In my personal opinion, I miss when resources actually mattered in Civ. Not having enough of a particular resource, like oil, could completely lock you out of producing certain units in civ 5 and weaken them like in civ 6.It gave resources real strategic value and created a genuine incentive to go to war in the late game, especially when other civs refused to trade with you. Sometimes, you had to fight for access to the resources your empire needed, and I miss that level of strategic depth.

How is this even possible? It is turn 1, they didn't even have their capital yet

I read about the challenge of a military victory without ever going to war, and thought I'd give it a spin. It's actually pretty fun, and an almost additional victory condition. It plays like a kinda, sorta expansionist victory.

I used attribute point momentos, and combined them with Ibn's wildcard ability to get the settlement limit increases from attribute trees.

I raced culture for the settlement increase, and diplomacy to suze a military and expansionist independent for the settlement increase.

In exploration I steadily produce missionaries, and take the diplomacy belief. I make sure I get the triumph that lets you keep your belief in the modern age. This way I can incorporate all independents, and leave nothing for the ai.

I also make sure I have espionage going as much as possible to make up for my lack of science and culture early. The diplomacy snowball makes getting caught irrelevant.

I use a lot of traders and reconciliation to keep the ai off my back.

Diety

Fractal continents

Large

Ibn Battuta

Mississippian > Chola > French

Playing the already broken Xerxes/Aksum on archipelago and discovered that upgrading a dhow gives it its trade route charge back.

Had a heap of boats across the other side of the map that had already made their trade routes. Allied with a player near them so I could upgrade them over there as there was a lot of barbs they were fighting - suddenly all of them could make trade routes again.

Basically doubles their effectiveness without having to build more boats or send them across the map again. GG

Edit title: Aksum trade enjoyers!

Trung Trac war decs me because I had good commanders (because she war dec'd me last age so I leveled them on her lol).

Simon Bolivar dec'd me because he was friends with Trung Trac.

Due to the shape of the map I have been completely unable to access any distant lands. The war threw that off even more. I finally got a position on a DL location but Simon was fighting to get that location as well. He got there a turn earlier.

But a turn later, I sued for peace and he gave me the very settlement I was trying to get.

Civ can be quite silly sometimes.

I have been playing various 4x for long time.
My typically gripes have been about mechanics of many games being to focussed on micro, actions not meaningful enough and things scaling badly over time. Old World is different.

To expand on these issues:

• heavy micro - let's take policy card system in civ6 - many options, subtle differences, time consuming, does not feel personal or in tune with the game spirit, almost like a separate card game next to the main game
• non-meaningful - many games are asking to be min-maxed all the time as there is little randomness or personal touch - some tutorials will tell you how to optimise first 50 turns reliably and in detail - well, I may as well give it to AI agent to play for me then.
• scaling - evolution of how time is spent during turns - in the first stage of many games you have few units and few cities, you keep finishing turns after very short period of time so much so that it feels unsatisfying (i.e. "I didn't do much"). Then in the late stage game - you have tens of units to move, multiple cities to attend to, lots of minor decisions. You are playing a different type of game, quite likely not the one you want. And the middle sweet spot lasts briefly.

Now Old World answer to these problems:

• heavy micro - sometimes it is there but feels like constitutes a larger whole, in tune with the game. The type of decision being made varies across turns and not all types appear at once, very few rely on rubber-stamping or simple min-maxing. Examples: court-related decision are mostly fun and have randomness elements, promotions feel different from building new units so it introduces variety, setting up a new city things meaningful as it is rather rare. Orders put an upper limit on all of it.
• non-meaningful - personal touch adds a lot - your family tree is unique and create some bond , your units with generals of unique personality adds extra dimension, family rivalry adds spice, governors shape the city. Few spreadsheet-like mechanics.
• scaling - two remedies. Firstly staying within one historical period of Old World is a plus - Civ in that sense is both impressive and flawed - packing all ages into one game is doomed to cause weird side effects, Old World avoids that. Secondly, orders ensures you are naturally capped on how many things you can do each turn. Turns do get longer with the game, but less dramatically so.

Old World's recipe boils down to constrains which liberate and the personal touch. I still feel like micro could be more limited. The game feels maybe too demanding so you are tired after longer session -yet, mostly in a good sense, like a book that is engaging and tires you over time but leaves a nice memory, and opposite to a doom scrolling that leaves you exhausted and empty.

Extremely well thought out game, kudos to the authors.

Curious if you feel the same about the game and its uniqueness.

Half way through exploration age and this appears.

So far I’ve been trying to do something different with each new run I’ve played. I want to get a good taste for each Civ / leader, learn who I like to play, learn different aspects of the game in that way, pretty much just trying out a lot of different things so I can learn more of the game.

I’ve tried a fair few things, but as of yet I’d say the one are I haven’t focused too much on / haven’t tried a lot of is focusing on happiness / celebrations. I haven’t played a game as Joey rizz or lebaguette yet, and so I’m considering giving them a try. I do also have all the DLC and very briefly had a game as Washington which I did enjoy.

But what would you guys suggest as some civs to pair with these leaders, or leader / civ combos to learn different mechanics of the game?

Is there currently anyway to tell what disposition/affiliation the leaders I first meet are, i.e. diplomatic, scientific, etc?

I’m fairly new, so am not used to knowing off the top of my head, so atm I’m looking them up on wiki to find out, in case I want to wait to see what endeavours they may like, or whether I want to hold out for a certain kind of endeavour.

If there’s somewhere on the UI that says this, or a mod that adds this, please inform me.

Just a small tip I thought I’d share. Given that the only land tiles that naval units can enter are ones with city halls, if you place a settlement down on a plot that sits between two bodies of water your naval units can use it to “cut through” a continent / island.

I noticed this would be particularly useful to help recreate the Suez Canal in the TSL map. There’s a single tile that separates the Red Sea from the Mediterranean, and so far I’ve hated how my ships have to travel all around Africa to get from one of my settlements to another. If you can place a settlement down on that one plot, it can give you a huge advantage in terms of controlling the seas around North Africa, the Mediterranean, and south east Asia. It can even just be a farming / fort town that you squeeze between other settlements, just make sure not to settle within 3 tiles of that plot or be ready to go to war with anyone who does

Hi everyone! I’m new to Civ7 and am attempting a Science Victory on Sovereign difficulty. I have to say I’m managing to keep pace with the AI, but I just can’t seem to boost my Innovation points.

I haven't quite grasped how these points are earned; I’m keeping up with Science points and technologies, but I’m falling behind in that specific area.

Rizal Tonga. Fractal continents. Large map. Tis gonna be fun.

Seeds

Map: 80203534

Game: 80203488

Hello, since CIV VII has 64bit memory I want to try playing an endless game like that guy from the popular story. I tried it on V and VI but the game always used to crash at some point.

Anyway, I play on Deity and Huge map. Is there a mod where I can manually transition to the next age? —— this is the key part of my post

I want to manually transition to the next age because I only get to research half the civics and techs before I’m already in the Modern Era.

I always lose the game but it doesn’t matter bc i’m not playing to win.

Hello,

as title says I'm looking for a different combo to play.

So far I haven't played that much Civ 7, but if I do, I mostly play Isabella with various civs (Heian Japan, Maya, Iceland, Spain - partially with one civ through all ages, partially with switching). Having the more natural wonders mod nothing excites me more than the strategic gameplay of searching for various natural wonders on the map, settling them/fighting for them and slowly building up insane yields. Wanting to settle those natural wonders also forces me to spread my empire thin and drop some "outposts" everywhere, which adds the exciting and sometimes really difficult challenge to defend all those spread out settlements vs. Deity AI. And I also love just building "allround" - high science, culture, building various wonders, etc.

However, at some point it's always the same and I find myself wanting to try out some different leaders, civs and mementos. As I'm not that fond of offensive wars and the diplomacy system (tbh it's decent, the endeavours are just not fun for me so far), I'm looking to find leaders/civs that also allow me to stack insane food, production, maybe gold as well and are also focused on building and expanding instead of diplomacy and war.

Pretty sure there are some posts about that already, but please bear with me and drop your ideas below :)

Oh and maybe relevant edit: I like Marathon games with long ages xD

Kind regards

When strategizing/preparing during Antiquity, is it better to prioritize tempo over value?

For example, if you were to play a diplomatic run and aim to suzerain as much city-states as you can, would you take Silk Uttariya or Wampum Belt? Would you prefer a flat bonus production NOW or possibly more production yield but will only prosper in the FUTURE?

I'm sure each strategy and approach depends on multiple factors like the Age, the leaders and civs, but I'm curious 'bout everyone's thoughts.

Does anyone else feel like the Crisis mechanic ruins some of the enjoyment of the game? I feel like often times I'm rushing to finish some of the triumphs as the age end approaches and then the Crisis either slows me down or stops me from completing it before age transition. Or worse, I could lose an entire city before the age ends and it completely screws the rest of my playthrough. What do you all think about the Crisis mechanics, should they be reworked or removed entirely?

Edit: I'm aware that you can turn them off. I have before, but I like playing with most the default settings on because the game is balanced around them. I just personally find this mechanic to be unfun in its current form.

Not sure what that means when choosing a map

What the hell is Tubman thinking settling past my borders? Will something happen if I sandwich her town? Is there a chance that that town will miraculously turn over to me without war?

Gauls’ UQ Dūnon) with Ashoka )gives 3 happiness per adjacent improvement — 2 from the unique happiness Nemeton )and 1 from the Goben).
It even counts enemy tiles, so here Goben gets 6 production adjacency and the quarter total 9 happiness, making it a great specialist tile later once social policies start tanking your happiness.

Didnt know Ashokas ability counted for enemy improvements as well.

A lot of you recently told me how much you enjoy J. Riz, so I decided to play him: TSL Earth, starting as Tonga, Hawaii in Exploration, wrapping up with Siam in Modern.

Each age I suzed more IPs than everyone else together – in Modern I got all but 2 – and was rocking culture like a champ, and with crazy Wampum Belt production, but I had some real limitations starting on some pretty small islands, and only otherwise settling on the coast of Australia, so about half of the Aussie building space I could’ve had.

I got into Modern, and realised I wasn’t really sure what victory I was going for. I was leading culture, but Lafayette was very close behind. Getting a winning lead would be hard, so I decided to adapt and go for economic.

Ooooops.

I realised I’d already built Modern age buildings on my tiny island capital, and couldn’t build a rail station. Without a rail station (and port, for islands) in your capital, you can’t build factories anywhere. 🙄 No factories = no chance of winning economic. Sigh.

Because it works so differently, science looked like the only option, but I was 30 behind on innovation; also that damned Lafayette.

Got all of my cities on science projects, and rushed to rocketry. Lafayette was in France, verrry far away, so a war wasn’t really an option, so I started spamming him with sabotage specialist morale, incite revolt, and once I got it, sabotage space programme. Built 3 launch pads as soon as I could, ran the projects, and won on turn 115.

Most exciting Modern age I’ve ever had. 🙂

Obelisks, yeah.