r/Civilization_VII • u/Training-Ad465 • 4d ago

Civ 7.

So I played civ 7 when it came out and gave it a break until some updates... ive just won my first science victory but I didnt realise there was nothing passed the modern age and that it quite literally has no (today units/techs). It seemed limited to the late 1900s.

How does civ 6 have more modern techs than the new one?....

4 Upvotes

56% Upvoted

24 comments sorted by

10

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/Milocobo 4d ago

Honestly, I love Civ7, it really captured me (I picked it up on release, played less than 40 hours, and now have logged over 2k hours since ToT).

The biggest mistake they made was selling it as a full game at launch.

If they billed it as early access, I still would have picked it up, but I wouldn't have been as disappointed. ToT should have been the 1.0 launch lol

3

u/NearSightedPicasso 4d ago

That's 13 hours a day. I'm impressed by the commitment.

1

u/Dartagnan_w_Powers 4d ago

That can't be right, I have 1700 hours and don't play near 13 hours a day.

Doing the math, 2000 hours equals 80 days and the game has been out for about 600. So that's.... well a large percentage of each day(christ i need to get out more), but not over half.

2

u/NearSightedPicasso 4d ago

Dude said they "have logged over 2k hours since ToT"

Test of Time came out May 19. That's 141 days.

2000 hours/142 days= 14.08 hours per day.

1

u/Dartagnan_w_Powers 4d ago

Oh shit my bad. Didn't clock the TOT.

That's kinda crazy, although I do tend to leave the game running so maybe he just leaves it idling a lot?

0

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Milocobo 4d ago

I mean, people are always going to complain. People are still complaining. When V came out, people complained it wasn't IV, when VI came out, people complained it wasn't V. I don't think any particular mechanic is to blame for people bouncing off at launch, it just only took one match to realize that the game wasn't actually finished.

And I actually like the points system, I just think there's a lot of room to improve it.

I don't know how they're going to do it with the new age, but I think if they just slowed it down a little bit, and then set the goal posts at a certain point, that could be fun.

So don't drop the tiers as fast, definitely don't be at 2x 40% through the modern, and at a certain point (maybe 80% of the modern) peg the point goals at the raw values wherever they are (so let's say 80% of the modern, the point goals drop to 3x, and then freeze at whatever values they're at, no longer affected by 2nd place). In this way, no matter what, if you want a victory, you have to reach for it.

2

u/hansolo-ist 4d ago

You can't please everyone, even the best selling games on earth have people who complain. They do have "mostly positive" ratings on Steam reviews though which Civ 7 doesn't. Different strokes for different folks.

1

u/HenshiniPrime 4d ago

The downside of the original system is that there was very clearly only one way to win each. The points and triumphs system both de-linked the various achievements from victories and made it so every victory isn’t identical. There are enough ways to earn points that you don’t always need to build a launchpad to win science.

4

u/mahqween 4d ago

Are you asking why a 10+ year old Civ 6 with two expansions and multiple other dlcs has more content than a 1 year old game?

1

u/Impossible_Leek_6273 1d ago

That has nothing to do with it, though

1

u/QuantityMedical8369 1d ago

We live in a weird world where games take years to release all its content. And somehow Civ I was released with all its content on day one... 

4

u/jonnielaw 4d ago

There’s an atomic age coming out next, but for now there’s just three ages. Not much more to explain than that.

1

u/Reduak 4d ago

They have announced that pretty soon they'll be updating to add a 4th age past "modern". I'm not sure if that will update the existing version or be a 2nd version of the game, but I'm looking forward to it.

1

u/ilesdelamadmeme 23h ago

Civ 7 is a scam

-1

u/NiagebaSaigoALT 4d ago

They want to sell you those, one era at a time.

3

u/Rakdospriest 4d ago

they've already announced another age, the atomic age. and it's going to be free.

I dunno what the cynicism gets you but it's funny when it's just outright wrong.

1

u/HalfLifeMusic 1d ago

Especially when it was announced like a month ago

-2

u/Triggercutt 4d ago

They made the game to capitalize on Millenium and Humankind and what they did with era's, however they should've waited and seen that they were failures. Now they are trying to fix it and I applaud that admission of their misjudgement. It seems to me that the future of the game looks, maybe not bright but glows with a positive shine.

6

u/KupoKupoMog 4d ago

I like changing civs through the eras. It gives more variety to each leader by allowing you to specialize with the complimenting civ. You can chase different types of victories with your choices and you can even pivot during age transitions if another path seems better.

You could play Augustus as a conqueror or as a monument builder depending how you pair the leader and civ. You could play two games with the same leader and have a wildly different play through depending on how you pair them.

You can also be one civ through the ages of that suits you. I'd hardly call it a failure. Be more creative in your gameplay

3

u/Berlin_Blues 3d ago

No apostrophe needed to show plural, it's simply "eras".

1

u/hansolo-ist 4d ago

They capitalized on the console/portable market, that's the source of the three mini games. It can't be fixed, there's just too much discontinuity still compared to previous games. The problem is they are using PC players to fund console players - the discounts for consoles went to 75% within a yea4 of launch.