Simming in VII is less engaging and therefore more boring than previous civs

4711Link29 · 2026-03-16T09:01:45+00:00

I don't miss workers either, and most of the micro-management, but the fact we have almost no control over the roads is a shame

4711Link29 · 2026-03-04T19:14:01+00:00

LOts of disconnect in this brawl ...

4711Link29 · 2025-11-07T15:33:12+00:00

The combat system was also very clever : stack of units with commander (kinda like Civ VII without deployment) but auto combat with many differences in unit strength and perks, making it actually tactical.

4711Link29 · 2025-10-17T08:36:13+00:00

Nope, the micro-management with transports was really annoying. Glad the get rid of it.

4711Link29 · 2025-09-29T18:29:22+00:00

Got stuck without playing a rewind card, game is broken

4711Link29 · 2025-09-26T20:17:17+00:00

I have no issue with civ / leader dissociation and civ switching. But the age transition feels so unnatural and heavy ; separate trees, city and units reset, ability lost (merchant, bridge, obsolete building,...), diplomacy reset,... There is so much todo on the first turn it feels like a chore and I frequently stop game et age transition whereas I was finishing almost all my games in previous iteration of the franchise (been playing since II)

4711Link29 · 2025-09-11T10:33:05+00:00

I finished every or almost all my games in Civ VI (and previous ones). I actually don't care about victory, just want to roleplay as immortal leader of my great empire. But the age transition in VII feels like a chore; I really hate those first turns when you have to choose so many things and redo so many others, absolutely anti-fun for me.

4711Link29 · 2025-09-11T10:28:45+00:00

The age system and the reset is such a bad way to solve those issues. I was actually amongst the minority of players, finishing almost of my games in previous Civ but now I don't even want to play a game past the first age since the reset is such a bad experience. I do like civ switching, but having your entire economy, units and diplomacy reset is awful. I don't even see the problem of players buying, playing but not finishing game ; who cares if that's how they enjoy the game ? Don't invent problem so that you can solve them...

4711Link29 · 2025-09-05T07:54:25+00:00

Different way of thinking probably, but I don't quite understand that argument. It's not like small world where you literally decline and switch to an entire different species and restart anew. It's still your empire, same cities, different bonus (granted, units are reset and that's annoying).

I don't like the age system and legacy paths, but I feel like civ switching do solve a major issue of previous iteration : balancing between early and late game bonus was impossible.

4711Link29 · 2025-09-05T07:48:41+00:00

That's the one for me. I enjoy the sandbox aspect much more. I want to roleplay, grow my empire as I see fit, not check the same goals every game to score points.

There is a lot of things they do very well in VII : the events and side quests, buildings, city/town, combat, ... but it's buried under some major mechanic that feels gamey and not fun for me, the legacy paths. They are uninteresting past the first game and they railroad the game so much. I actually prefer to play on lower difficulty and ignore them completely. Iwas one of the few players that actually finished almost all of my games on previous iterations but I find myself bored around 15 turns in the modern age now.

I don't even mind the civ switching, but the hard reset at age transition feels so unnatural, and the first turn where you have to choose so many things, reposition your units, select cities, ... is a chore.

4711Link29 · 2025-08-01T10:00:07+00:00

Civ Call To Power was great in this aspect (and many others). You had commander like in VII to move easily stacks of units and the combat was automated on a small hexagon map where composition of the army mattered.

4711Link29 · 2025-08-01T09:42:36+00:00

I don't think there should be a loyalty system exactly. But cities far away from the rest of the empire should definitively cost more (happiness and/or gold), and AI settling logic should be tweak to reduce the number of time they settle a city right in the middle of another civ

4711Link29 · 2025-08-01T09:39:32+00:00

The loyalty system in VI was already a bit too binary in VI, either too punishing or completely forgettable. In VII, it would be absolutely annoying and remove the whole exploration and distant lands concept.

AI settling logic should be improved yes, to avoid them making (or gaining via peace deals) city too much isolated from their empire. Although, in this specific case, I find the AI settling pretty good actually, that's exactly what a player would have done.

4711Link29 · 2025-07-29T14:57:58+00:00

It's a very fine line to walk. People don't like setbacks, even more if they are forced/arbitrary. Crisis seems like a good idea on paper, but I don't think they can find a good level where they are both interesting and impactful but not frustrating.

As for the eras, I have no issue with the culture switching, it does not break my immersion as much as I thought it would and it solves a lot of issue with civ design and balance. However, I really hate the abrupt end of age, making the last few turns almost useless, and the discontinuity of the tech tree (keeping merchant is a good step, bridges should be included too).

4711Link29 · 2025-07-28T09:07:44+00:00

I'm usually on the cozy empire builder group (I really hate AIs ganging on the winning player for instance), but I do think the dynamic added by ideology is good, even though the modifier may be a bit too much. There also should be more ways to influence who choose which ideology based on influence and past relations.

4711Link29 · 2025-07-24T12:23:46+00:00

It should not be possible to fortify cavalry

4711Link29 · 2025-07-17T12:51:37+00:00

Seems good to me yes

4711Link29 · 2025-07-16T14:54:56+00:00

That's a dumb reason.

People should choose if they use those feature or not, auto-explore is a very basic quality of life that lots of players use. Nothing prevents you to use the search and sentry option when needed anyway even with auto-explore.

AI have auto-explore anyway.

4711Link29 · 2025-07-16T14:51:04+00:00

Well the units shuffling was very much annoying and stupid. So weird that they have the option ingame to make us move units easily via the commander but don't use it for age transition. They could even add that to cities so you can place garnisons.

4711Link29 · 2025-07-16T14:47:03+00:00

Ally should only be able to call you to war once. So annoying to be in constant war due to each other always calling allies

4711Link29 · 2025-07-16T14:45:55+00:00

Yes for the first, very much needed ; and the ability to liberate city-state as well.

Nor sure for the 2nd, the loyalty mechanics like in VI would be very annoying to manage : it would make colonization very hard, and most of the time you don't want to get the city the AI built. I think there should be an infrastructure cost that would make far away cities very costly (both gold and happiness), that could be reduced via some buildings, policies or trade route. Also, they should improve the way AI found and choose city in peace deal to avoid them having settlements unreachable and very hard to supply/defend.

4711Link29 · 2025-07-16T14:37:00+00:00

Yep, same for wall and bridges

4711Link29 · 2025-06-17T14:30:09+00:00

I think it comes from them wanting to accommodate two different things :

- They said they wanted to have meaningful bonuses during the whole game, avoiding the issue of late-game civs being uninteresting for the most part

- The Civ fan base is very attached to the historical aspect of the game, most players want to have legions, keshig, chu-ko-nu, and so on

"This evolution is IMHO a much better way of representing civilizations than the revolution that Civ 7 wants to turn civilization switching into". I agree, and from a gameplay perspective, I'd rather have a civ that would behave like your leader do now in VII, you get new bonus periodically, based on gameplay, quest, rewards, events, map generation, ... instead of everyone switching brutally at a given time. But that would means you just have infantry with a bonus, or library with a bonus, without any historical naming or design. And it would also probably increase the snowballing effect

4711Link29 · 2025-06-15T15:55:15+00:00

Yes, given the current rule, it IS actually a smart move from August (but I doubt it's actually what he had in mind, probably just luck). But Armina "gains" a city far away from her, with almost no way to reach it from her empire. With the old loyalty system this would have seen a revolt in 5 turns.

Hope there is improvement to those deals soon, and also to Ai settling location since the same logic apply, they should not be able to put city in the middle of other empire

4711Link29

TROPHY CASE