Sid Meier's Civilization

[hawkisnight]

He gave the game 8/10, didn't mention several glaring issues with it in original review and now he back peddles. Guy got like 60k subs and rug pulls people like a at least million sub channel

 

[Kane Lives]

some youtubers weigh in trying to explain what they think the main problem of Civilization 7 is.

I don't normally listen to jewtubers, but this one I think, nailed quite succinctly why Civ VII just feels off. Well, two things:
a) The power fantasy of taking some civ onto a schizo-alt history of success is just gone. (This is my most primary complaint of this game tbh, and one they will never ever be able to fix without tearing the game apart and starting anew). It has been a perennial Civ tradition to take anachronistic or long disappeared nations/empires to ahistorical success.
b) You're playing the game as the devs intended, rather than as a sandbox for you to choose how to play. Very much more like an euro boardgame (a feeling that already started in Civ VI, mind you), complete with points and shit you have to earn each age. It's the same reason I bounced off Doom Eternal, but liked 2016. More than anything, I hate being pigeonholed into playing only how a dev wants you to play unless the game is really good, which very few games are.

 

[Rome's rightful successor]

He gave the game 8/10, didn't mention several glaring issues with it in original review and now he back peddles. Guy got like 60k subs and rug pulls people like a at least million sub channel

The youtube comments are tearing him apart.




And they are absolutely right, I'm so sick and tired of strategy game companies releasing a broken game at launch with DLC that not only announced before the released of the base game but also have day 1 dlc with stuff that could easily have been included in the base game every single fucking time now. Just the upmost petty greed is the one thing that can be expect Strategy Games companies now with the army of shill youtubers to boot. Complete with the "The game will totally be good in two or three years when it gets fixed when you have to pay another hundred dollars worth of DLC". I'm just done with this shit.

I don't normally listen to jewtubers, but this one I think, nailed quite succinctly why Civ VII just feels off. Well, two things:
a) The power fantasy of taking some civ onto a schizo-alt history of success is just gone. (This is my most primary complaint of this game tbh, and one they will never ever be able to fix without tearing the game apart and starting anew). It has been a perennial Civ tradition to take anachronistic or long disappeared nations/empires to ahistorical success.
b) You're playing the game as the devs intended, rather than as a sandbox for you to choose how to play. Very much more like an euro boardgame (a feeling that already started in Civ VI, mind you), complete with points and shit you have to earn each age. It's the same reason I bounced off Doom Eternal, but liked 2016. More than anything, I hate being pigeonholed into playing only how a dev wants you to play unless the game is really good, which very few games are.

Civilization was about you building a civilization that could stand the test of time and removing that is removing a core part of the game. It's like a Mario game where Mario can't jump or a Sonic Game where Sonic can't run or A Call of Duty Game without guns. Or for a more Boardgame analogy, playing Battleship but in this new game you can see where all of your opponents ships are at all times. Or Monopoly but without the railroads and the go to jail card. It's all dumb. It's Firaxis looking at Humankind and thinking "How can we copy this and make it "Better"" while forgetting they are making a civ game and what the point and appeal of a civ game is.

 

[Tri-Tachyon'sClown]

A bulk of the mechanics it introduces are just rip-offs of humankind. I'd suggest looking at videos of that if 7's mechanics look enticing otherwise I'd avoid it. I'm not even interested in pirating it to be brutally honest from what I've seen the mechanics are a turn off for me.

I looked into it a bit more since I never even glanced more than once at Humankind and also those mixed reviews are interesting. Overall, not my thing, will stick to Caveman2Cosmos. Reading the thread more, they fucked up bad.

 

[deerbeer]

Jesse Cox made a video saying as politely as possible that the game sucks.

The only reason I share is because I can't think of a person who has a more normie opinion when it comes to liking the Civ series, and it seems even he can't defend it.

TL;DW - It's a Civ game that fundamentally doesn't understand why people like Civ games.

 

[Kane Lives]

TL;DW - It's a Civ game that fundamentally doesn't understand why people like Civ games.

Given how the multiplayer crowd has been gushing over it so far, it's definitely a game made for them.

Good on them; it's probably gonna kill this game in 2 years lmao.

 

[The Big A]

An addendum to the prior post because I'm a double nigger:

View attachment 6951200

Skipping enlightenment lasts you a bit longer than I thought after double checking, but it's still only 11/59 industrial techs you can get without it.

But you can get the whole thing started, provided you go out of your way to make it last as long as possible, four techs into the medieval era (4/26), have it last the entire renaissance era barring 2 techs (33/35), then take it 11 techs into the industrial era (11/59), allowing the priest economy to last a full 66 techs total out of 206, or a bit over a quarter of the game if you want to play all the way through (unlikely). It also leaves you in an odd tech location, and having to research four poor techs just to get the rest of the good stuff in the industrial era. Watch out if you're playing with tech conquest on as well, as you can accidentally obsolete yourself.

The other thing to note is that the economy cranks out great prophets like hotcakes, which aren't bad in and of themselves, but they aren't great scientists or great engineers, the latter you need one of to build the Manhattan Project. Expect some difficulty procuring either after your 12th great prophet makes the next great person exorbitantly expensive. It doesn't help that Great Prophets are also modified by the prior wonders and civics, so they'll fall off as well along with the priests except you can't switch them out for better specialists.

The Realism Invictus Specialist Economy part 3: Wonder Rushing and Getting Enlightened

We've already established that a strength of the Priest Economy is that while it takes a decent amount of foresight (you need to found either Christianity or Buddhism an age prior for a proper set up), the economy holds true for the next two ages, giving big research boosts by allowing you to run your tech slider at 100%. What we haven't discussed yet is the priest economy's most busted attribute, making 1,000+ gold per turn at minimum with the gold slider turned to 100% by the early renaissance. One way I abused this was by rushing for Naval Engineering and Absolutism. The former allows you to transport colonists and workers over oceans, and makes overseas colonies possible. The latter unlocks the Versailles wonder, which is pretty weak as it does the same thing the Forbidden City does but at three times the price. It's also only good in very far flung cities that likely have low pop and production to begin with, which makes it harder to build.

However, this can all be bypassed if you can simply brute force pay for the wonder outright, but it's a huge investment to hurry. Thankfully, the priest economy at 0% for about 10 turns allows you to simply rush the wonder, which I built in my southern colonies:



Each one of those southern cities would have cost 50 gold in distance maintenance alone each without Versailles. Instead, I use the power of money to re-create Australia. I count 15 cities down there, so quick math puts it at 750 gold per turn saved by the wonder.


But by this point in the game, you're through most of the Renaissance techs and wondering how to transition out of the Priest economy. The key is to transition into another Specialist economy, as your tile improvements likely consist entirely of Farms, Mines, and Lumbermills, with nary a cottage in sight.




The key is to rush down Market Regulations, a tech which opens the Industrial era, if at all possible, build Das Kapital and don't be afraid to stockpile gold to rush it. Also build Limited Liability Law, but that's a national wonder so there's no time pressure to get it.




Ironically, inventing Marxism and being able to adopt Communism early pales in comparison to the other effect, this thing will make you hundreds of gold per turn (potentially). Even if you don't get it, the Merchant Economy is still very strong. You're also going to have to change your civics to Working Class and Protectionism, your other civics depend on your game. I'd reccomend you switch out of Theocracy, however, as we're leaving the priest economy behind, and you'd be better served getting a government that lowers maintenance costs.



And here's the end result, at least in your capital where I presume you've put all your money multiplying buildings as well as National Stock Exchange:



For every other city in your empire, Merchants will only be +8 (+9 once you unlock supermarkets), and you'll be limited to 4 per city in the early industrial era. But Merchants aren't even the main stars of this economy, craftsmen are:

And this is only going to get more insane once Machine Tools and Electricity come online later on in the industrial era.

To put it in math terms, 8 fully tuned Christian priests produce 32 gold ( 4x8 ) and 24 hammers ( 3x8 ), four non-capital tuned up merchants and four early industrial craftsmen combine to produce 36 gold (8x4) + (1x4) and 24 hammers (6x4), they aren't going to fall off with tech, and the craftsmen will soon outpace the priests (max of 36 hammers), and the merchants are superior in your capital, and will slightly increase in gold production in the late game. You've now successfully transitioned out of the priest economy at a slight gain, except for all those great prophets who will now be less effective. As of now, the transition out of Theocracy and into a government that charges less for upkeep more than makes up for your prophets losing their effectiveness.


This whole thing really does highlight how effective the Priest Economy is, it gives you access to industrial level specialist usage multiple eras earlier.


PS: This whole playthrough was done on Emperor difficulty, your mileage may very if you try this on Immortal or Diety, where rushing for Techs and Wonders is more difficult.

 

[Foxxo]

The key is to rush down Market Regulations, a tech which opens the Industrial era, if at all possible, build Das Kapital and don't be afraid to stockpile gold to rush it. Also build Limited Liability Law, but that's a national wonder so there's no time pressure to get it.

Eww, Das Kapital. A half-accurate treatise on the economy of the time, from the perspective of an anti-Semite who regretted blowing all his aristocratic connections by not bathing enough.

 

[The Big A]

Eww, Das Kapital. A half-accurate treatise on the economy of the time, from the perspective of an anti-Semite who regretted blowing all his aristocratic connections by not bathing enough.

I feel like there's some unintentional spicy political commentary about how Marx's work increases the wealth of the Merchants.

 

[OutInTheRain]

Jesse Cox made a video saying as politely as possible that the game sucks.

The only reason I share is because I can't think of a person who has a more normie opinion when it comes to liking the Civ series, and it seems even he can't defend it.

TL;DW - It's a Civ game that fundamentally doesn't understand why people like Civ games.

Jesse Cox is still around!? Blast from the past.

Given how the multiplayer crowd has been gushing over it so far, it's definitely a game made for them.

Good on them; it's probably gonna kill this game in 2 years lmao.

That always makes a series worse. Once the sweatlords get in there they strip out all the fun. I don't want multiplayer civ with meta builds. I want a civ where I can sit down on a rainy afternoon and then suddenly it's midnight. Civ should be one of those games where the multiplayer crowd doesn't matter. People will play them forever.

 

[The Big A]

That always makes a series worse. Once the sweatlords get in there they strip out all the fun. I don't want multiplayer civ with meta builds. I want a civ where I can sit down on a rainy afternoon and then suddenly it's midnight. Civ should be one of those games where the multiplayer crowd doesn't matter. People will play them forever.

A strategy game by rule shouldn't pay much heed to the multiplayer community, just give them their modding tools and let them go to work in their own little area. Everyone wanting to become the next Starcraft nearly killed RTS's.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

Annoying flaw in Civ 1 and 2 is triremes getting randomly lost at sea, a limitation which may not apply to any of the civs ran by AI.

What they should've done was what they did in Civ Rev: have shallow and deep sea regions. With those triremes limited to shallow sea.

 

[Computer God Autism]

A strategy game by rule shouldn't pay much heed to the multiplayer community, just give them their modding tools and let them go to work in their own little area. Everyone wanting to become the next Starcraft nearly killed RTS's.

IMO Starcraft's influence on the decline of RTS is heavily overstated. The bigger issue was that there was a massive oversaturation of games that were either AoEII reskins that lacked quality control, or took too many ques from Warcraft III and wound up competing against W3's modding scene (which birthed MOBAs, arguably the worst thing it did).

 

[Fig Kommandant]

IMO Starcraft's influence on the decline of RTS is heavily overstated.

I would lay more blame on SC1 than SC2 honestly. Koreans having kept the game alive for so long in very competitive communities gave a skewed perception of what the average strategy gamer is and it made studios try to milk the esports trend.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

The only thing I think Civ should learn from Humankind style games is the combat.

Civ combat is stale and boring, without anything other then a sad RPS thing. At lest in HumanKind you can tweak your set up and units within the army for better overall effect.

But the wokies devs at Civ took every bad idea Humankind had and said "wow, lets do that but worse"

Just fix the fucking AI and Civ games would be fun again, we don't need a hundred new gimmicks for each new edition. The AI is the single biggest issue the game has faced since it came out but they no longer have the excuse of piss poor home computers for it. You can make semi decent AI no now problem. Is it easy or cheap? No, not really but I bet it's a hellva lot cheaper then whatever they paid to make the shit that Civ7 is.

Fix the fucking AI Maxis.

 

[Chickenpolar]

Just fix the fucking AI and Civ games would be fun again, we don't need a hundred new gimmicks for each new edition. The AI is the single biggest issue the game has faced since it came out but they no longer have the excuse of piss poor home computers for it. You can make semi decent AI no now problem. Is it easy or cheap? No, not really but I bet it's a hellva lot cheaper then whatever they paid to make the shit that Civ7 is.

One unit per hex made the AI so much worse.

I like Civ6 but the AI sucking at moving units and at planning for bonuses holds that game back.

 

[Lone Star]

Gave the game a shot a few days ago. The UI really was as bad as everyone has been saying, the game is just so lifeless and dull. All the structures you build are just grey blobs, it's so unappealing. The way the civilizations work is so retarded, it should've at least been an option in case someone out there actually liked the system. This is like, the second or third time I ever refunded a game on Steam, it was just so boring and ugly to deal with.

Also Harriet Tubman? Fucking really? Who are we gonna get for Civilization VIII, Rosa Parks?

 

[Kane Lives]

IMO Starcraft's influence on the decline of RTS is heavily overstated. The bigger issue was that there was a massive oversaturation of games that were either AoEII reskins that lacked quality control, or took too many ques from Warcraft III and wound up competing against W3's modding scene (which birthed MOBAs, arguably the worst thing it did).

You say that, but I seen multiple new and upcoming RTS games chase the e-sports dragon and fell absolutely flat on their faces. (Grey Goo, COH2 and DOW III comes to mind, though in the case of the latter two it was also dragged down by other absolute dogshit decisions.)

 

[Boss Hawg]

Also Harriet Tubman? Fucking really? Who are we gonna get for Civilization VIII, Rosa Parks?

I want George Floyd as Kang of Amerika.

He gave the game 8/10, didn't mention several glaring issues with it in original review and now he back peddles. Guy got like 60k subs and rug pulls people like a at least million sub channel

Is this the guy who's videos consist of him watching Paradox game timelapses while saying some inane drivel? How does he have any subs?

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

You say that, but I seen multiple new and upcoming RTS games chase the e-sports dragon and fell absolutely flat on their faces. (Grey Goo, COH2 and DOW III comes to mind, though in the case of the latter two it was also dragged down by other absolute dogshit decisions.)

yah DOW3 was a real gut punch after how awesome the other games were. It's wasn't even bad...it was terrible, almost unplayable at launch and the Dev's responses only made shit worse and worse as they spazzed out at the community.

Bitch you were handed a golden goose and you butchered it outright for "reasons" and now your mad that people don't want to play your shitfest?

Get fucked.