Yeah, I want regroup style, but with the commanders at least staying where they ended up. And then basically every unit should just shuttle into the nearest commander.
Which Age Transition mode do you use the most?
- Thread starter Leucarum
- Start date
Yeah, I want regroup style, but with the commanders at least staying where they ended up. And then basically every unit should just shuttle into the nearest commander.
Elhoim
Iron Tower Studio Dev
TBH, at this I really, really want an almost fresh start in each age. If they are working as 3 games, it would be interesting to start almost anew and revive the feeling of early game in the other 2 ages (while keeping the the story of the world compared to just play 3 separate games via menu).
King Flevance
Deity
I use continuity and mostly refrain from "gaming/cheesing" the system. I like the feel much better but I do see value in regroup. But I dont think regroup actually does much to fight the 'snowball' so I just accept it and enjoy units and everything just feeling more consistent.
The Economy
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2012
- Messages
- 130
This is something you could always do in previous Civ's too though, and which I often did. Build a bunch of triremes, park them, and then mass upgrade when I have the tech to navigate oceans.
The cheesy part is in civ 7 your boats are upgraded for free and even in neutral territory. It’s so much easier compared to civ 6.
marius_kaparius
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2016
- Messages
- 474
I currently use Continuity but I’m looking forward to Collapse. Imagine if you could see the collapse play out without cutting to a loading screen. It would be epic!
As epic as seeing your units die to the plague at the end of exploration?
Leucarum
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,839
Or more likely the stuff that happens offscreen is just more extreme...
Yeah, I'd be more in favour of full continuity if your boats and units all merged forward as like "level 0" units of the new era, and you more or less had to pay the full price of a new unit to upgrade them to the base version in the new edition. So your "level 0 Cog" would not have the ability to enter deep ocean until upgraded, then it doesn't really matter if I bring forward 1 or 21.
And then you get 10-15 free unit upgrades (that way its not dependent on Commanders)
But what is the point then? If it does not matter whether I bring forward 1 or 21, why would I want to bring them? That would just be useless extra clicks.
Presumably the upgrade wouldn't be the full full cost, so bringing 21 units at 50% upgrade cost is still better for you than nothing. And obviously for many units, having them around you could still do something with them, even if they are limited in some capacities.
I'm playing Continuity, but haven't played as much in the last week due to RL time constraints.
King Flevance
Deity
I would just have all units carry over to the new age as Tier 3 units from the previous Age rather than level 0 units of the new Age. So, Exploration Age would start you with all of your Antiquity boats as Quadriremes. I would also not give anyone a free Cog. All of your infantry are Tier 3 Antiquity infantry. Same for Cavalry, siege and ranged units. Then you get 10-15 free upgrades. However, you must have the technology required to upgrade the units. (This would keep seige from being able to be upgraded. You will have to work with whatever ballista's you brought.)
Tier 0 would effectively be the same as Tier 3 the previous age, except Tier 0 would not be buildable and could only be upgraded for equivalent to outright buy cost.
moondog385
Prince
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2024
- Messages
- 454
I thought I was going to prefer continuity. Played a few games with it and I think I’m going to stick with regroup. If they could add naval commanders to antiquity so you can keep your ships in regroup, that would be a nice balance.
King Flevance
Deity
For me, it would be a superficial disruption. With "continuity" in mind, we just left the antiquity era. Giving me a tier 0 sword, instead of the tier 3 phalanx I was just running (or t2 spears upgraded to phalanx) is no different than giving me a tier 1 sword. I didn't have swords, I was using spears. It is a taste thing, probably, but it would bug me. I would rather keep more 'continuity' to feel as though I am picking up a lot closer to where I left off.
Well Tier 0 could still be named/graphically CS stat a spear (which would upgrade to Tier 1 Sword)
but it would be effectively build cost 0 (so upgrading to Tier 1 is no cheaper than buying a new Tier 1)
King Flevance
Deity
That would work for me. Just so long as it feels like my units were "carried over" to the next age "maxed out". I still play with the crisis on as well to have some sort of 'narrative' as to why my civ is suddenly having an identity crisis. Having it feel like my units have properly carried over and potentially even upgraded makes it feel as though a more reasonable amount of time has passed. It makes sense in my head, and for me that is what matters I guess.
I know I already stated it before but, the biggest reason I play continuity is because I do prefer the more consistent gameplay. I am cool with era transitions and even Civ switching but Civ 7 has made it feel like whiplash. I would prefer the crisis be an interactive event, instead of picking the least crappy policy card, like the barbarian uprising spawns barbarians. Having an expensive priest unit in a city with an altar in antiquity could 'bless' tiles to remove the plague that cancels a tiles yields. Just something active the player does and it doesn't have to be something you can "win" or "achieve" just something you have to fight against that will make warfare notably harder.
I would also like to see some sort of "Humankind-esque" video between ages. (Too bad the art team has been culled.) That is one of the parts of HK that I felt was well done. Have a video sequence connected to whatever the crisis is and a voiceover. For example, a video plays showing plague and disease/barbarian invasion/etc spread through your Greek style cities. The narration could have a stock recording play over how the disease spread through your civilization and many lives were lost and changed. With that change came a new culture and way of life... blah, blah. Or With the barbarians, it could say that the barbarians were nearly successful in their constant raids destroying much rural lands and disrupting trade routes. Many people were killed and many nobles and statesmen were missing or even known to have fled these lands. New leaders rose and managed to change the momentum. Most of the barbarians were dispatched or pacified. Something of that nature to blend it together narratively. It would be even better if this system was dynamic, but I am not trying to get carried away. Already adding something like this would be a lot and it is just flavoring.
I know I already stated it before but, the biggest reason I play continuity is because I do prefer the more consistent gameplay. I am cool with era transitions and even Civ switching but Civ 7 has made it feel like whiplash. I would prefer the crisis be an interactive event, instead of picking the least crappy policy card, like the barbarian uprising spawns barbarians. Having an expensive priest unit in a city with an altar in antiquity could 'bless' tiles to remove the plague that cancels a tiles yields. Just something active the player does and it doesn't have to be something you can "win" or "achieve" just something you have to fight against that will make warfare notably harder.
I would also like to see some sort of "Humankind-esque" video between ages. (Too bad the art team has been culled.) That is one of the parts of HK that I felt was well done. Have a video sequence connected to whatever the crisis is and a voiceover. For example, a video plays showing plague and disease/barbarian invasion/etc spread through your Greek style cities. The narration could have a stock recording play over how the disease spread through your civilization and many lives were lost and changed. With that change came a new culture and way of life... blah, blah. Or With the barbarians, it could say that the barbarians were nearly successful in their constant raids destroying much rural lands and disrupting trade routes. Many people were killed and many nobles and statesmen were missing or even known to have fled these lands. New leaders rose and managed to change the momentum. Most of the barbarians were dispatched or pacified. Something of that nature to blend it together narratively. It would be even better if this system was dynamic, but I am not trying to get carried away. Already adding something like this would be a lot and it is just flavoring.
Similar threads
