r/civ

Hi, I want to play as Alexander on a 12-player deity on Pangea, and I want to manually select the AI ​​opponents that are the most annoying in most games (they hate the player, act like jerks, etc.). Who would you recommend to assert my greatness on?

I’ve only played 3, 5, 6, and 7. In my opinion 5 had the best war gameplay due to how the ai on higher difficulties could throw endless waves of units at you. This made war gameplay feel so exciting to me.

Does Civ 7 run better than 6?

I love 6 to death but after 200+ turns, the game becomes extremely sluggish.

From the time it takes for AI to make turns to the stuttering and sluggishness of the camera panning across the map.

Is Civ 7 better in this regard?

I saw victories has changed in Civ7, what you guys think about theses changes?
Is it better or worst?

For me I hated Religion victory and Economic see nice(not played Civ 7 yet...)

Science victory change it for innovation points?(A good thing?)

Comparaison table generated by AI

Victory Type	Civilization VI Track	Civilization VII Track
Score	Highest points when the turn timer runs out.	Tiebreaker based on Triumphs and placements.
Military / Domination	Capture the original Capital city of all other players.	Accumulate Dominion points (or eliminate all players early).
Culture	Attract more Foreign Tourists than any rival has Domestic Tourists.	Accumulate Tourism points via Legacy paths.
Science	Launch a satellite, land on the moon, and colonize Mars.	Accumulate Innovation points (Modern Age only).
Economic	None (Gold is only used as a generic currency).	Accumulate GDP points via the Treasure Fleet legacy.
Religion	Convert over 50% of cities in every civilization to your faith.	Removed (Faith now supports Culture and Military paths).
Diplomacy	Earn 20 Diplomatic Victory Points through World Congress.	Removed (Replaced by regional influence and Ideology systems).

Is this expected?

Title.

The %yield increase nodes were too strong and deserved a nerf when there were so many attribute points to be had. But there are a far more reasonable amount after ToT, and they would be a satisfying reward to reaching the end of an attribute tree.

I played ages ago and it did nothing. I tried again today and it does nothing. Has this ever worked?

So I was playing humankind again and got thinking my issue with changing civs in both games ISNT the changing of the civs or the way they are made but with the actual core game.

For instance why is a scout in 4000bc the same as a scout in 4000ad? I feel like if the game is going to regig the map and change things than why not go all the way.

For example in the ancient era scouts and other units should only be able to go X amount of tiles away from your border. I feel like this symbolises local knowledge and the strength of your civ to control trade routes and paths outside your border. To the extent that I think they should die. Either this or having a soft lock boarder would allow for smaller regions to form and than be connected in later eras

In a similar vain hexs in the ancient era should represent say 10km while in the modern era it represents hundreds of KMs. You could have a vast desert that was an insermountable issue say 10s of hexs in size in the ancient era shrink to only a coup by the modern. This would represent the progression of technology.

I even think things such as military, culture, and science should drastically change. I think science in the ancient era should be more based around what you have in your rough area and how you interact with that. I know civ 6 did something like this, but again I think they should take it further their shouldnt even be chosen research or tech tree you can see in the ancient era. It should feel like you have stumbled upon an innovation or discovery rather than actively decide to research calender.

Another example is military, many ancient era only had a handful of of full time military while relying on militias and conscription. I think a system where you build equipment and you can choose when and how that equipment is used.

Also much like certain mechanics get introduced in later eras they should remove mechanic or replace them as eras progress to show a shift in significance of aspects of society.

Idk if this is crazy and genuinely might be way to wide sweeping for civ and would have to be completely different game. But I would be interested to see what a civ game with each era being completely different would feel like.

So I been thinking about getting into the Civ games for a while now but whenever these games go on sale, I always think to myself "What exactly i the main appeal?" Whenever I look at gameplay, I dont quite get what is going on. Is it a nation game? War game? Is it a sandbox game.

How hard is it to get into? I am hoping its is quite accessible and would like it to be quite a sandbox but I am not sure. I am just hoping someone really clears up what kind of game I am getting into with Civ VI.

And yeah, CIV VI since it seems to be the one on sale.

I’ve got over 1000 hours into Civilization VII, I really enjoy the game. I think we should get some more crises that would enhance exploration. Here’s what I mean, I would love for a crisis or even when we reset the age to have a lot of what you have explored turned dark again. Because of the changing of the ages and how people change in government change, etc. Especially as a way to get more exploration out of the game because that’s one of my favorite aspects of civilization. I also wouldn’t mind the modern age, allowing you to explore some kind of new continent that shows up with a certain kind of crisis or something like that. I just wanna find more ways to explore and that’s why I typically get tired of a game is that I’ve already explored everything. Any thought thoughts about something like this?

Seriously, who would use the "+50% Reduction in Commander Recovery Time" mementos, taking up a valuable slot? This is one of the more absurd examples, although there are plenty of practically useless mementos. Maybe, future tech or civic should also give a slot for an additional mementos and several options to choose from depending on the leader's attributes and the mementos unlocked in the meta-progression? Or maybe there should be some other way to implement this, because right now it's completely unclear why there are so many mementos if some are truly powerful, while others are practically pointless.

Scientific and military victory screens are in ok places I think. They show your progress clearly and show what the sources of your progress are.

But for cultural and economy it's extremely unclear in my opinion. All the "useful" info for how to achieve a victory is hidden behind the little (i) pop-up and very poorly explained. It just leaves me with a lot of questions. I've been playing deity civ since civ iii, and I've never been so clueless on what I'm doing to achieve victory.

• What does "achieve cultural dominance" mean? Have a multiple of the 2nd best opponent? Cross an arbitrary finish line first?
• Why can we only see sources in increments every couple of turns in the victory screen?
• Is there such a thing as culture generated per turn?
• Why is the great work counter featured so prominently?
• If I have a bunch of unique improvements in a settlement and I build a railroad. Do I get an additional +4 tourism or just +3? What if I delete an improvement? Do I keep the bonus or lose the tourism?
• Economy is possibly even worse. "Line go up is good" I guess?

I could go on... So many questions.

https://preview.redd.it/p0v7ne1bm3kh1.png?width=2625&format=png&auto=webp&s=439f297582f1a75a6f0d0414f6ea2b8d6cbc3996

https://preview.redd.it/ixb3rfp68yjh1.png?width=825&format=png&auto=webp&s=6509f69b7034c50447a189dbb80a510a1f134adf

Can we get a toggle for these? They're fine the first time but I really don't care that Catherine likes that I have less great works than her for the 6th time.

After watching a video from PaisleyTrees and just thinking over what the next DLC pack will be before the likely expansion, I had to really wonder what is the vision for Civ7 and what direction is it going towards?

A lot of hard work has been done to provide a new experience with Test of Time as the vanilla game had a larger shift in changes that soured its launch, barring UI and other things that I chalk up to being released too early.

But as much as I like TOT and Continuity, I can't help but realize that each update basically paints over the base game that I worry that the game is just losing its unique aspects all together.

Regroup has basically been made irrelevant with Continuity. It's nice to see Regroup get tweaks along the way but I wonder if it would've been better to just continue to change Regroup over introducing Continuity so early. Perhaps they can introduce a Unit Cap to at least bring Continuity more in line and establish how much is excess gold and influence in the UI.

Crises are basically mild annoyances lost in the shuffle. You don't even really get legacy bonuses from facing them. That's leaving aside how you can somewhat ignore them. My most recent game I didn't go Religion and realized how easy the Crises was doing so that it allowed me to expand even further due to the extra happiness.

Late Age buildings have never been resolved, especially made worse with the lack of legacy options. An easy tweak to me is to make them "Next Age" buildings.

One of the biggest mottos for Civ 7 has been "History is built in layers" and it seems like like the game only briefly touches on this now with Syncretism (which is unbalanced, imo) and how you can get artifacts. Previous legacy paths are slowly being consumed by the plethora of ways to get points that it hardly feels like there's a benefit for interacting with the Age specific systems.

The game is becoming increasing complex (and to some unwieldy) and variable, so what direction do you see the game going into especially with an expansion likely to come?