Next Civilization Game Officially Announced by Firaxis - IGN
Firaxis Games has officially announced that Civilization 7 is in development at the studio.
Civilization 7 on its way
- Thread starter Tombstone
- Start date
Looking forward to it! I just hope it's a "proper" Civ game and not another Beyond Earth. Either way though, I hope it's hits the ground running. Civ has a habit of becoming brilliant eventually, but it usually takes an expansion or two.
I'm guessing since we didn't any screenshots, trailers, or any further information it's early in development and a year or two away.
I'm guessing since we didn't any screenshots, trailers, or any further information it's early in development and a year or two away.
I still need to play some CIV 6.
My GF still hasn't forgiven me for the whole weekend I played CIV 5, communicating mostly in grunts lol.
My GF still hasn't forgiven me for the whole weekend I played CIV 5, communicating mostly in grunts lol.
Caporegime
Quietly optimistic for now. VI didn't click with me, but I've loved so many entries of the series I'm hopeful.
Soldato
I found 6 annoying, religion spam, and crossing seas took ages, I'd basically just win my continent then quit.
Hopefully 7 is less of the annoying stuff and more of the fun stuff.
Hopefully 7 is less of the annoying stuff and more of the fun stuff.
Soldato
Been playing VI recently with some friends thanks to Jan's Steam discount, but I still prefer V.
Is this really Civ VII though? Even in the article OP linked as well as the original statement from Firaxis doesn't mention if it's VII or a spin-off like Beyond Earth/etc.
Original tweet:
Is this really Civ VII though? Even in the article OP linked as well as the original statement from Firaxis doesn't mention if it's VII or a spin-off like Beyond Earth/etc.
Original tweet:
Caporegime
To me "next Civ game" reads like Civ mainline game.
I preferred Civ 5 over Civ 6, although Civ 6 did have some aspects that I really liked (Civ 6 multiplayer was much better than Civ 5 multiplayer for example) and to be fair, even though I preferred Civ 5 I still managed to get over 1,500 hours out of Civ 6. Given that I have played every Civ game from Civ 1 through to Civ 6, its a no brainer that I will get Civ 7 
Permabanned
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 2,136
I would genuinely play Civ 1 over 6. I honestly couldn't even finish a game in 6, even on the second attempt with all the DLC.
It's freaking whack. FU Firaxis, and your tiny maps and ****** district spam.
It's freaking whack. FU Firaxis, and your tiny maps and ****** district spam.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 1,936
Having played all the main Civ games bar Civ II, my preference is Civ V as it has the most diversity regarding units, but it has the worst diplomacy AI. Would have liked Civ V with the diplomacy of Civ VI. Hoping VII takes the best of all and puts them together.
It's good that there's another Civ game in development, I played IV to death and have played VI a fair bit.
I actually like the districts in Civ VI, it forces you to plan ahead when placing your cities. What I don't like is that the military conquest option is so much more powerful than any other strategy. Once you start rolling and have captured a few cities your science, culture and money etc. start ramping up and you can eventually just steam roller all the other civs or switch to some other sort of victory half way through. Some sort of corruption penalty for having too many cities might help balance this, make a player choose which cities to keep, raise or give away.
It doesn't help that the AI is so dumb either, it will only attack if it has a much stronger military and this only happens in the early game. After this it never goes all out to build a bigger military than you or team up with another civ to beat you. An AI that can move groups of units tactically rather than sending them in piecemeal as at present would be a big improvement too.
Civ VI's religious unit spam is another really annoying feature, hoping they come up with something better in VII.
I actually like the districts in Civ VI, it forces you to plan ahead when placing your cities. What I don't like is that the military conquest option is so much more powerful than any other strategy. Once you start rolling and have captured a few cities your science, culture and money etc. start ramping up and you can eventually just steam roller all the other civs or switch to some other sort of victory half way through. Some sort of corruption penalty for having too many cities might help balance this, make a player choose which cities to keep, raise or give away.
It doesn't help that the AI is so dumb either, it will only attack if it has a much stronger military and this only happens in the early game. After this it never goes all out to build a bigger military than you or team up with another civ to beat you. An AI that can move groups of units tactically rather than sending them in piecemeal as at present would be a big improvement too.
Civ VI's religious unit spam is another really annoying feature, hoping they come up with something better in VII.
Caporegime
I liked the idea, in practice I found them irritating. I think the biggest problem was that they just cost so damn much and stopped you building buildings until you'd paid the district tax.
Hopefully 7 is a combination of 5 and 4. I did not like 6 due to poor ai where as I found civ 4 really challenging on monarch or above, it’s also had the best ai.
Civ 5 was decentish but I did not like the global happiness design, just found it immersion breaking.
Civ 5 was decentish but I did not like the global happiness design, just found it immersion breaking.
I think one reason Civ IV's AI seemed to work better was that the game used army stacks rather than individual units. It is a lot easier to programme an AI to build balanced stacks of units (infantry, archers, cav etc.) and send them to attack other stacks than to get it to move a bunch of individual units in a coordinated fashion. Not sure I'd want to see stack fights back though. Although if the actual battles were fought on the map, the way Humankind does it, it could work. I seem to recall the diplomatic AI in IV was a lot more likely to stab you in the back, which unlike in VI, meant you had to keep a stack or two in reserve.
Last edited:
Yeah 4 used stacks and while it was a bit simplistic compared to the later games, by god the ai could at least send proper doom stacks of like 80-100 units. Even if they did focus on one city at a time, they were a massive threat if you did not have strong army to oppose them.
6 ai was terrible, denounce messages every turn and sending out unprotected settlers,
Civ 7 needs to nail combat ai.
6 ai was terrible, denounce messages every turn and sending out unprotected settlers,
Civ 7 needs to nail combat ai.
