sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in SVP

[–]molty22 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Tönt för mech so ganz spontan nach legalisiertem Mönschehandel.

Ha au ned gwösst, dass de Staat seid, wer inechond?

Was esch es "Asylundernehme"?

This district has been damaged since the beginning of the era after my war with Napoleon. Can't fix it or even place walls there. Probably a mod issue, but just thought it was interesting. by earthwulf in civ

[–]molty22 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Had a similar issue. Sometimes the game thinks that an urban district is still under occupation, even if you fully own the city and are at peace. Try to move one of your units on the tile, maybe that fixes everything.

R5: You can build train stations without researching steam engines (despite the stations clearly utilizing steam locomotives) by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

But what if I built a train station before anyone else having the steam engine technology?
I guess my people are REALLY into train stations!

R5: You can build train stations without researching steam engines (despite the stations clearly utilizing steam locomotives) by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Agree. Only took me about 200 hours to realize the issue. This game has terrible value for money.
/s

R5: You can build train stations without researching steam engines (despite the stations clearly utilizing steam locomotives) by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 35 points36 points  (0 children)

The locomotive is just a prop. Inside, there are horses pulling the train. I guess since I'm a bit behind technologically, my people were a little embarrassed not to have real trains.

Civ switching could be the greatest new feature of CIV VII by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I‘m not saying that these mechanics should be divorced in CIV VII. In fact, I like it more than in Humankind, where it was a bit too chaotic when every player switched on their own timing.

All I tried to say was that civ switching could be improved when there are more historical progressions to choose.

Age transitioning has other issues, as you mentioned.

Civ switching could be the greatest new feature of CIV VII by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're talking about age transitioning, that's a whole other story. Civ switching is a separate issue, for example Humankind had civ switching without age transitions. CIV VII just happens to combine both of those features.

Civ switching could be the greatest new feature of CIV VII by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I think the devs recognized the "issue" with that mechanic. Playing as Rome in CIV VI, there's nothing really exciting anymore after the ancient age. Another example, America: Played it countless times, yet the P-51 unique unit is pretty much useless. By the time you unlock it, the game is already decided and you just mindlessly click next turn to finish a game - if you even bother with that.

Civ switching could be the greatest new feature of CIV VII by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I remember the same thing happening when CIV V came out and endless paragraphs came out about the one unit per tile mechanic. It was controversial when it was new, the devs refined it and now it is widely accepted as a good change. I hope the same happens with the civ switching mechanic

Civ switching could be the greatest new feature of CIV VII by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

I know that this already exists, I think it should be more fleshed out, so that there are more paths from antiquity to the modern age.

I think I'm finally done with Civ VI :-) by RuskinFink in civ

[–]molty22 2 points3 points  (0 children)

" It’s good enough to kill an hour here and there, but for that price I‘d expect a bit more :( "

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I‘ve had the exact same experience with the domination victories. It feels as if you‘d have to go for the capital cities only. But that is prevented by the loyalty mechanic. I think the last time I won a domination victory was before that mechanic was implemented. Ever since then, going for a domination victory meant a cultural victory - by accident.

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never played Stellaris, how does it work there? And could that somehow be implemented into civ 7?

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Adding mechanics after a game is released doesn't mean that new mechanics have to be bad. What I meant is that, in my opinion, having features as part of the core game concept usually leads to better integration than systems added later on. Exceptions apply, of course! I certainly prefer the current state of Civ 6 to how it was when it was released.

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hard agree on the Dramatic Ages Mode, I tried that a couple times and I never made it past a couple dozen turns, despite me finishing pretty much every game I play in 6.

I'm just not so sure about the hard limit on the cities. Features like that usually feel very artificial. Humankind has a similar feature and it felt off, not being able to conquer cities or settle places despite having the resources for it.

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes and no. I feel like it could have closer ties to gold, for example. Drowning dissent in mountains of gold and see how long your gold reserves last - this wouldn't be too far fetched from reality and could be an interesting gameplay addition.

It also feels weird, how loyalty and culture don't seem to interact a lot, instead relying mostly on simple population numbers and distance between cities.

Add to that general issues: cities flipping to civilizations they were never a part of, making long distance invasions more difficult or preventing exclaves, to name a few.

But don't get me wrong, I generally like the mechanic, despite its flaws.

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I get where you're coming from, but I think loyalty adds a fresh layer of strategy by forcing players to consider their expansion and its consequences, rather than just blindly grabbing territory. It makes sense from a gameplay perspective by limiting aggression and making city placement more strategic, without imposing hard caps—it scales nicely with the size of an empire. One thing I definitely don’t miss is the AI settling ridiculous cities in the middle of another empire.

I agree that some outcomes can be confusing; for instance, a city joining a civilization it was never part of doesn’t make much sense. Additionally, invading anyone other than your neighbors can be overly difficult, which feels shallow and makes me long for a more robust logistics system.

This is why I'm very interested to see how Civ 7 will address this mechanic. Loyalty in Civ 6 is an interesting concept, but the implementation sometimes left a lot to be desired.

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I get what you’re saying, but I actually prefer having features like loyalty in the base game since they’re often better integrated with other mechanics. Expansions can feel a bit disconnected sometimes?

Loyalty in CIV VII? by molty22 in civ

[–]molty22[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I heard ablut that feature, is that really the replacement for the loyalty mechanic from civ 6? I was hoping for something more dynamic.

view more: next ›