• Civ7 is already available! Happy playing :).

Which age are you most looking forward to playing?

Which age are you most looking forward to playing?

  • Antiquity

    Votes: 33 34.0%
  • Exploration

    Votes: 26 26.8%
  • Modern

    Votes: 20 20.6%
  • All three equally

    Votes: 18 18.6%

  • Total voters
    97
Voted equally to my own surprise

Generally speaking very very excited about Diplomacy and Influence. I think these are probably the best mechanics in Civ 7

Antiquity for
- the Civs and its the period in history I’m most interested in
- first exploration of the map is always fun in Civ games
- initial district planning
- I tend to like the wonders in this age the most but maybe wonders will stay interesting in this version of Civ

Exploration for
- more map exploration
- overbuilding
- treasury fleets

Modern for
- factories & Railroads / Economic victory feels like my favourite at the time.
 
Good to see this is pretty even. I voted Exploration because the treasure fleets and economic system seems pretty fun, also my favorite part of any game is setting sail and settling on a fresh continent. I'm pretty hyped all around, Looking forward to having modern age feel new and fresh and less of a slog as Modern/Atomic/Internet eras have in the past
 
What I don't like in Civ7 is that seems to start right away with the beginning of the age
They did a time jump in the stream. They said overseas exploration usually kicks in about 40 turns into the game so that sounds pretty reasonable.
 
Sigh.
I'm torn between all three Ages.

I did my graduate work on the Hellenistic/Alexandrian period of classical history, and I've always loved the 'blank map' feel of the early game - seeing and finding everything for the first time is a thrill that never fades.
BUT
I also spent years researching the late 17th - 18th century and have recently been reading a lot of new books on medieval British and French history. As much as any other period in human history, this is when men's eyes got opened to new ways of doing things socially, politically, militarily and culturally
BUT
For the past 15 years I've been doing archival research into aspects of the 20th century, and I've lived through enough of modern history to be intrigued by how the game will handle it - from Robber Barons o the 19th century to Tyrants of the 20th and people's reactions to them - Progressive, Regressive, Fascist and Anti-Fa, Commie and Capitalist Pigs (funny how the same animal is used to malign two supposedly different groups).

Mostly, I'm hoping the game succeeds in its stated purpose of keeping the last Age as interesting as the first. If they do, this will be the first Civ since IV that I play as much of the last 150 turns as I do of the first 150, instead of the ratio being about 10 to 1 in favor of the early game, as it has been in Civ VI . . .
 
I picked antiquity because I like the civs the most but I’m really interested in trying the exploration mechanics. I’m also hoping that all three are equally fun and that they’ve solved the fullness of the later games in the modern era.

(I’m also eager to see what the ages system and the tweaking the various mechanics can do for scenarios.)
 
So looks like antiquity and exploration are neck-and-neck but modern is lagging somewhat? Maybe less being known about the civs in modern?
 
Antiquity, mainly because it’s the beginning of everything and when decisions feel most important. There are also more wonders during that era :p. However, mechanically, I prefer the Exploration Age. I truly enjoy the Economic and Scientific victories that come from it.
 
So looks like antiquity and exploration are neck-and-neck but modern is lagging somewhat? Maybe less being known about the civs in modern?
Wouldn't it be ironic, though, if with all their efforts, they still can't do anything about late-game apathy? That that's just built into the human psyche.
 
Wouldn't it be ironic, though, if with all their efforts, they still can't do anything about late-game apathy? That that's just built into the human psyche.
I'm skeptical that they have done enough to stop snowballing if that was their goal... But I think maybe there will be more info on the modern age soon that might change people's thoughts?
 
I'm skeptical that they have done enough to stop snowballing if that was their goal
I think they kind of put themselves in a no-win situation. You can only stop "snowballing" at the cost of making the player feel his or her efforts are inconsequential. Insofar as you equip the human player to (through good play) carry over more from a previous era or navigate the crisis less deleteriously, you've reintroduced snowballing back into the game.

I myself am a player for whom they didn't need to fix that. As I've mentioned before on these forums, I save all of my games, and one of my folders is "call it a win." I'm perfectly happy with the games in that folder. Oh, and another one is called "quits," and I wouldn't have been happier playing those to their bitter end.
 
Last edited:
I would say Antiquity and Modern.
Not sure why, but that "Distant lands" story in Exploration does not resonate with me...
 
I voted "All three equaly". Mostly because one age does not "invalidate" the one previously, but "just" add some mechanisms. What you do in antiquity is still relevant to exploration age (building commanders, settling the best spots, etc...), just as modern still use most of was you did in exploration.

Therefore is see it as a "harmonious" game flow, where you start simple, and get more to do as the game unfurls.
 
I'm skeptical that they have done enough to stop snowballing if that was their goal... But I think maybe there will be more info on the modern age soon that might change people's thoughts?
I am also skeptical of this, but what I am hopeful they have achieved is making the modern age feel competitive. So far though, from what I have seen, I think that they have deterred snowballing. But we will see. If the modern age is just as exciting as the exploration age, I will be thrilled.
 
Top Bottom