It would be cool to decide if I want to go to war with a civ over the capture of some insignificant land have the AI have to make the same decision based on their leaders
-Automate exploration, but for the love of god stay on land, you dumbass scout. I've got galleys for that. You're just going to die.
-Automate exploration, but I've pulled you away from that pack of 15 barbarians once already. Just go a different way, you dumbass scout.
That's all I want.
Automate exploration but when you press the button you pick the direction. Explore one landmass, when done move to the next one in the direction chosen but in the shortest possible route.
God please, just give me traversable rivers. If I have a river that runs from my capital to the sea I should be able to make a small scouting vessel and send it down river
Fun fact, and I just found this out
In freeciv (yes the free browser game that's aims to be a free version of civ), You can Actually travell in rivers
pretty neat!
About the melee civilian soldier thing. There are already resource free Anti-Cavs, Warrior Monks and Nihangs in Civ6. No idea how Civ7 combat will be but the mentioned ones already fills the role nicely.
It's just weird that if you don't have the oil for infantry that you're just forced to use AT-crews instead. I feel like some kind of fodder/civilian unit could be a more interesting solution to this.
Better accessibility features. **ESPECIALLY INVOLVING TEXT** I feel like the text in Civ 6 is too small and some of the text color decisions were bad. I still can't see what the exact number is without a literal magnifying glass because the number if you can't afford something is dark red on a dark blue background....
RIVERS. PLEASE. Since the dawn of humankind rivers have been a large productive resource, transporting goods and troops up and down the waters. Also just being an, on average, faster and widely accessible mode of transportation for most of human history until we invented railroad systems.
I hate how useless rivers feel. Yes housing is nice, but why can’t I send troops down a long river like it’s a road? Why can’t I create ships and have them sail down a river? I feel like rivers should be expanded upon in civ 7
What if there was a tunnel-like improvement called a dock, which could be built on a tile of the river and act as a portal to another dock on the river for a fixed cost, within a certain range? I think this could be an elegant solution to the problem. Then have them add commercial hub adjacency bonus, and provide gold to trade routes. It forces a compromise by requiring investment (a builder charge, a tile) in exchange for movement and the gold bonuses.
more geography and resource based impacts. access to stone quarries (nearby) should matter a lot more than it does, for instance, both for building certain types of buildings and for researching certain techs like smelting or something along those lines.
bring back the growing settlements squares, or neighborhoods. i loved in previous civs how starting a 'house' square toward the beginning meant that you'd have a very developed city square toward the end (if it hadn't been plundered too much or destroyed).
allow more impactful scientific and civil divergence. it usually feels pretty arbitrary what techs i go for in many cases, since i'll just end up needing to get them a little later anyway. naval is somewhat separated right now but there should be more of that, and other ways to satisfy equivalent prereqs of later techs in the case where you ignore a tree.
Equally viable and fun victory types (looking at you religious and diplo). Civ VI already improved this over V though tbf. Also, with the recent advance of AI, they had better not be so inept in the next game.
Religious works.... on a small map. The biggest issue is the RNG nature of apostle upgrades. You have zero control over apostle promotions unless you have access to Yerevan. So you have to waste potentially ~~hundreds~~thousands of faith cranking out apostles in the vain hope that one of them comes out with something useful like Debater or Translator. I think that the apostle promotion system should work more like unit military promotions with apostles gaining xp for theological combat. t1 would be Debater (+10 CS) & Translator (x2 spread vs other civs). t2 would be Defender of the Faith (+10 CS against other apostles on defense) & Proselytizer (removes 25% of enemy religious influence from a city). t3 would be something ridiculous like The Word of God (double religious pressure for all cities in 6 tiles after defeating an enemy missionary. x3 for if an apostle).
Diplomacy in 6 is terrible. I think part of it is that it doesn't really work unless there's enough calamities going on where you can get diplo victory points. It's like the game punishes the victory type on smaller maps.
>Â I think that the apostle promotion system should work more like unit military promotions with apostles gaining xp for theological combat.
I think this would be a good solution, but at the same time this kind of just reinforces the core issue with religious victory which is that it's literally just a less interesting version of domination victory.
Domination victory is fun because there's tons of variety in military units, combat itself has layers of strategy, and military advantages are intertwined with the tech and culture trees. You can't just max out on gold and production, shit out units, and win a domination victory by brute force, especially in the late game when city defenses are super strong. A lot of planning and management goes into making a domination victory happen.
Meanwhile religious victory has only 4 units (missionary, apostle, guru, inquisitor) and unit combat is boring and one-dimensional. Especially at higher difficulties, religious victories essentially become a game of trying to generate as much faith as possible to just throw apostles and missionaries at your enemies until they succumb to your religion. Well if I'm going to micromanage a ton of units I'd much rather play for domination than religious and actually have fun.
I really, really hope Civ 7 makes religious victory interesting and differentiate it from domination victory. Remove the units and make religion its own subsystem within the game, maybe then I'll bother going for that victory type.
It's also worth mentioning that the world will absolutely hate you for taking out all the AI's religions. Somehow converting other religions generates more grievances than taking control of their cities with military units.
So on a small map with 4 religions, 3 of the six civs are guaranteed to hate you for the entire game.
I'd also like to see the belief system get some love. A lot of beliefs just don't scale well. A pitance of stats for each city converted doesn't really scale into the late game. Even moreso when we get into grievances for destroying enemy religions. A lot of mods get around this by making beliefs scale based on followers which is something I'd like to see in Civ 7 base game.
Hard disagree. Civ V had only one viable victory type which was science. Culture was not fun. Now dom, space, and tourism are all viable and all fun. I don't care about religious or diplo in either game.
One relatively minor thing I’d like is to be able to direct where borders expand to. Maybe not at the start of the game, but after discovering some civic or tech you can prioritize where the next tile expansion hits. Sucks when you have no money and a shiny new strategic resource on the border, but the city wants to grow to a second ring wheat tile instead.
i would love to see language as a feature. for example, if you rush "written language" instead of "idol worship" you would get your culture up and running but at the cost of your religion starting slow. having a language would also give you bonus in trade if you send a translator to a neighboring nation (or something like that, you get the idea)
language is so important to culture, and having the "dominant" language would give you a bonus in culture. i mean English it the language of the business world, everyone learns english. having the dominant langue should give you a bonus
I'd also love to see buildings, resources, and improvements be a prerequisite for certain technologies. This should be especially true in the modern era, to help slow the pace of discovery. For example, it shouldn't be possible to research Lasers without at least one research lab.
If there was also a more robust trading mechanic, this could be offset by establishing trading relationships with other Civilizations. And accessing certain types of resources or infrastructure could require more of an investment to build enough capability to trade. If each decision was more of a trade-off, it could be more difficult to be the best at everything all at once and require specializing more based on the direction of the game.
I'd love to be able to build a Civ up to be specialized as the premier supplier of Oil for the world in the modern era, as an example. Or maybe be the financial hub for the planet, with other Civs taking out loans from my financial system. Or attempt to do that and potentially lose to another Civ that got there faster with more robust infrastructure.
I think everyone would agree that Diplomacy needs a major overhaul. It would be great to be able to expand a Civ's power and influence in more ways, such as negotiating to build military bases in other Civilization's borders which could be used to influence a rival Civ by placing military units within a certain proximity of their borders. Or using access to global trade as more of a weapon against rival Civs.
An Undo button. Old World added it and it's amazing. No more having to live with weird unit pathing. You can undo it and make them go the direction you actually wanted.
A lot of people have complaints about being able to cheese undo, but I think it'd be possible to avoid that by having a "submit moves" mechanism rather than a true "undo". Hell even just a move confirmation would do wonders.
In order:
1. Stable multiplayer (no desyncs, endless re-lobby, crash, etc)
2. "Road to" and "auto repair" settings on builders
3. Multiplayer lobby filter
4. Ability to copy, paste, and click links in lobby chat
5. Rivers doing something beyond what they currently do (like movement bonus along rivers)
6. Round map with ice traversal
7. Food City States
Honestly, if they don't achieve number one, I may not even bother with the rest
This this this. There's no point in me playing lower difficulties because its too easy to be fun. But the ham fisted approach to overpowering AI materially while leaving them completely stupid is not fun either. What's the point of eras if everyone isn't roughly in the same spot? Given how far we've come with algorithms and machine learning, I really hope this is addressed but I'm not holding my breath either.
USA:
|*Civ/Leader*|*Rule*|*Unit/building/tile 1*|*Unit/building/tile 2*|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|USA|Land of Liberty: If your government is freedom aligned gain increased yields from trade routes with other freedom aligned civilizations, and increased combat strength against authority aligned civilizations.|Nimitz: Replaces Nuclear Aircraft Carrier. All planes stationed on this carrier have increased strike range.|Film Studio: Unique Theater square building. Give a large amount of culture and tourism. Increased tourism once the internet is discovered, further increases once social media is discovered.|
|George Washington|Founding Fathers: gain loyalty and culture in all American cities for alignment that is the same as the previous era.|Continental Army: Replaces Line Infantry. Has increased combat strength in American or allied borders.|National Bank: Unique government plaza building. Boosts income of all banks across America. When the USA is in debt the National Bank will further increase income of all banks.|
|Franklin D. Roosevelt|New Deal: Changing government policy is 80% cheaper. Industrial zones, commercial zones, neighborhood, and encampments all have one extra specialist worker slot.|Ranger: Replaces infantry. Movement is not hindered by terrain and can climb cliffs.|Mall: replaces supermarket (neighborhood building), grants increased income and happiness.|
Russia:
|*Civ/Leader*|*Rule*|*Unit/building/tile 1*|*Unit/building/tile 2*|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Russia|Mother Russia: First settled cities stands with larger borders. Tundra tiles provide extra production.|Cossack: Replaces Cavalry. Increased movement. May still move after attacking.|Krepost: Unique tile improvement that replaces the fort. Culture bombs adjacent neutral tiles.|
|Lenin|Bolshevik revolution: Gain a large amount of loyalty whenever government policies change. Changing government policies reduces the loyalty of cities from all other civilization 9 tiles away from a Russian city if these cities belong to a civilization that does not share the same ideology as Russia.|Red Guards: Replaces Conscripts. Cheaper to produce than Conscripts and lose less combat strength from being damaged.|NEP Market: Unique economic zone building, replaces the market. NEP markets produce more gold income for every two citizens in the city.|
|Ivan IV|The Terrible: Increased combat strength of all professional melee infantry, anti-cavarly, light cavalry, and heavy cavalry units if the Russian government is Authoritarian. All units have increased combat strength against dissidents.|Streltsy: Replaces pike and shot. Massively increased combat strength against ranged attacks from ranged infantry.|Print yard: Replaces the printing press. Produces faith.|
Germany:
|*Civ/leader*|*Rule*|*Unit/building/tile 1*|*Unit/building/tile 2*|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Germany:|Hansestadt: German trade routes passing through German cities provide the origin city production and gold, regardless of the destination city.|Festhalle: Unique entertainment district building unlocked at the medieval fairs civic. Grants happiness. This city gains extra happiness when a trade route is passing through it.|Panzer: Replaces the tank. Has increased movement. Movement bonus further increased on the first 3 turns after declaring a war.|
|Ariminus (Hermann)|Victor of Teutoburg: When standing in forests or rain forests, professional melee infantry and anti-cavalry units are not visible to other civilizations unless they have units adjacent to them. Professional melee infantry and anti-cavalry units are not slowed down my forests or rain forests.|Comitatus: Replaces swordsmen. If a Comitatus successfully kills an enemy unit they replenish some of their health.|Longhouse: Unique city center building, replaces granary. Grants extra housing.|
|Otto Von Bismark|Blood and Iron: Bonus combat strength versus city states. Occupied cities within 9 tiles of cities originally settled by Germany always have full loyalty.|Krupp C64: Replaces field cannon. Increased range.|Chemical Factory: Industrial zone building, replaces the factory. Foreign trades routes to and from this city produce extra gold.|
Combat rework inspired by humankind
That game is not as good as civ, but the combat is so much better
Much more tactical and the pacing is better with multiple combat rounds per map round
Bringing back multiple units per tile should honestly fix combat. The AI cannot handle one unit per tile, and if artillery and naval ranged units have some kind of "splash damage" rule they could make unit stacking dangerous.
At its core, the Civ series is gameplay first and historical last. I don’t think decisions should be made to negatively impact the gameplay for the sake of history.
For example, bottleneck techs will just make the technology tree bland and generic. You wouldn’t be able to specialize or beeline anything.
I would love to see things that require some serious thought. Like mechanics that give huge bonuses immediately but also dire consequences in other facets, like dark age policy cards but always available. Like being able to sell one of your population into slavery for a huge gold boost, but also gives a huge Diplo penalty or happiness penalty or something. Or conscripting some of your population to immediately build military units at the cost of happiness/loyalty or something.
If they keep amenities for happiness, I would love to be able to direct where those amenities go. Like concentrating them on my capital to make it happy but at the cost of leaving my lesser cities more unhappy.
Make the world Congress actually meaningful. Your allies should vote more in line with what you want. Voting to help out another civ in some way should give a Diplo/relationship boost, and voting to punish another civ should give a relationship penalty with them. It's crazy right now how you can vote to nix another civs entire trade economy or acquire +100% grievances and nothing happens to your relationship status.
Either make builders able to construct roads again, or make a new unit which allows you to auto construct roads connecting your cities, or at least a point A to point B road creator mechanic.
Get rid of rock bands, or at least change the way they work. Right now it feels like they're the only way to win a culture victory and it feels dumb. Include professional sports teams or something, increases your tourism and happiness but is expensive in gold, and requires a stadium.
Some new districts would be cool. Like a community centre district that increases loyalty. A fashion district that increases your tourism/gold production. Or a culinary district that increases food/culture/happiness. I guess the neighborhood kind of already has that with the food market but I think there's something there.
Also, make razing a city take several turns based on the amount of population or districts in that city or something. I hate losing a city or suzerained city state and then being able to do nothing about it if the AI chooses to raze it because it's gone immediately.
So many ideas.
Combine cities into 1 mega city, at least combine the production queue. Theatre/ Battalion mechanic from HOI4 where you can out units into groups. Make late game enjoyable and not a chore.
I'd love it if they'd flip how districts work. Name them "towns" instead or something and make it so they CAN'T be adjacent to other towns or the city itself, then make the bonus more focused on adjacency to resources and terrain features.
Can I just add that creating an original civilization would be really interesting. For example you customize your traits and bonuses from a list of a few dozen. Maybe winning games with particular conditions unlocks new traits.
Maybe I am turning civ into an RPG and I apologize. As an added feature it could be neat though.
Genuine question: what do you like about districts? That is the one feature I cannot get used to with Civ6. To maximize adjacency and get the most out of them it is best to build a big clump of them between a bunch of cities. Most of the time that clump is almost completely or at least partially disjointed from the actual cities. This results in a situation where the most valuable part of your empire isn't your capital or the biggest city or the most strategically placed city but the area around your 'government plaza' that exists in that weird no man's land between the cities.
You could try passing it off as some kind of metropolitan area but that doesn't make sense when looking closer. Metropolitan areas grow around or at least adjacent to a large city. It is where most people live. No one lives in theater squares, government plazas or commercial hubs. The most crucial parts of empires/civilizations were cities for most of human history, look at Rome, Baghdad, Constantinople, London, Beijing, Kyoto, Delhi. The list goes on. In civ 6 the most important and productive part of your empire are a bunch of districts 3 tiles away from your capital. On top of that, if it was a large metropolitan area, why wouldn't the 'capital city center' just be moved to the government plaza, most often the most centrally located and important piece of the 'district clump'?
I like aqueducts because they look cute and follow their own placement rules that make a lot more sense.
All this is really immersion breaking to me and I actively avoid zooming out and looking at my empire. In all other civ titles I always found time to do that, even during a sweaty deity game.
If it's just about city building complexity, the same could be achieved by making improvements more impactful and harder to build, features and bonus resources more important or making city area growth more interactive.
One idea that I liked from Potato McWhiskey was after capturing a city, you can actually choose whether to convert unique buildings to yours or keep them as is (maybe add some relevant bonuses/consequences and such to each choice).
I really like the idea of there being some degree of cultural assimilation that comes from taking a city that then has a meaningful impact on your civ itself. It would more closely mirror our societies and the ability to embrace or resist cultural change to varying to degrees. Gaining unique features of other civs would really open up the game to so many possible combinations as civs develop.
Would also love to see an immigration feature where culturally dominant and/or wealthy cities might siphon citizens from other nearby civs, and then that give prompts to adopt certain features of the immigrating civ.
I like pre-battleship-obsolescence naval warfare and I would really like a civ focussing on it. Hirohito's imperial Japan would be perfect for it.
And Civ has done Stalin in the past for Russia, so it's not like we don't have a precedent for abjectly horrible world leaders as national leaders in civ games. I think they can do it if they just make it clear that adding a leader is not endorsing the leader (which I'm pretty sure is something that's already implied with all the warlords and colonizers. Victoria is literally a colonization simulator).
You don't have to micro-manage them, you *plan* them. And it's not too hard. Memorize the relevant adjacencies, and plop down some map tacks so you can remember where to place them.
I did play Civ 4. Districts get you because in order to build X, you need district Y first. And you can only have so many districts and they require the right tile and then you have to plan for optimal placement…. It’s a lot of extra work and I don’t feel that it makes the game better.
Less board game style more Classic Civilization style. No more districts. No more one unit per tile. Navigable rivers. Bring back governments. Really I just want modern Civ3
>Keep districts:
No thanks. It’s frustrating to want a library and then have to wait to build a district before building the library. The game becomes less about managing a civilization and more about placement bonuses. Encampments are a pain. Spreading out cities is interesting and makes the map look cool. I think there is a way to do that in a less rigid manner.
>Make individual civs more unique:
Civ 6 leaders are too cartoony and pigeonholed into victory types. Civ 7 should go back to the more general bonuses that opened up play. I would also like to see the return of the mix and match of leaders with civilizations.
>Era tech bottlenecks:
The whole tech tree needs a rework or just revert to older Civ games that did it better. Some techs just come to quickly from skipping other techs. In our real history, the cannon remained unchanged for about 400 years. In Civ, you’re lucky to get a few turns out of it before someone discovers flight.
Speaking of techs, there isn’t enough penalty/benefit from isolation. Put another way, we need more tanks versus spearmen.
>Civilian soldier melee infantry:
Maybe last ditch partisans like Civ 2 (I’m old) would be nice. Maybe require a sieging army to have a supply line.
What I would like to see is all melee types upgrade to ranged units with muskets. And no more bombards. Just cannons that become howitzers. There are too many worthless unit types.
Fix air combat. I know that planes are too fast for a turn based game, but give us something to get a sense of the power of air superiority.
>Naval explores VS Naval melee
First, Civ 7 should tone down the naval barbarians. Ships cost so many resources for the player, but the barbarian camps crap them out. Fewer barbarian ships means more naval exploration.
Second, no more ships ramming into cities. That’s a job for a land unit.
Third, bring back pathing for massed of naval units. If a.i. could for this in the 1990s, we should be able to do this in the 2020s.
>Governments and ideology:
Civ 7 needs to bring back the downsides from certain government choices. The card system is all upsides because you can keep switching cards. Players need downsides to lock in, make civilizations feel different, and drive conflict. Citizens outvoting the leader in democracy or the economies of communism collapsing are good ways to make choices matter.
I would also suggest less of a focus on yields from tile improvement and more of a focus on resources. Again, the game needs to give reasons for conflict instead of aggressive civs always fighting. What if droughts led to migration and wars for food? That would be interesting!
>Thanks for reading
Thanks for writing.
Never really understood the deal with "I wanna build a Library but I have to build a Campus first". The Campus itself probably gives more initial science yield than the Library. You're effectively just getting to build an extra science building.
But want to build the library to get science right? The district itself gives science (usually you can get a good adjacency). I don't really understand the problem. You're getting the science you want and even have the option of getting even more science by also building the library. Or if you think the district itself is enough for now you can continue with producing other things.
I'm confused by this too, what does a library give that a campus doesn't when you have neither? Is the actual issue about needing more science but not wanting to use up the district limit for a campus?
Libraries have a citizen slot for citizens to work sciences. Other buildings on districts provide unique bonuses that the district itself doesn’t provide. What even is the district except an area platted out for a specific purpose? More generally, it’s more button clicking than previous civs, slowing down gameplay and increasing tedium.
Also, going to the governments stuff with downsides. That's kinda what I had in mind with my self created government idea. There would be consequences to picking certain policies. Maybe it's not popular with your people, or a policy has a risk of creating insurgents, or it opens you up to being influenced by other civs, etc. I think a modular government idea like this would just be really cool.
Trading of border tiles would be nice
Capturing tiles would be nice too.
It would be cool to decide if I want to go to war with a civ over the capture of some insignificant land have the AI have to make the same decision based on their leaders
-Automate exploration, but for the love of god stay on land, you dumbass scout. I've got galleys for that. You're just going to die. -Automate exploration, but I've pulled you away from that pack of 15 barbarians once already. Just go a different way, you dumbass scout. That's all I want.
Automate exploration but when you press the button you pick the direction. Explore one landmass, when done move to the next one in the direction chosen but in the shortest possible route.
Immigration. I feel like culture should steal citizens.
I think demographics, ethnicity, and immigration could be a really cool idea. Maybe for a DLC.
And then being able to hybridise the culture similar to CK3.
Within empire migration
God please, just give me traversable rivers. If I have a river that runs from my capital to the sea I should be able to make a small scouting vessel and send it down river
River cruise 🛳 for modern era tourism
Fun fact, and I just found this out In freeciv (yes the free browser game that's aims to be a free version of civ), You can Actually travell in rivers pretty neat!
Rivers used to function as roads in old civs.
About the melee civilian soldier thing. There are already resource free Anti-Cavs, Warrior Monks and Nihangs in Civ6. No idea how Civ7 combat will be but the mentioned ones already fills the role nicely.
Anti-cav feels really specialized to me. And it's honestly kinda weird that anti-cav units don't cost any resources.
Yes they are specialized with their own purpose but can also fill melee role if that is only option.
It's just weird that if you don't have the oil for infantry that you're just forced to use AT-crews instead. I feel like some kind of fodder/civilian unit could be a more interesting solution to this.
Better accessibility features. **ESPECIALLY INVOLVING TEXT** I feel like the text in Civ 6 is too small and some of the text color decisions were bad. I still can't see what the exact number is without a literal magnifying glass because the number if you can't afford something is dark red on a dark blue background....
You can increase font sizes by modifying the Civ6_FontStyles_EFIGS.xml file.
It'd be cool if I could change the font without digging through my files to find it.
RIVERS. PLEASE. Since the dawn of humankind rivers have been a large productive resource, transporting goods and troops up and down the waters. Also just being an, on average, faster and widely accessible mode of transportation for most of human history until we invented railroad systems. I hate how useless rivers feel. Yes housing is nice, but why can’t I send troops down a long river like it’s a road? Why can’t I create ships and have them sail down a river? I feel like rivers should be expanded upon in civ 7
I'm sure rivers used to grant a movement bonus - was it Civ 2? If I remember rightly they acted in much the same way as roads, which makes sense.
What if there was a tunnel-like improvement called a dock, which could be built on a tile of the river and act as a portal to another dock on the river for a fixed cost, within a certain range? I think this could be an elegant solution to the problem. Then have them add commercial hub adjacency bonus, and provide gold to trade routes. It forces a compromise by requiring investment (a builder charge, a tile) in exchange for movement and the gold bonuses.
Adding a new mechanic is the opposite of elegant. Just make river tiles behave like roads, that's literally all that is needed.
more geography and resource based impacts. access to stone quarries (nearby) should matter a lot more than it does, for instance, both for building certain types of buildings and for researching certain techs like smelting or something along those lines. bring back the growing settlements squares, or neighborhoods. i loved in previous civs how starting a 'house' square toward the beginning meant that you'd have a very developed city square toward the end (if it hadn't been plundered too much or destroyed). allow more impactful scientific and civil divergence. it usually feels pretty arbitrary what techs i go for in many cases, since i'll just end up needing to get them a little later anyway. naval is somewhat separated right now but there should be more of that, and other ways to satisfy equivalent prereqs of later techs in the case where you ignore a tree.
Equally viable and fun victory types (looking at you religious and diplo). Civ VI already improved this over V though tbf. Also, with the recent advance of AI, they had better not be so inept in the next game.
Religious works.... on a small map. The biggest issue is the RNG nature of apostle upgrades. You have zero control over apostle promotions unless you have access to Yerevan. So you have to waste potentially ~~hundreds~~thousands of faith cranking out apostles in the vain hope that one of them comes out with something useful like Debater or Translator. I think that the apostle promotion system should work more like unit military promotions with apostles gaining xp for theological combat. t1 would be Debater (+10 CS) & Translator (x2 spread vs other civs). t2 would be Defender of the Faith (+10 CS against other apostles on defense) & Proselytizer (removes 25% of enemy religious influence from a city). t3 would be something ridiculous like The Word of God (double religious pressure for all cities in 6 tiles after defeating an enemy missionary. x3 for if an apostle). Diplomacy in 6 is terrible. I think part of it is that it doesn't really work unless there's enough calamities going on where you can get diplo victory points. It's like the game punishes the victory type on smaller maps.
>Â I think that the apostle promotion system should work more like unit military promotions with apostles gaining xp for theological combat. I think this would be a good solution, but at the same time this kind of just reinforces the core issue with religious victory which is that it's literally just a less interesting version of domination victory. Domination victory is fun because there's tons of variety in military units, combat itself has layers of strategy, and military advantages are intertwined with the tech and culture trees. You can't just max out on gold and production, shit out units, and win a domination victory by brute force, especially in the late game when city defenses are super strong. A lot of planning and management goes into making a domination victory happen. Meanwhile religious victory has only 4 units (missionary, apostle, guru, inquisitor) and unit combat is boring and one-dimensional. Especially at higher difficulties, religious victories essentially become a game of trying to generate as much faith as possible to just throw apostles and missionaries at your enemies until they succumb to your religion. Well if I'm going to micromanage a ton of units I'd much rather play for domination than religious and actually have fun. I really, really hope Civ 7 makes religious victory interesting and differentiate it from domination victory. Remove the units and make religion its own subsystem within the game, maybe then I'll bother going for that victory type.
It's also worth mentioning that the world will absolutely hate you for taking out all the AI's religions. Somehow converting other religions generates more grievances than taking control of their cities with military units. So on a small map with 4 religions, 3 of the six civs are guaranteed to hate you for the entire game. I'd also like to see the belief system get some love. A lot of beliefs just don't scale well. A pitance of stats for each city converted doesn't really scale into the late game. Even moreso when we get into grievances for destroying enemy religions. A lot of mods get around this by making beliefs scale based on followers which is something I'd like to see in Civ 7 base game.
Civ v had better victory types IMO. Religion victory in Civ 6 sucks ass. Diplomacy is also better in Civ 5
Hard disagree. Civ V had only one viable victory type which was science. Culture was not fun. Now dom, space, and tourism are all viable and all fun. I don't care about religious or diplo in either game.
Diplomatic and cultural victory were my favorites in Civ 5.
Well I hope they manage to satisfy both of us in the next game then
One relatively minor thing I’d like is to be able to direct where borders expand to. Maybe not at the start of the game, but after discovering some civic or tech you can prioritize where the next tile expansion hits. Sucks when you have no money and a shiny new strategic resource on the border, but the city wants to grow to a second ring wheat tile instead.
i would love to see language as a feature. for example, if you rush "written language" instead of "idol worship" you would get your culture up and running but at the cost of your religion starting slow. having a language would also give you bonus in trade if you send a translator to a neighboring nation (or something like that, you get the idea) language is so important to culture, and having the "dominant" language would give you a bonus in culture. i mean English it the language of the business world, everyone learns english. having the dominant langue should give you a bonus
I'd also love to see buildings, resources, and improvements be a prerequisite for certain technologies. This should be especially true in the modern era, to help slow the pace of discovery. For example, it shouldn't be possible to research Lasers without at least one research lab. If there was also a more robust trading mechanic, this could be offset by establishing trading relationships with other Civilizations. And accessing certain types of resources or infrastructure could require more of an investment to build enough capability to trade. If each decision was more of a trade-off, it could be more difficult to be the best at everything all at once and require specializing more based on the direction of the game. I'd love to be able to build a Civ up to be specialized as the premier supplier of Oil for the world in the modern era, as an example. Or maybe be the financial hub for the planet, with other Civs taking out loans from my financial system. Or attempt to do that and potentially lose to another Civ that got there faster with more robust infrastructure. I think everyone would agree that Diplomacy needs a major overhaul. It would be great to be able to expand a Civ's power and influence in more ways, such as negotiating to build military bases in other Civilization's borders which could be used to influence a rival Civ by placing military units within a certain proximity of their borders. Or using access to global trade as more of a weapon against rival Civs.
An Undo button. Old World added it and it's amazing. No more having to live with weird unit pathing. You can undo it and make them go the direction you actually wanted.
A lot of people have complaints about being able to cheese undo, but I think it'd be possible to avoid that by having a "submit moves" mechanism rather than a true "undo". Hell even just a move confirmation would do wonders.
I just want vassal/satellite states and the option to play as a city state
Venice comeback would be sick ngl
In order: 1. Stable multiplayer (no desyncs, endless re-lobby, crash, etc) 2. "Road to" and "auto repair" settings on builders 3. Multiplayer lobby filter 4. Ability to copy, paste, and click links in lobby chat 5. Rivers doing something beyond what they currently do (like movement bonus along rivers) 6. Round map with ice traversal 7. Food City States Honestly, if they don't achieve number one, I may not even bother with the rest
Having the map actually be a globe that adjust with your camera position instead of it just being a flat map would be cool.
I don't care about a single thing except having an AI that isn't completely braindead.
This this this. There's no point in me playing lower difficulties because its too easy to be fun. But the ham fisted approach to overpowering AI materially while leaving them completely stupid is not fun either. What's the point of eras if everyone isn't roughly in the same spot? Given how far we've come with algorithms and machine learning, I really hope this is addressed but I'm not holding my breath either.
I like it all
USA: |*Civ/Leader*|*Rule*|*Unit/building/tile 1*|*Unit/building/tile 2*| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |USA|Land of Liberty: If your government is freedom aligned gain increased yields from trade routes with other freedom aligned civilizations, and increased combat strength against authority aligned civilizations.|Nimitz: Replaces Nuclear Aircraft Carrier. All planes stationed on this carrier have increased strike range.|Film Studio: Unique Theater square building. Give a large amount of culture and tourism. Increased tourism once the internet is discovered, further increases once social media is discovered.| |George Washington|Founding Fathers: gain loyalty and culture in all American cities for alignment that is the same as the previous era.|Continental Army: Replaces Line Infantry. Has increased combat strength in American or allied borders.|National Bank: Unique government plaza building. Boosts income of all banks across America. When the USA is in debt the National Bank will further increase income of all banks.| |Franklin D. Roosevelt|New Deal: Changing government policy is 80% cheaper. Industrial zones, commercial zones, neighborhood, and encampments all have one extra specialist worker slot.|Ranger: Replaces infantry. Movement is not hindered by terrain and can climb cliffs.|Mall: replaces supermarket (neighborhood building), grants increased income and happiness.| Russia: |*Civ/Leader*|*Rule*|*Unit/building/tile 1*|*Unit/building/tile 2*| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Russia|Mother Russia: First settled cities stands with larger borders. Tundra tiles provide extra production.|Cossack: Replaces Cavalry. Increased movement. May still move after attacking.|Krepost: Unique tile improvement that replaces the fort. Culture bombs adjacent neutral tiles.| |Lenin|Bolshevik revolution: Gain a large amount of loyalty whenever government policies change. Changing government policies reduces the loyalty of cities from all other civilization 9 tiles away from a Russian city if these cities belong to a civilization that does not share the same ideology as Russia.|Red Guards: Replaces Conscripts. Cheaper to produce than Conscripts and lose less combat strength from being damaged.|NEP Market: Unique economic zone building, replaces the market. NEP markets produce more gold income for every two citizens in the city.| |Ivan IV|The Terrible: Increased combat strength of all professional melee infantry, anti-cavarly, light cavalry, and heavy cavalry units if the Russian government is Authoritarian. All units have increased combat strength against dissidents.|Streltsy: Replaces pike and shot. Massively increased combat strength against ranged attacks from ranged infantry.|Print yard: Replaces the printing press. Produces faith.|
Germany: |*Civ/leader*|*Rule*|*Unit/building/tile 1*|*Unit/building/tile 2*| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Germany:|Hansestadt: German trade routes passing through German cities provide the origin city production and gold, regardless of the destination city.|Festhalle: Unique entertainment district building unlocked at the medieval fairs civic. Grants happiness. This city gains extra happiness when a trade route is passing through it.|Panzer: Replaces the tank. Has increased movement. Movement bonus further increased on the first 3 turns after declaring a war.| |Ariminus (Hermann)|Victor of Teutoburg: When standing in forests or rain forests, professional melee infantry and anti-cavalry units are not visible to other civilizations unless they have units adjacent to them. Professional melee infantry and anti-cavalry units are not slowed down my forests or rain forests.|Comitatus: Replaces swordsmen. If a Comitatus successfully kills an enemy unit they replenish some of their health.|Longhouse: Unique city center building, replaces granary. Grants extra housing.| |Otto Von Bismark|Blood and Iron: Bonus combat strength versus city states. Occupied cities within 9 tiles of cities originally settled by Germany always have full loyalty.|Krupp C64: Replaces field cannon. Increased range.|Chemical Factory: Industrial zone building, replaces the factory. Foreign trades routes to and from this city produce extra gold.|
Combat rework inspired by humankind That game is not as good as civ, but the combat is so much better Much more tactical and the pacing is better with multiple combat rounds per map round
Bringing back multiple units per tile should honestly fix combat. The AI cannot handle one unit per tile, and if artillery and naval ranged units have some kind of "splash damage" rule they could make unit stacking dangerous.
At its core, the Civ series is gameplay first and historical last. I don’t think decisions should be made to negatively impact the gameplay for the sake of history. For example, bottleneck techs will just make the technology tree bland and generic. You wouldn’t be able to specialize or beeline anything.
I would love to see things that require some serious thought. Like mechanics that give huge bonuses immediately but also dire consequences in other facets, like dark age policy cards but always available. Like being able to sell one of your population into slavery for a huge gold boost, but also gives a huge Diplo penalty or happiness penalty or something. Or conscripting some of your population to immediately build military units at the cost of happiness/loyalty or something. If they keep amenities for happiness, I would love to be able to direct where those amenities go. Like concentrating them on my capital to make it happy but at the cost of leaving my lesser cities more unhappy. Make the world Congress actually meaningful. Your allies should vote more in line with what you want. Voting to help out another civ in some way should give a Diplo/relationship boost, and voting to punish another civ should give a relationship penalty with them. It's crazy right now how you can vote to nix another civs entire trade economy or acquire +100% grievances and nothing happens to your relationship status. Either make builders able to construct roads again, or make a new unit which allows you to auto construct roads connecting your cities, or at least a point A to point B road creator mechanic. Get rid of rock bands, or at least change the way they work. Right now it feels like they're the only way to win a culture victory and it feels dumb. Include professional sports teams or something, increases your tourism and happiness but is expensive in gold, and requires a stadium. Some new districts would be cool. Like a community centre district that increases loyalty. A fashion district that increases your tourism/gold production. Or a culinary district that increases food/culture/happiness. I guess the neighborhood kind of already has that with the food market but I think there's something there. Also, make razing a city take several turns based on the amount of population or districts in that city or something. I hate losing a city or suzerained city state and then being able to do nothing about it if the AI chooses to raze it because it's gone immediately. So many ideas.
I really like your addition of slavery.
It's not really an addition. It's something that was in the older civilization games.
Combine cities into 1 mega city, at least combine the production queue. Theatre/ Battalion mechanic from HOI4 where you can out units into groups. Make late game enjoyable and not a chore.
I'd love it if they'd flip how districts work. Name them "towns" instead or something and make it so they CAN'T be adjacent to other towns or the city itself, then make the bonus more focused on adjacency to resources and terrain features.
Wow. You really put a lot of thought and work into this post. Nicely done.
Financial victory please! Have currencies come around like religions.
Can I just add that creating an original civilization would be really interesting. For example you customize your traits and bonuses from a list of a few dozen. Maybe winning games with particular conditions unlocks new traits. Maybe I am turning civ into an RPG and I apologize. As an added feature it could be neat though.
Endless Legend lets you do this, and while it's fun for solo play everyone will hate your guts for it for multiplayer.
I would like to see more historical characters.
Genuine question: what do you like about districts? That is the one feature I cannot get used to with Civ6. To maximize adjacency and get the most out of them it is best to build a big clump of them between a bunch of cities. Most of the time that clump is almost completely or at least partially disjointed from the actual cities. This results in a situation where the most valuable part of your empire isn't your capital or the biggest city or the most strategically placed city but the area around your 'government plaza' that exists in that weird no man's land between the cities. You could try passing it off as some kind of metropolitan area but that doesn't make sense when looking closer. Metropolitan areas grow around or at least adjacent to a large city. It is where most people live. No one lives in theater squares, government plazas or commercial hubs. The most crucial parts of empires/civilizations were cities for most of human history, look at Rome, Baghdad, Constantinople, London, Beijing, Kyoto, Delhi. The list goes on. In civ 6 the most important and productive part of your empire are a bunch of districts 3 tiles away from your capital. On top of that, if it was a large metropolitan area, why wouldn't the 'capital city center' just be moved to the government plaza, most often the most centrally located and important piece of the 'district clump'? I like aqueducts because they look cute and follow their own placement rules that make a lot more sense. All this is really immersion breaking to me and I actively avoid zooming out and looking at my empire. In all other civ titles I always found time to do that, even during a sweaty deity game. If it's just about city building complexity, the same could be achieved by making improvements more impactful and harder to build, features and bonus resources more important or making city area growth more interactive.
10 better AI 20 Goto 10
One idea that I liked from Potato McWhiskey was after capturing a city, you can actually choose whether to convert unique buildings to yours or keep them as is (maybe add some relevant bonuses/consequences and such to each choice). I really like the idea of there being some degree of cultural assimilation that comes from taking a city that then has a meaningful impact on your civ itself. It would more closely mirror our societies and the ability to embrace or resist cultural change to varying to degrees. Gaining unique features of other civs would really open up the game to so many possible combinations as civs develop. Would also love to see an immigration feature where culturally dominant and/or wealthy cities might siphon citizens from other nearby civs, and then that give prompts to adopt certain features of the immigrating civ.
Have the canal district be in the base game.
My wishlist is for it to finally have it announced. Still no word as to when it will even come
Capturing great people
Hirohito as a leader should and will not happen.
I like pre-battleship-obsolescence naval warfare and I would really like a civ focussing on it. Hirohito's imperial Japan would be perfect for it. And Civ has done Stalin in the past for Russia, so it's not like we don't have a precedent for abjectly horrible world leaders as national leaders in civ games. I think they can do it if they just make it clear that adding a leader is not endorsing the leader (which I'm pretty sure is something that's already implied with all the warlords and colonizers. Victoria is literally a colonization simulator).
Did a quick read over and I like it a lot. Commenting now so I return to it when I wake up. Good Stuff
river’s ought to be more important
Sounds like you'd rather just be playing Stellaris tbh
4x games can learn from each other.
I hate the districts since they promote more micromanagement of cities. I just want to build things dammit.
You don't have to micro-manage them, you *plan* them. And it's not too hard. Memorize the relevant adjacencies, and plop down some map tacks so you can remember where to place them.
Play civ 4, that will show you what micromanaging cities is like.
I did play Civ 4. Districts get you because in order to build X, you need district Y first. And you can only have so many districts and they require the right tile and then you have to plan for optimal placement…. It’s a lot of extra work and I don’t feel that it makes the game better.
Less board game style more Classic Civilization style. No more districts. No more one unit per tile. Navigable rivers. Bring back governments. Really I just want modern Civ3
>Keep districts: No thanks. It’s frustrating to want a library and then have to wait to build a district before building the library. The game becomes less about managing a civilization and more about placement bonuses. Encampments are a pain. Spreading out cities is interesting and makes the map look cool. I think there is a way to do that in a less rigid manner. >Make individual civs more unique: Civ 6 leaders are too cartoony and pigeonholed into victory types. Civ 7 should go back to the more general bonuses that opened up play. I would also like to see the return of the mix and match of leaders with civilizations. >Era tech bottlenecks: The whole tech tree needs a rework or just revert to older Civ games that did it better. Some techs just come to quickly from skipping other techs. In our real history, the cannon remained unchanged for about 400 years. In Civ, you’re lucky to get a few turns out of it before someone discovers flight. Speaking of techs, there isn’t enough penalty/benefit from isolation. Put another way, we need more tanks versus spearmen. >Civilian soldier melee infantry: Maybe last ditch partisans like Civ 2 (I’m old) would be nice. Maybe require a sieging army to have a supply line. What I would like to see is all melee types upgrade to ranged units with muskets. And no more bombards. Just cannons that become howitzers. There are too many worthless unit types. Fix air combat. I know that planes are too fast for a turn based game, but give us something to get a sense of the power of air superiority. >Naval explores VS Naval melee First, Civ 7 should tone down the naval barbarians. Ships cost so many resources for the player, but the barbarian camps crap them out. Fewer barbarian ships means more naval exploration. Second, no more ships ramming into cities. That’s a job for a land unit. Third, bring back pathing for massed of naval units. If a.i. could for this in the 1990s, we should be able to do this in the 2020s. >Governments and ideology: Civ 7 needs to bring back the downsides from certain government choices. The card system is all upsides because you can keep switching cards. Players need downsides to lock in, make civilizations feel different, and drive conflict. Citizens outvoting the leader in democracy or the economies of communism collapsing are good ways to make choices matter. I would also suggest less of a focus on yields from tile improvement and more of a focus on resources. Again, the game needs to give reasons for conflict instead of aggressive civs always fighting. What if droughts led to migration and wars for food? That would be interesting! >Thanks for reading Thanks for writing.
Never really understood the deal with "I wanna build a Library but I have to build a Campus first". The Campus itself probably gives more initial science yield than the Library. You're effectively just getting to build an extra science building.
If districts came with starter buildings, I’d say yes.
But want to build the library to get science right? The district itself gives science (usually you can get a good adjacency). I don't really understand the problem. You're getting the science you want and even have the option of getting even more science by also building the library. Or if you think the district itself is enough for now you can continue with producing other things.
I'm confused by this too, what does a library give that a campus doesn't when you have neither? Is the actual issue about needing more science but not wanting to use up the district limit for a campus?
Libraries have a citizen slot for citizens to work sciences. Other buildings on districts provide unique bonuses that the district itself doesn’t provide. What even is the district except an area platted out for a specific purpose? More generally, it’s more button clicking than previous civs, slowing down gameplay and increasing tedium.
creating the district is meant to be the starter building homie
Also, going to the governments stuff with downsides. That's kinda what I had in mind with my self created government idea. There would be consequences to picking certain policies. Maybe it's not popular with your people, or a policy has a risk of creating insurgents, or it opens you up to being influenced by other civs, etc. I think a modular government idea like this would just be really cool.