

Yeah, Governors were very Civ6 take on attributes - with micromanagement of juggling governors between cities.

 

[Evolena]

Yet the effects of Governors were more varied than this or that way to increase a raw yield from an Attribute.

 

[Siptah]

Yet the effects of Governors were more varied than this or that way to increase a raw yield from an Attribute.

The governors also had a clear meta though, and you didn't earn different points, i.e., you could always go the same route each game. And because the governors and their trees were so incredibly unbalanced, it often felt like a chore that you had to do instead of picking "nice" bonuses whenever you get the appropriate point to spend.

That said: some more interesting abilities wouldn't hurt.

 

[Evolena]

That said: some more interesting abilities wouldn't hurt.

That was my implicit point, not stating a preference on one or the other mechanically

 

[UWHabs]

I kind of like the attribute trees more now that they nerfed a couple of those OP spots. They give you some nice bonuses, something more than a rounding error in your empire, and there's a few nodes you can chase, but it's not like missing out on them is costing your empire. I do wish there were maybe a few more ways to get attribute points just by playing the game, sort of like a "if you have less than 3 economic attribute points in the game and complete a gold building with at least 4 adjacency, get an econ point". They still need a little bit of balance, it's annoying how some nodes on the science tree give you 5 science and some give you 90 at times.

 

[m_mus]

- Religion still awaits its overhaul
- The suzerainty of established city-states should be contestable.
- The UI still needs massive improvements in certain regards:

• The civilopedia needs to operate with quicklinks ... just as it had in Civ6. Nice to read the entry for a certain civilization and seeing the thumbnails of their unique buildings, units, etc ... but it would be so much better if I could click on them and be transported to the assorted civilopedia-entry!
• The civilopedia needs to be more useful in some of its entries. For example, when I wanted to look up certain civics of Silla, all the entry for them gave was its flavour-text, but no actual description of its immediate effects and no reference to the traditions unlocked by them.
• I want a "Commerce-Hub" that shows not only, which trade-routes are possible, but also: which trade-routes do I currently have? What do I earn by it, what does the receiver get for it? How many trade-routes are sent to me? From which player, to which city? Etc.
• I also want to properly see which cities are connected to which towns (yes, mods do that already, but I want it in basegame.) & [though this is mechanical, I know] I want to be able to pick which cities are supported in their food-supply by which town.
• I want to actually "see" the traderoute-range of my cities / towns, so I can judge for certain before founding a settlement, if they'll have a road connection to my empire or not.
• I want way, way more lenses. And they seem easy to implement, judging by the mod(s) that were able to do that right shortly after relase.

All these bullet-points of the UI-whishlist are driven by the conviction: If you actually want me to engage with a 4x-game, which means theory-crafting and puzzling about the most optimal strategy, the game needs to provide me the information necessary so my mind can get involved!

 

[bigjim1]

Leaving aside all the minor tweaks (and there are lots of great ideas here), the thing I miss most from earlier games (Civ IV being the best at this, imho) is having to make hard choices. Particularly when it came to governments. These now seem far too complicated with lots of little nuances, but not enough clear differences.

E.g. in Civ IV you could maximise science by becoming a democracy; political and intellectual freedom boosted your research. But your citizens hated wars (especially if you declared them; they were a bit more tolerant if you were attacked). If you fought on for too long, your citizens got unhappy, productivity fell, then riots broke out, buildings were destroyed and eventually the city might rebel and join another civ. So you couldn't be a high-tech warmonger. You had to choose: science or war (and switching governments too often was fraught with the risk of anarchy = more happiness, etc.). Autocratic governments = less war weariness but also less science. Similar mechanisms affected other aspects (e.g. more religion gave you more happiness but less science, etc.)

The original Avalon Hill board game that partly inspired the whole PC game series was built on a simple, fundamental trade-off (more people, less money, Vs more money but a smaller population). Personally, I'd like Civ to get back to making players face slightly sharper either/or decisions.