***Sid Meier's Civilization VII***

I'm not sure about it. I don't like mixing the leaders and civilizations, it seems silly, I'm not a fan of the different ages and the lack of one more turn is annoying. That's been part Civilization for so long, and now it just ends. Lets see how I feel about it after a few more playthroughs..
 
Last edited:
hytin11 said:
I don't like mixing the leaders and civilizations, it seems silly
Click to expand...

Honestly mixing up the leaders and civ's after a couple of play throughs opens up some good fun with mechanics.

A few of the YouTubers have started posting videos on the mad combos, I've made a point not to watch the content yet but to try the title combo and see what happens. Xerxes the Achaemenid getting Hawaii in the exploration age turned out to be great fun as you end up with mega amount of culture and gold, but if you do the lazy way of getting to Hawaii in the exploration age by being the Mississippian's in the starting age you also turn up with an unreasonable amount of food so you can go a bit ape with massive cities really early.

Icing on the cake was doing the exploration path's to get a legacy choice to keep your cities as cities when you age transition, with is disgustingly good to keep the yields up and pace with the AI.

​

 
Fireaxis have released a roadmap of upcoming changes:

apsJHFe.jpeg


Hopefully those UI changes arriving next week will address the most irritating parts of the game, and the AI improvements coming at the end of the month seem welcome.
 
I'm struggling to take to this one - I had what I thought was a good game the other day: made an alliance with Harriet Tubman, had a ton of trade routes, open borders, research agreements etc. and then suddenly a massive army of hers materialised out of nowhere and completely steam-rollered me. Don't get me wrong, I like that there's a chance that a rival will surprise attack you but this was so random given how the game was going it kind of broke the immersion.
 
hotseat multiplayer in the beyond section of the road map, is that where the AI takes over if someone leaves, then another random can join the server and take over the civ? as long as it wasn;t a passworded civ?
 
arknor said:
hotseat multiplayer in the beyond section of the road map, is that where the AI takes over if someone leaves, then another random can join the server and take over the civ? as long as it wasn;t a passworded civ?
Click to expand...

I think it's multiplayer on one machine where you switch out who is playing? Not sure.
 
Finished my second playthrough with a military victory on Immortal difficulty. Still really enjoying the game, but it does feel like the difficulty needs tweaking a bit: even having played so much of the other games in the series, it shouldn't be this easy to win on Immortal without feeling like I really understand the game yet. Also, the animations on plane attacks do need tweaking, since they hold things up.

I am beginning to feel like I understand the game a bit though, and I'm going to try for one of the other two victories on the next playthrough.
 
1.1.0 update has dropped along with Ada Lovelace, Great Britain, and Carthage for Deluxe and Founder's edition buyers. Not a massive update, but some fairly significant stuff in there, especially for the culture victory. That was what I was angling towards in my current playthrough so I think I might abandon and start a new game.
 
I'm on my 3rd game since purchase, kinda sad, after the latest patch I thought id retry it.
Playing as Rome, Normans, Britain. And Ada.

Ships are still bugged and the ranged attack is sometimes becoming melee.
Attack an Airport , fortified airfield. Ground units cannot attack the air co-ordinator unit, have to hit him with artillery.. bloody stupid.

I'm still really unimpressed by the sheer urban clutter when it comes to fighting.

I'm still not in love with the game tbh, though I did really enjoy the Roman part of the game.

I'm still really finding it jarring doing age transition. It just feels like 3 different games to me still.

A long way to go before I'm back in love with civ 7
 
Last edited:
I'm on my second game now, first was Confucius/China x 3 and the second is Ada/Rome/Norman/Britain. Civ VII is making sense to me now, although I am still learning from my mistakes here and there.

I actually quite like the three games in one aspect of it compared to Civ VI. In that game there would be a tough start but then an endless easy slog to actually achieve the conditions to win the game. In Civ VII the differing challenges to each era keeps each game interesting for a lot longer.

Other likes are that religion is a lot less annoying and only matters for 1/3 of the game anyway. There's less micro managing of units too, no moving workers around to build stuff or engineers to lay railways etc. More of your play time involves making decisions that have consequences, which is where the fun lies in a game like this.

I don't like that the game still can't employ military units in a way so that they concentrate and support each other effectively. It is easy to set up a line of temporary fortifications at a choke point and let the AI throw troops against it piecemeal. Having generals rather than troops rack up the experience points is a great idea though. Also there are the various bugs, map clarity and UI issues that others have mentioned, but they aren't game killers for me and are being addressed.

Overall its not perfect but I already like Civ VII more than its predecessor and won't be going back to that.
 
Anyone experimenting with mods? I've installed a few UI tweaks, and one to unlock all the momentos because metaprogression irritates me in a civ game, and it definitely helps a bit.
 
£24.99 Steam price for

• 2 new leaders: Ada Lovelace, Simón Bolívar
• 4 new civilizations: Carthage, Great Britain, Nepal, Bulgaria
• 4 new Natural Wonders: Machapuchare, Mount Fuji, Vihren, Vinicunca
• 1 badge cosmetic bonus

quite rightly getting the review it deserves! 'very negative'
 
Caracus2k said:
£24.99 Steam price for

• 2 new leaders: Ada Lovelace, Simón Bolívar
• 4 new civilizations: Carthage, Great Britain, Nepal, Bulgaria
• 4 new Natural Wonders: Machapuchare, Mount Fuji, Vihren, Vinicunca
• 1 badge cosmetic bonus

quite rightly getting the review it deserves! 'very negative'
Click to expand...
And yet bizarrely, with a Steam price of £22.49 for Total Warhammer 3 - Thrones of Decay which gives 3 new Leaders, 3 Lords and 15 Units.....reasonably comparable, it has "very positive"

So I guess the players of Total Warhammer 3 dont mind paying £22 for the above DLC whereas the Civ players baulk at a similar deal.
 
Tombstone said:
And yet bizarrely, with a Steam price of £22.49 for Total Warhammer 3 - Thrones of Decay which gives 3 new Leaders, 3 Lords and 15 Units.....reasonably comparable, it has "very positive"

So I guess the players of Total Warhammer 3 dont mind paying £22 for the above DLC whereas the Civ players baulk at a similar deal.
Click to expand...

Warhammers a terrible value for money gaming franchise these days to with egregious cash grabs for DLC in TW Warhamner 3 that basically just enables stuff already built into the game. It does have the slight advantage of having a base game that was better received on launch however and it did offer some more of the main options from launch unlike Civ 7 which kept GB behind a pay wall!
 
Last edited:
Caracus2k said:
Warhammers a terrible value for money gaming franchise these days to with egregious cash grabs for DLC in TW Wargamner 3 that basically just enables stuff already built into the game. It does have the slight advantage of having a base game that was better received on launch however and it did offer some more of the main options from launch unlike Civ 7 which kept GB behind a pay wall!
Click to expand...
Warhammer 3 definitely has an insane amount of DLC (much like Paradox games) , £250 worth of DLC, and yet most of it is received positively and herein is the issue, either having a wodge of pricey DLC is wrong or its not, a person cant be accepting of £25 quids worth of DLC for one game and not £25 quids worth of DLC for another game (for comparable levels of content) just because they have a grudge against the base game or company of one title but not the other. Its a principal thing, a person must either be against a principal or not. So those folk who mark the TW3 DLC as Very Positive but the Civ7 DLC as Very Negative (for comparable prices and content) are being biased and not assessing both DLCs on an equal footing, at best its bias, at worst its hypocrisy. Happens a lot in game reviews/opinions , like people hating on a Ubisoft game because Ubisoft, rather than being objective in thoughts on the actual game in question.

For the record, I think any DLC that costs as much as £24 needs to be absolutely chock full of content (which in the above cases, neither the Civ7 one mentioned nor the TW3 one mentioned is) , few DLCs are, in fact the one DLC that I can think of recently which has justified a very high DLC price, is the Elden Ring DLC
 
Last edited:
Tombstone said:
So I guess the players of Total Warhammer 3 dont mind paying £22 for the above DLC whereas the Civ players baulk at a similar deal.
Click to expand...

How many of these people complaining actually bought the DLC and how many got it with the Deluxe Edition and decided to double dip on posting negative reviews?

Doubt it says much about the DLC at all. People who are buying DLCs like the game they're buying them for and know what they're getting.

Personally I think the game is great but I'm not paying for the DLC but that's okay: you can just not buy the thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom