Hey Potato, you mentioned recently that you've been having a rough time lately. You are not alone man, thanks for continuing to make videos and keep plugging even when it's hard.
Religion in Civ VI felt like all or nothing. I have to rush religion to get the bonus that synergizes with what I'm doing or don't even bother with it. This is something I can engage with as much as I want to, I'll get rewards for it even if I didn't focus on it. Also I like that it is contained to one age, I'm not churning out missionary after missionary after missionary at the same time I'm trying to build a spaceship.
This is my takeaway as well. It does feel like you lose some of the fun personal civ roleplay identity that you can make by building your civ around a religion. But by making it strictly an expansionism mechanic instead of a bonus to home cities, it turns it into an optional gameplay path. Instead of being something that you must take, even if you don't interact with it, just for the extra passive yields. The absence of a faith resource further reinforces its new, more optional status in this build as well, at least in my mind.
@@Ffourteen yeah, I don't like religion in civ 6. Either you race to be one of the first or you just ignore the whole system, including any wonders. And it's ahistoric too, religions start from being a minority to growing larger, but you can only make missionaries of the dominant religion in a city.
Dropping the pantheon means your choices in later ages mean more. Keeping all the stacking bonuses through every turn of the game is why other civ games snowball so hard and why late game turns take so long but accomplish so little.
I think I'd like it if they reduce the pantheon bonus's power, but not eliminate it. It really hurts when some of your choices from previous ages don't matter at all anymore.
@@CAG83 Pantheons naturally "reduce" in later ages because they don't scale. I agree with so many of their "simplifying in the next age" choices but dropping the pantheon doesn't make any sense because it was all about the early advantage. The pantheon was the one thing in civ 6 that doesn't scale and doesn't require any extra micro-management
@@andreydupreez6370 I kinda like it, because there is no pantheon anymore. Pantheons kinda represent the ancient religions before the more modern religions took over. So Pantheon bonusses have no place in a modern world really from a 'lore' perspective (as much as Civilisation has that). And mechanically I like the simplification of the game towards the later game that it doesn't snowball so hard, and also that it is not so much a runaway effect. If you're behind in the midgame you've basically already lost in most civ games, since it is practically impossible to bounce back when you are behind. You only get further behind. So a kind of reset in the mid-game that puts everyoe kinda on the same footing I think is great. Particularly multiplayer, but also makes single player more interesting and not just that you've already won the game but still have to play for hours to formally win.
Potato: I know a lot of people didn't like Religion in Civ 6 Civ dev: We're scaling back and simplifying Religion in the new game Potato: *shocked Pikachu face* Fitting it into one age and making it less needlessly complex and involved sounds great to me
I genuinely feel like people who have this opinion that the game is better without it, are just being suck ups for whatever reason. If you keep making the game more simple it becomes tic tac toe. Is that what you all want?
@@jho4977 I genuinely feel like people who want to hold onto things solely because they are already in the game, regardless of how well they work or the public response to them, are just slaves to maintaining the status quo. I think removing needless complexity in features that people have widely shown little interest in makes sense. if they simplified military to the point where there's only 2 types of unit, then that wouldn't go down well. but if they simplified great works to only sculptures and paintings (rather than having landscape paintings, portraits, religious, etc.), I don't think people would mind
@ For me I just don't think it's possible to go forward by taking things away. In my opinion they should just expand on religion and make it more pronounce rather than watering it down for everyone. I feel this way about ages as well now that we are down to 3. And workers. Idk I would have rather them expand on all of these things rather than water them down and take them way. I'd much rather see depth added to these mechanics. I like the religion race because you don't always have to have it. But if you did have it, it could be very useful. Now everyone gets religion and sure it felt bad to not get a religion if you are going for it but how is it any different than not moving on to the next age if you aren't doing well enough?
@@jho4977 religion sucked when it was reintroduced in V, and sucked in 6. It was annoying, tedious, and overall not fun unless you focused on that. There are other places to make the game more complex, but religion isn't one. It is probably the most disabled win condition in the game, bar maybe time victory. Also, not needing a religion? With how busted some of the bonuses are? It has always felt like a requirement minus maybe on Bismark in V
@@goldenhate6649 See that's what makes Civ a a great game sometimes you can have so many different type of experiences depending on who you play with and how you play. Watering down mechanics just takes away from players ableness to play how they choose, and leans the player into a more scripted outcome.
Disagree strongly with Potato on some of the religious points made in the video. I understand that it’s disappointing to lose a gameplay feature, but religion as a tent-pole feature in Civ 6 never made sense to me and is a major reason I never jived with that game. To Potato’s point, religion added an extra layer of complexity to play with and plan interesting strategies around and that is a layer of FUN, but I disagree that it’s a necessary addition to the game at the complexity it was at in 6. The idea of religious conversion, conflict, and high-profile relevance being restricted to one age makes more sense to me, (I think it could even fit better in a “middle age” in between antiquity and exploration) as you don’t really see major civilizations changing religion in the modern era, or really in antiquity before institutional organized religion developed. The idea of converting a modern American or China or whatever to a new majority religion just feels stupid to me. Maybe they’ll release an expansion at some point that adds a “middle ages” time period with more religion mechanics and crusades and what not. So with religion just restricted to one age (for now) I can see why they’d want to spend less time on developing a deeper system of adjacencies, linkages, etc. I also think, a lot of the beliefs and enhancements that Potato is missing were about faith generation, a currency that has been removed (to my great pleasure) so the lists feeling more “bland” or less impactful, makes some sense. I also think, with how the Civ 6 religion meta developed, there were some beliefs that were just objectively better and some that were unusable in almost any circumstance. A more bland list could mean potentially a more balanced/situational list. We’ll have to see how it plays, but tbh I prefer this system massively to Civ 6.
I think 6’s better-but I think 7’s done in a way to develop its own character down the line. Plus, I think 7 has a decent amount of complexity that religion was basically going to be paired down. I almost thought they had nixed it. I think it could use some carryover effects, though. Like, pantheons maybe becoming a social policy. Same issue is with codices, imo, that you’ll have with relics-they kinda just “go away”, unlike the other pathways’ bonuses.
7 takes a hard turn from 6 in its core philosophy. In fact I think 7 is breaking with the philosophy of the entire genre. 6 (and all 4x games) is a game about piling layers of bonuses on top of each other to efficiently reach the ultimate victory condition in a few hours. 7 is a game about constantly winning points towards various victories, creating efficiencies is still a big part of what you do to win but not actually how you win. Religion is a perfect example of this. In 6 its a support mechanic to create more yields to support other victory conditions. In 7 its an actually different gameplay mechanic where you win by actively converting. I really believe that we will see many of the current content creators around the game be unhappy, it simply will not play the same way.
Strong disagree regarding religion mattering less in an exploration age. Religious conversion was a dominant factor in human history from Clovis to the Scramble for Africa. Conceptually, that is Civ VI's Exploration Age, even slightly beyond it around the edges.
@@benabaxtersorry if it seems like I’m saying it matters less in exploration! Not my intention. Religious conversion is HUGE in exploration and makes perfect sense. I’m just thinking, in terms of religious wars, crusades, and mechanics with extra religious units like in Civ 6, Civ 7 by design would want to restrict to an age/time period where it’s most relevant, which could still be exploration age, but I also think it could be fun to add a more “medieval” or “Middle Ages” age to the game. I don’t know if they’ve ruled out extra ages, but it’s fun to think about.
@@AvishaiGreensteinthis is a great point! In a lot of ways, on paper Civ 7 feels more like a board game than a video game, and it seems to be taking more of its DNA from outside the franchise than from previous Civ games, which is absolutely a valid complaint for those that really love the identity of Civ. Personally though, since Civ 6 never really worked for me (despite hundreds and hundreds of hours in the game) and since I love board games with similar victory mechanics to Civ 7, I’m looking forward to giving it a go. ❤
20:27 To add an outsider perspective - I do actually enjoy the idea of the resource management minigame. I am really bad at visualizing abstract concepts - things like amenities never fully clicked for me. So being able to directly see what resource is going where makes a lot more sense to how my brain works!
@@Velahra yeah I never noticed what having/not having amenities ACTUALLY did. Like I tried to make them go up with Scotland and sort of noticed production and stuff felt high...?
@@Sco10 It was basically city happiness. negative amenities lowered your city growth. having 2-3 extra gave you a 10% bonus to growth speed and like 4+ gave you 15% city growth. You can see the bonus/penalty on the city screen.
Gotta admit amenities was just a bad system. It was arbitrary and could be manipulated in so many ways but also hurt wayyyyy too much. There needed to be much more granulated steps to it than just +3 to -3. I played incas a lot and it would just be murder on my civ in the industrial age because I’d have like 6 20 pop cities by then and they’d pretty much all be at -1 or -2. Stopping production for an entertainment district was just murder on the snowball effect.
I'm sorry but I don't see how removing something that faded away over time (like pantheons) is a bad thing, its in line with the ENTIRE theme of 'history is built in layers' IMO it was always weird to have a fully built up Catholic Spanish run and still have them worship some random river god from 3000 years ago
while it's strange to have them worship it, old pagan beliefs still impact people to this day. We're still filled with superstitions from that era and special holidays related to it. Pantheons taking a different meaning under organized religion still makes sense.
Also even if the beliefs don't hold, they impact the culture still. Having +1 production from fishing boats in the modern age isn't because the people believe in a river god but because they descend from people who have been fishing for centuries.
You keep the special abilities that your ancient civ has, even though you change to another civ twice. They even praised how you build your civ into a unique combination of stats and abilities with persistant choices that add up to create it. Why shouldnt a pantheon stick over time when ancient civ abilities do?
Yeah, I closed the video at this point, it just became all nitpicking. We're complaining that one tiny little bonus is going away a third of the way through the game? Give me a break. I'm all for sharing concerns but holy moly
Two comments for this video so far. Religion sounds better in my eyes, I hated civ 6 religion and this sounds more like what I wanted to see from religion. Secondly they said the production bonus from the event was until end of era not the entire game. Might have been a bad choice of words but if you misunderstood I wanted to clarify.
@DSJaha Spains civic tree increases fleet movement by +1, so that's also why it seems to move so quickly. Also remember, while Spain has a treasure fleet right off its coast within like 10 tiles, the other nations have to go the long way to acquire their treasure fleets. I think they move fast enough, it's the island being so close that really throws it off. Plus I agree with potatoe, it should have to go back to a dock then any body of water connected to the main land under your control.
I'm just hoping plenty of piracy goes on with this one ;). It'll hopefully teach them not to rob people blind with their content release highway robbery tactics.
I would basically build one or two just so I could fend off barbarians until I got late game where battleships and missile cruisers would destroy any coastal city in range... It is gonna be great to play with naval in the mid game
One thing I noticed which I haven't heard mentioned before is that population count of cities is significantly higher in Civ 7. It seems like in late game 40 pop cities will be normal.
About things being hard lately. My dude. I’m JUST on the other side of perpetually being kicked in the nards by life since 2022. And things are FINALLY starting to look good. I’m saying this because that’s the period where I found this channel and the content really helped during a rough time for me. Thanks for everything and just know WE are rooting for YOU!
I vastly prefer religion being more focused on spreading it and needing to actually engage and interact with it beyond the initial founding. It feels more engaging to actually need to interact with other players rather than just hyperfocusing on my own religion. I felt like I never wanted to go out and spread my religion, only keeping my religion within my own cities. Religion and Culture like tourism always felt linked and too similar to me.
I disagree with the religion thing. Like in civ 6 most of the time religion was a means to stock pile faith for culture victory or for a crusade push i a war game. Other times you really didnt care or only cared enough to defend it. If everyone is going to get a religion, then its important to make a reason to play around the religion. The bonuses being mostly for spreading the religion rather than simply having one make that incentive to at least be actively engaged with the system.
His whole point doesn't make sense, how is getting more food in tundra tiles related to a religion in any way? Religions should be based around followers, that's why they're relevant culturally for a civilization in general. The problem is he's so Civ brained that a more simple and realistic view of religion is seen as a downgrade because "it doesn't buff enough" or "it's not as relevant".
@@JuniorOliveira-lp4fo I wouldn't go that far. Like I get it that there two real high points in creating a religion specifically in civ 6: the race to forming the religion and using the faith afterwards to as a form of currency to win the game, whether it be combat units or naturalists and rock bands. It also didnt help that the time when you were supposed to be engaging in religious conquest was the most fun part of civ 6, the real expansion era and when you starting cities were really setting up their important districts and doing builder management and there wasnt a lot of depth for religious focused wins other than hitting theocracy. I understand he doesn't like that theyre removing the two religion highs of the game, but i disagree with the characterization that religion was fun in it of itself, and not just a means to an end in most playthroughs you bothered wit it. And while they were more useful, from a game design perspective, passive boosts from religions that scaled just with you allowed you to just stockpile faith for the late game if the ai deided to just not bother you in the game.
@@wanyaisneed3972 But it doesn't need to be fun in that way, it can be fun in other ways. That's the point. You can kinda break the game with boosts that don't make sense in civ6. that's why its annoying McWhiskey, he sees it as losing a buff instead of seeing it as a gameplay mechanic.
@@JuniorOliveira-lp4fohe’s upset about losing the gameplay mechanic that added an extra layer of complexity and fun for him. Even if it isn’t “realistic” I think it’s fair for Potato to be upset about losing a feature he found it fun to play with. I disagree with his reasoning, I disagree with the idea that it’s an important feature to have or that the game needs that level of complex religious mechanics, but I don’t disagree that it SUCKS when a game removes a thing that I had fun with, so I see where he’s coming from in that sense. Hopefully he’ll find that other aspects of the game fill the space he feels is missing that religion had filled, but I’m certainly not going to miss the Civ 6 religious system.
@@Hazlius I think this incentivizes more complexity then civ 6's system. It rewards you for going out and doing the thing. As opposed to in 6 where it was just yet another way to get yields that will eventually go towards building a space ship.
Having seen them many times in past livestreams like the ones for Civ 6's various passes, I'd say that's just how they look tbh; they've always been a little awkward and probably not super comfy being on camera being broadcast to thousands live. It also doesn't help that most of these streams seem to be totally unscripted and unrehearsed judging from how they awkwardly try to demonstrate in-game stuff.
Often a good sign for the game if the people in charge aren't hired for being overly charismatic and perfect on camera. That should mean they actually know what they are doing technically instead.
Naval gameplay has always been so mediocre in Civ. Even on more naval-oriented maps (like archipelago), there has been little incentive to lean heavily into building a navy unless you're going for outright conquest. Civ6 sort of tried with more naval civs and requiring naval techs to get to industrialisation (to mirror the historical importance of navies to that process) but Civ7 will finally make it a central part of the gameplay.
I think the big issue has always been the movement was too fast, and their sight range was too low. Like, ships are sloooow. IDK why they always made ships so fast. Like, a tank is waaaay faster than a battleship, but battleships have more points. I believe Civ 4 had a lot more naval combat if I remember right due to slower movement
The +50% gold to buy naval units might be there to avoid the stacking of -33%'s that lead to free stuff at times. (Edit: which you mention nearly an hour later)
@@CraigNull for just one buff its equivalent, however if you have multiple buffs it differs. Lets say you have +50% and + 50% you have +100% which is comparable to -50% cost. If you have -33% - 33% you have -66% which is more and in the extreme +150% is 2/5 the cost while -99% is basically free.
Potato. You mentioned that you're sad at the shallowness of Religion in Civ 7. I think you missed something: At 2:01:01, you're seeing a civic tree. Notice there are Spanish Civics, Exploration Civics and... Theology civics. They haven't showed us what theology civics are yet, but that will probably make religious gameplay a tiny bit spicier at the least eh?
The events system is actually pretty nice. Thousands of events that have a chance of firing with specific conditions, and some of them are unique to certain Civs/Leaders. Think about this as added, semi random bonuses that allow for increased player agency in determining future actions with increased replayability. I play a lot of Paradox games and hate the events (due to frequency and the lack of win conditions making options objectively correct), but a 4X game allows these infrequent events to facilitate different ways of playing the game through relatively minor buffs.
My favorite way to play is to risk everything and claim a distant continent for myself. It rarely works out well on harder difficulties but it's just so fun when it works out. Exploration age is often peek civ for me so I'm glad they are putting more into it
I see the deep influence of board games now. Religion is now a actual gameplay mechanic designed to create conflict. In civ 6 it was a makes numbers go up, put in your investment and then passively collect. Now religion is an actual active mechanic. The point is to go out and convert cities and the bonuses incentivize this behavior for you and for the AI.
@@CityState_of_Valletta The more I have studied history, the more I realized religion's impact for individual countries was minimal. It was a more macro scale thing for most of modern history. There was a bit of drama during the reformation and the schisms in the muslim religions, but that being modeled in this game seems impossible unless they revert to more of a civ 4 style religions where it spawns randomly. There was the fight between the catholics and the muslims, but that was a clash of moral systems and militaries. You couldn't simply waltz in and convert a city like Civ does. Its the attempt to model the real world with civ mechanics and failing pretty bad
Main problem with civ 7 rn? World size. It feels small, feels like a board game more than it resembles actual world with many nations. Another gameplay with small amount of rivals and a map which resembles lower end of world sizes in prior Civs. Clear trade-off from rich city graphics. They look nice but you don't launch Civ to play this Age of Empires/mobile strategy game-vibe. Hope im completely wrong but rn it feels like even if there are bigger maps available, they won't be stable enough to sustain advanced era gameplay with 10+ rivals.
I really appreciate you going through these. I watched the stream when it aired, but I feel like I have absorbed so much more with the extra commentary pauses. Keep up the awesome work man.
it would be cool it have a mechanic where if you have a friend joining a game late then they start in the new world. So they have a whole contentment to themself to help them catch back up, and are separated from other players to help protect them from conquest, but they are behind technologically. Could create an interesting dynamic
Love your videos man, hope you know that tons of us get excited every time your videos pop up. Regardless of what’s going on in your life you have an entire group of really cool people rooting for you constantly. You got this brother.
i could comment a lot but the one most important thing that worries me most is that they always show continent type of maps so it fits nicely into the age progresion, but about other types of lands? pangea, islands etc. How will age progression and map size behave on those types? are those removed? they also dont mention multiplayer a lot
Didn't they say the UI was a work in progress after all the testers complained about it? But it doesn't look like anything has changed? Really not a fan. Many of the icons look like Google clipart by different artists with different styles. Looks amateurish almost.
Keep in mind the game comes out about a month and a half from now and that livestream came out on a WIP build back in November. A lot can change in that time.
I don't care much how it looks, just put everything useful 1-2 clicks away and show more information in a view. In the trees and narrative events, most of the effects of choices were revealed only on hover cards. I don't understand why you wouldn't show as much as you could side by side when there's so much unused screen real estate.
13:20 Later on, perhaps in the Modern livestream (my memory is far from perfect), we find out that there are civs that start in what are the Distant Lands to you (Only as advanced starts? Not clear), but your home land mass is their Distant Lands for game mechanic purposes.
It's gonna need a custom map maker on launch or it will suffer. Civ 6 was known for having absolutely atrociously bad map gen at launch, especially in MP placing people within 6 tiles of each other.
As someone who plays the game purely for fun and not for min/maxing, I love how much they're streamlining what (to me) were granular, "crunchy" elements of the gameplay. It feels more like a city builder, which I LOVE
These changes look more fun. It feels like your choices get challenged by the world around you in interesting and granular ways, rather than just playing the same min/maxing focus for the entire span of a game. I’m going to have a lot more fun in this game and I think I’ll be able to get a lot more friends into this series now
I kinda disagree with your take on religion. It was basically just a worse version of a domination victory. You pretty much need to only worry about one yield and have very few unit varieties or strategies. Basically just send your units straight out the enemy city and that was it. I think it’s much better as a supporting act for culture victory. But I definitely disagree with the event system. I think it is a fair critique if certain events are unbalanced (which I would be cautious to say before we actually played the game), but the whole system isn’t taking away your choice, it’s giving more of them. It is small bonuses that are random and minor enough where you don’t build a whole strategy around them, but they liven in the game up so that following a predetermined bill order isn’t always the best move.
I get why potato is annoyed by the religion part, but im kinda happy with it. I always felt pigeon holed into fast tracking religion, and if you didn't get it, it's a feels bad, so sad moment. Or you ignore the shit entirely. With civ 7, you can interact with it as much or as little as you want, it seems. And i quite like that.
Board Gaming is still a thing and I imagine if you search you can find people to play with, especially if willing to look into doing it online (I don't mean digitally)
@@schwingedeshaehers For me there is a small shop about 30 minutes away to go and play TCG games and probably board games too. I guess if you have the money open up your own shop and then you will always have a place to do that
RE: Cities should have 4 workable tiles. I know Civ 5 has that plausibility as there's a fair certain amount of mods that does that, i.e. Vox Populi overhaul modpack lets the capital have 4 tile radius when you finish the tall social policy tree. It's... super underwhelming to be honest! Remember that 1 pop = 1 worked tile, and the 3 tile radius gives you 36 workable tiles for the city which is a lot of tiles to choose from. Adding a 4th ring is more about reaching a pretty good resource tile in the 4th ring than actually working on all the new 24 tiles. There's also a certain point where working a new tile is not worth it on a super high pop city and would be better as a specialist. I think the new building=district will be good enough to make cities feel large. Especially with walls, the "city center" will be moving around as you build more districts with the wall outline
You pretty much countered your own point though. Especially w limits on # of settlements, reaching more resources via one city is CRUCIAL. Even if you don’t work the tiles you claim, A) you keep them from an opponent and B) you can establish stronger borders for defense. Simply working all the tiles is not the only reason or even the best reason to argue for wider reach.
I really like the idea of "one-tricking" a particular civ and that gives you rewards or personalisation options. I'd love to identify with a civ and it would add a lot to multiplayer.
A pristige style system is interesting, kinda like the pantheon system in Age of Wonders 4, to give you incentive to actually finish and not abandon games to have outside meta progression. Just as long as having it doesn't give a massive advantage in multiplayer.
I actually hated it for this reason. Having unlocks tied to play time means you will be handicapped even more compared to someone who has more experience with theirs. It discourages playing multiple civs, meaning sessions with friends are going to be less varied when people repeat the same strategies instead of trying new things.
In regards to the splash damage promotion on naval commander, it is easily countered by the +1 range. naval battles will have a bigger field of engagement, nothing's really changed, honestly. curious about the +1 range in terms of coastal bombardment, as +1 range is always OP in terms of bombardment.
2:41:00 They have ruthlessly pared back features from 6, presumably to make room for the many features they have added and modified to make age transitions what you focus long and medium term strategy around. Pantheons disappear in the transition to Exploration, and you have to start over with religion. The Antiquity tech and generic civics tree both go away, as do your ability to build or slot anything unlocked by them. It's as if they never existed. Buildings from the earlier age are left, but they lose their adjacencies, resulting, at least in this livestream, in paring back your culture and science output by nearly 50%. At least some of your cities get demoted to towns. The overall paring back makes whatever you have managed to carry over to the new age that much more important. These are your traditions, whatever you get with your legacy points, as well as however many settlements, commanders, and units you built. And given what Ed Beach said in response to the question about loyalty, I suspect that at least some of the crises will see you losing some of your settlements. Overall, they seem to be changing more from 6 to 7 than they changed from 5 to 6. The paring back with age transitions seems especially bold, as the fan base is going to have a lot of anxiety when it is more widely recognized just how much age transitions will set you back. Pantheons gone, religion side-lined, the crises potentially looking a lot like Dramatic mode from 6, many of your yields pared back dramatically during a transition that resets everyone to starting a new tech and civics tree... Yikes! I would be very worried if this set of devs did not have an excellent track record of integrating a complicated set of mechanics into a coherent whole. You can only get that right with exhaustive play-testing, and they seem to understand and practice that. We're just going to have to accept the loss of a lot of neat stuff from 6, a loss that will prove well worth it if they pull off this whole complicated age transition thing,
Thankfully, once mods are released, we probably won’t have to settle at all. As PW mentioned, modding out Crises will probably be one of the first things the community does. Same with modding ways to remove/manipulate settlement limits, I imagine
Imagine a survival 4x style game based on that concept. Like you build up a little civilization fighting other local area tribes with similar technology and then get invaded by more technologically advanced civs.
You could have a "Vikings" Civ and/or leader with War and Economy focus. They start with a a costal bias unlike most other civ who have River bias. The vikings outside of piliging were also fishermen and traders. So they could have +1 gold bonuses from water tiles (similarly to Egypt +1 production from rivers) which could help kickstart a war economy. As a special unique you might have a berserker who get bonus power outside of your boarders. Or unqiue longship that can do coastal raiding somehow. As for unique buildings you could have a special "longhouse" building or a "Stave Church" Altar. Combine them both ( or with a another culture building ) And you could combine into a Unique Urban districts called "Thing" or "Allthing" if its unique to the capital. You could then have them turn into "Sweden" who could be a Military civ for once( instead of diplomatic ) With a focus on great generals with under Gustav Vasa as its leader. Sweden did take a few American colonines in the end of the age of exploration. But Sweden mostly fought around the home country and was big fish in a small pond of around the Baltic sea. They were somewhat famous for its military expansion and navy around that time. You could give them some science/economy/some unqiue great people bonus from expanding to help with the exploration age theme. but they could possibly have a unique playstyle like Mongolia too who can win from fights on the home continent. And in the Modern age Sweden could then turn into Finland. Finland around that time had just declared independens after being anexed by russia after after Finland separated from Sweden in 1809. Finland's key economic sector is manufacturing, and their main export is somehow Refined Petroleum despite not haveing any oil in the homeland. Give them some Oil related War benefits like stronger airplanes and/or the slower heavy ships class. And slap on some economical benefits from miltary resorces ( like oil ) if they do not originate from the home country. Finland could then be a defensive economic powerhouse which helps finish Operation Ivy ( The hydrogen bomb ) or transition into a economic victory ( World Market ) .
33:00 The buildings from the old age lose their adjacencies in the new age, and revert to only their base yields. Specialist yields seem to be dependent on adjacencies as well, so they also drop.
@@sennarghal691 You get them by assigning a new population point to be a specialist, but their yields are spoken of as depending on the adjacencies of the buildings in the tiles they are assigned to
Stay positive man. You are always so thoughtful in your breakdowns of Civilization topics, we are SO early yet haven't even seen Modern. Let's let the devs cook a bit and then we can all enjoy together (or hate together).
I like that they really really listened to the player feedback. So you can keep playing the leader and maintain that concept like being expansionist Isabella, or you can convert some other direction.
I don't watch this guy's content and I generally think of him as a power gamer; someone who plays much closer to optimally than I do. So I was surprised to hear him say that Emperor is the most fun difficulty; that's what I play on, and win on virtually every time despite playing ironman and only using mods and options that increase difficulty and variance. I never chop for example. I never plan district placement ahead of time, or place districts early to lock in their costs, or plan IZ coverage over multiple cities. I never plan an aggressive strategy. I focus on production over gold, when I'm pretty sure the meta is the reverse. I usually neglect specializing unit promotions to take advantage of combining them into armies. etc. I'm surprised that he and I both prefer Emperor, and are both able to win on Deity.
honestly, sounds more like something i would like. I disliked 6 and played 5 for as long as i could. this sounds like they are getting rid of a lot of the things i didnt like about 6
40:20 Overbuilding is important as early as you can manage it early in a new age because, not only are their base yields higher, buildings from your new age get adjacency bonus yields. The old building, because it is from the prior age, no longer has adjacency. An advantage for overbuilding is huge.
I'm assuming "+50% A towards B" is a way of wording this to communicate how same bonuses stack together. For example, "-33% gold cost" means you pay 2/3 cost. If you have this twice and they stack, this results in 1/3 cost, and 3x stack means 0 cost. You can even go negative. With "+50% towards" you pay the same 2/3, but when you stack multiple bonuses, this will go 2x: +100% => 1/2 cost, 3x +150% => 2/5 cost, 4x +200% => 1/3 cost, etc.
@@BigPurpleCarrotsomething costs 90 gold. You put 60 gold towards it. The bonus puts 50% extra towards it - 50% of 60 is 30 gold. So you've bought a 90 gold thing for 60 gold, 2/3 the base cost
@@sjc9832 What? That makes no sense. Where has the 60 come from? If something costs 90 gold I need to pay 90. So if something put 50% towards it it'd be 45.
@@BigPurpleCarrot Gold was maybe a poor example, lets try Production. Something requires 90 production to build, and you have 6 production in your city, but you have a bonus that gives +50% Production towards building it. As a result, where you would normally be taking 15 turns to build it (90 / 6 = 15), you are instead taking 10 turns (6 * 1.5 = 9; 90 / 9 = 10), which is 33% less time.
I don't think they ever set out to make a Sequel to Civ 6. Just a game that stands on its own. Also considering Humankind was something I really wanted to work but didn't, i'm hoping Civ 7 can make the concept work how I envisioned.
I wouldnt go that far but adopting the worst mechanics from Humankind could be a fatal blow for this game. No shot it's going to be as popular as Civ 6.
@are3287 i think it will be a huge hit. Unfortunately the more i see of the game, the less it appeals to me, i will buy it- but in a few years from now when it is on sale.
CIV VII visuals are so muted, give me good contrasts! If they don't launch with a Settings options to increase contrasts I pray that someone makes a mod to make it look better.
Take the time you need to rest and deal with whatever you’ve got going on, disembodied voice of Potato. Things are tough; we’ll figure it out, but not without rest.
I so want a currency mechanic in the game, instead of gold as the economic aspect. Like each civ has to develop a currency, have it backed by like a resource or something they produce and have to get it to be either the only currency used or have the highest value as a wincon. Idk someone smarter than me can flush it out, but that seems on theme
@@dillonrodriguez1575 Interestingly I was weeks in developing a mod to what you described for Civ 5 had extensive lua for it to function. I had each currency linked by region or in Civ 5 it was prefix “Asian_” for example. Had USD, Peso, Euro, and Yuan. I had it coded where it dynamically changed based on how many cities, buildings, pop, technology researched, and military strength with UI display in GDP/C. Idea was generating currency would provide increasing benefits based on stockpile threshold, you could also convert currency to gold if needed. Also had dynamic valuation, you could how each currency was performing translated in gold (basically conversion rate) Also had an idea for inflation if the player or AI was generating too much too quickly. The biggest struggle and why I abandoned it was trying to get the AI to effectively use it, there was also a performance hit.
So as a really big fan of Jadwiga in 6 I'm really torn about the religion changes. On the one hand I love the new reliquary systems. Reliquaries was a super fun way to play a religious Civ in 6 despite the initial hurdles of trying to farm relics without void singers. But on the other hand, it kinda seems like the whole identity of religion is kinda gone, I get that "a lot of people weren't fans of religion" but like I was. I'm not a big fan of science but we didn't gut the science tree, ya know? Its just super disappointing to see my identity go like that.
Cross platform saves is probably more relevant to you than you'd think, just because it means if you have a save file, or you do any series playing viewer save files any console players you have watching can take part in that
I read another commenter mention that the build they were streaming was from early November rather than the newest version. Still worries me- its giving 'Early Access Beta for 6+months' vibes.
Everyone else is talking bout religion, so I’ll share my opposite take that I actually am really excited for the narrative events. But hey different strokes for different folks, and if it ends up that you don’t like the game, Civ 6 will still be here in all its glory
I like the way religion works here. It gives me a reason to actually do things with religion where before it always just seemed to kind of sit there not doing anything.
regarding Linux support, Steam Decks running Steam OS are using linux so if you are supporting running the game on steam decks you basically get Linux support for free. I'm also sick enough of Windows that I'm trying out Linux on some of my devices and Civ games are one of those games that I might want to play on my linux laptop while out and about not just on my home gaming rig
Exactly why does microsoft need to be involved when I'm playing civ but even if there wasn't a native linux build proton is a thing. It will be interesting to see the performance differences between native and running it via proton. Steams linux is above 2% now, that's higher percentage than any of AMDs GPUs (individually) and once valve officially release SteamOS I can see that number more than doubling over night
I love a lot of changes about Civ 7. One big issue I have though, is how blatant the hexagons are at times. Coastlines and walls in particular feel like they're yelling at you, "these tiles are HEXAGONS in case you forgot." Hexagons are bestagons, but I want the game art to be smoother. Civ 5 had smoother edges for Pete's sake, and that was 15 years ago. Same thing with the minimap. Civ 5's minimap was better than Civ 6, and now Civ 7, in the year 2025.
I never liked the religion gameplay in any Civ, but as a bonus that synergizes with your chosen gameplay, it was pretty good. Making religion dependent solely on spreading it to other civs is not only bad design, but also makes no sense. How does religion not affect your empire in any way at all? What if i want to be religious but wanna play huge map with only one other civ? Not good.
Oh my god. I didn't realize. I was thinking the way the map worked all players were on the same continent and then they can travel across the seas, but for the entire antiquity era there will just be players disconnected from each other until the exploration era. That's amazing. Civ 7 is looking to be the most intriguing civ in many many years. I really hope this unites all civ players under a single game as a true step forward for the series unlike civ 6 which split people.
Why oh why, would someone playing a narrative game open up the wiki site to look up an event chain? Do what looks most interesting and nine times out of ten it will reward you.
I was gonna comment the same thing. I've played my fair share of Stellaris, and the only time it makes any sense to do it is if you're 100s of hours into the game and min-maxing at the highest difficulties. I get that optimization is the only thing that's fun for some people, but exploration of the game is equally or more important for many others. (And off the top of my head, in Stellaris, even the min-max question is more about whether you should complete an event chain, not which path to pick.)
@@danieltatar7575 I mean to be fair I'm the kind of person who will go in blind for the first ~50ish hours of gameplay but then have the wiki at the ready for the next 500 hours of gameplay. So even if its fun to explore for the first few weeks of release it will eventually lead to stressful memory games and regrets when you miss a cooler+better path. Losing a long run to Giant Alien Spiders in FTL: Faster than Light because I forgot what button to click (no save files or undos) is only funny so many times.
I'm really liking the religion system. There were more founder belief menus. Plenty of things to come. I don't think it was overly-focused on foreign settlements. Civ 6 has lots of those. It's thematic, too: having a strong belief in your native country, like Shinto in Japan, isn't as powerful .Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and the rest, they all benefit their founding nations because they're global. I'm also glad to see a system that I recognize. Given everything else that changed, I'm glad to see something familiar. I mean, Civ 7 feels like Civ, but man, they're ambitious. That makes for a complex game.
They did specifically say the religions were one of the areas that they were likely to make changes to before the game went live so I wouldn't focus too much on the specific beliefs from this stream
Seems like a make or break thing whether the exploration age works out. 1 scenario nobody bothers expanding out and sim citys instead, scenario 2 people settle everywhere because its too valuable not to do. Hopefully there are "builds" of equal strengths in both scenarios so 1 doesent get drowned out.
11:30 "Look at those Sheep! Welsh people look away... New Zealanders too." It took me a few secs to get this... Thanks potato I spilled my drink. XD You are so Stupid. I love it.
they are ignoring Legends because its an online registration feature that was mentioned when presenting the preorder stuff, i cite "Each leader possesses a unique ability and can further be improved with customizable attributes earned through gameplay". its not clear if only in MP or not.
1:33:40 I kinda wish they did the tooltips similar to how paradox does where you can highlight keywords, would be great to see a list of "marine" tiles or what is a settlement. And it's a double edged sword, civ 6 had you rushing to get a religion online so you werent locked out, I do like that it is able to be accessed by everyone. Though religious combat and such going on in the background was a pain too however.
Those story events will turn into "I don't read the text, just compare the rewards" kind of thing, the same as it is in all Paradox games (where to be fair, more people role-play).
Love the idea that every nation gets its own Religion. It would be interestng to see some of the extreme options that might be offerable to specific religions, I'm looking at you Aztecs. Maybe some religion mods would be cool as well.
Hearing about how religion changes from age to age it sounds like they really went heavy into making each Age feel like a new game. So instead of playing a continuous game with generally defined technological ages, we play a game of Civilization: Antiquity, then get a New Game+ mode to play Civilization: Exploration. Your previous choices will have impacts on whats available to you, but some mechanics are basically reset to give you the feel of playing a new game.
1 hex lake tiles (and to some extent that 1 hex desert island) don't do it for me, they look odd and frankly old. I'd prefer something like within each hex are smaller hexes to offer more variety in shapes / details to lakes / mountains / islands etc
Hey Potato, you mentioned recently that you've been having a rough time lately. You are not alone man, thanks for continuing to make videos and keep plugging even when it's hard.
I agree with this post.
Keep going Irish potato man!
Had no idea.
Hope you get through it quick, and it's better on the other side.
Potatoes are delicious.
missed opportunity to say "and keep churning even when it's hard"
joke aside, we're all here for you potato
Agreed 😊
Religion in Civ VI felt like all or nothing. I have to rush religion to get the bonus that synergizes with what I'm doing or don't even bother with it. This is something I can engage with as much as I want to, I'll get rewards for it even if I didn't focus on it. Also I like that it is contained to one age, I'm not churning out missionary after missionary after missionary at the same time I'm trying to build a spaceship.
@@Ffourteen once I realized religion was an easy way to win I started removing that win condition entirely
This is my takeaway as well. It does feel like you lose some of the fun personal civ roleplay identity that you can make by building your civ around a religion. But by making it strictly an expansionism mechanic instead of a bonus to home cities, it turns it into an optional gameplay path. Instead of being something that you must take, even if you don't interact with it, just for the extra passive yields. The absence of a faith resource further reinforces its new, more optional status in this build as well, at least in my mind.
One might say you had to *devote* yourself to it?
Religion was bad in Civ 6 I hated the spam and religious combat 😅
@@Ffourteen yeah, I don't like religion in civ 6. Either you race to be one of the first or you just ignore the whole system, including any wonders. And it's ahistoric too, religions start from being a minority to growing larger, but you can only make missionaries of the dominant religion in a city.
Full disclosure I am a casual player, but I hated religion in Civ 6. Felt like a completely parallel game taking place at the same time.
Dropping the pantheon means your choices in later ages mean more. Keeping all the stacking bonuses through every turn of the game is why other civ games snowball so hard and why late game turns take so long but accomplish so little.
I think I'd like it if they reduce the pantheon bonus's power, but not eliminate it. It really hurts when some of your choices from previous ages don't matter at all anymore.
they could add them as a tradition/legacy that is an easy fix
@@CAG83 Pantheons naturally "reduce" in later ages because they don't scale. I agree with so many of their "simplifying in the next age" choices but dropping the pantheon doesn't make any sense because it was all about the early advantage. The pantheon was the one thing in civ 6 that doesn't scale and doesn't require any extra micro-management
@@andreydupreez6370 I kinda like it, because there is no pantheon anymore. Pantheons kinda represent the ancient religions before the more modern religions took over. So Pantheon bonusses have no place in a modern world really from a 'lore' perspective (as much as Civilisation has that). And mechanically I like the simplification of the game towards the later game that it doesn't snowball so hard, and also that it is not so much a runaway effect. If you're behind in the midgame you've basically already lost in most civ games, since it is practically impossible to bounce back when you are behind. You only get further behind. So a kind of reset in the mid-game that puts everyoe kinda on the same footing I think is great. Particularly multiplayer, but also makes single player more interesting and not just that you've already won the game but still have to play for hours to formally win.
Potato: I know a lot of people didn't like Religion in Civ 6
Civ dev: We're scaling back and simplifying Religion in the new game
Potato: *shocked Pikachu face*
Fitting it into one age and making it less needlessly complex and involved sounds great to me
I genuinely feel like people who have this opinion that the game is better without it, are just being suck ups for whatever reason. If you keep making the game more simple it becomes tic tac toe. Is that what you all want?
@@jho4977 I genuinely feel like people who want to hold onto things solely because they are already in the game, regardless of how well they work or the public response to them, are just slaves to maintaining the status quo.
I think removing needless complexity in features that people have widely shown little interest in makes sense. if they simplified military to the point where there's only 2 types of unit, then that wouldn't go down well. but if they simplified great works to only sculptures and paintings (rather than having landscape paintings, portraits, religious, etc.), I don't think people would mind
@ For me I just don't think it's possible to go forward by taking things away. In my opinion they should just expand on religion and make it more pronounce rather than watering it down for everyone.
I feel this way about ages as well now that we are down to 3. And workers. Idk I would have rather them expand on all of these things rather than water them down and take them way. I'd much rather see depth added to these mechanics.
I like the religion race because you don't always have to have it. But if you did have it, it could be very useful. Now everyone gets religion and sure it felt bad to not get a religion if you are going for it but how is it any different than not moving on to the next age if you aren't doing well enough?
@@jho4977 religion sucked when it was reintroduced in V, and sucked in 6. It was annoying, tedious, and overall not fun unless you focused on that. There are other places to make the game more complex, but religion isn't one. It is probably the most disabled win condition in the game, bar maybe time victory. Also, not needing a religion? With how busted some of the bonuses are? It has always felt like a requirement minus maybe on Bismark in V
@@goldenhate6649 See that's what makes Civ a a great game sometimes you can have so many different type of experiences depending on who you play with and how you play. Watering down mechanics just takes away from players ableness to play how they choose, and leans the player into a more scripted outcome.
Disagree strongly with Potato on some of the religious points made in the video. I understand that it’s disappointing to lose a gameplay feature, but religion as a tent-pole feature in Civ 6 never made sense to me and is a major reason I never jived with that game. To Potato’s point, religion added an extra layer of complexity to play with and plan interesting strategies around and that is a layer of FUN, but I disagree that it’s a necessary addition to the game at the complexity it was at in 6.
The idea of religious conversion, conflict, and high-profile relevance being restricted to one age makes more sense to me, (I think it could even fit better in a “middle age” in between antiquity and exploration) as you don’t really see major civilizations changing religion in the modern era, or really in antiquity before institutional organized religion developed. The idea of converting a modern American or China or whatever to a new majority religion just feels stupid to me. Maybe they’ll release an expansion at some point that adds a “middle ages” time period with more religion mechanics and crusades and what not.
So with religion just restricted to one age (for now) I can see why they’d want to spend less time on developing a deeper system of adjacencies, linkages, etc. I also think, a lot of the beliefs and enhancements that Potato is missing were about faith generation, a currency that has been removed (to my great pleasure) so the lists feeling more “bland” or less impactful, makes some sense. I also think, with how the Civ 6 religion meta developed, there were some beliefs that were just objectively better and some that were unusable in almost any circumstance. A more bland list could mean potentially a more balanced/situational list. We’ll have to see how it plays, but tbh I prefer this system massively to Civ 6.
I think 6’s better-but I think 7’s done in a way to develop its own character down the line. Plus, I think 7 has a decent amount of complexity that religion was basically going to be paired down. I almost thought they had nixed it.
I think it could use some carryover effects, though. Like, pantheons maybe becoming a social policy. Same issue is with codices, imo, that you’ll have with relics-they kinda just “go away”, unlike the other pathways’ bonuses.
7 takes a hard turn from 6 in its core philosophy. In fact I think 7 is breaking with the philosophy of the entire genre. 6 (and all 4x games) is a game about piling layers of bonuses on top of each other to efficiently reach the ultimate victory condition in a few hours. 7 is a game about constantly winning points towards various victories, creating efficiencies is still a big part of what you do to win but not actually how you win.
Religion is a perfect example of this. In 6 its a support mechanic to create more yields to support other victory conditions. In 7 its an actually different gameplay mechanic where you win by actively converting. I really believe that we will see many of the current content creators around the game be unhappy, it simply will not play the same way.
Strong disagree regarding religion mattering less in an exploration age. Religious conversion was a dominant factor in human history from Clovis to the Scramble for Africa. Conceptually, that is Civ VI's Exploration Age, even slightly beyond it around the edges.
@@benabaxtersorry if it seems like I’m saying it matters less in exploration! Not my intention. Religious conversion is HUGE in exploration and makes perfect sense. I’m just thinking, in terms of religious wars, crusades, and mechanics with extra religious units like in Civ 6, Civ 7 by design would want to restrict to an age/time period where it’s most relevant, which could still be exploration age, but I also think it could be fun to add a more “medieval” or “Middle Ages” age to the game. I don’t know if they’ve ruled out extra ages, but it’s fun to think about.
@@AvishaiGreensteinthis is a great point! In a lot of ways, on paper Civ 7 feels more like a board game than a video game, and it seems to be taking more of its DNA from outside the franchise than from previous Civ games, which is absolutely a valid complaint for those that really love the identity of Civ. Personally though, since Civ 6 never really worked for me (despite hundreds and hundreds of hours in the game) and since I love board games with similar victory mechanics to Civ 7, I’m looking forward to giving it a go. ❤
20:27 To add an outsider perspective - I do actually enjoy the idea of the resource management minigame. I am really bad at visualizing abstract concepts - things like amenities never fully clicked for me. So being able to directly see what resource is going where makes a lot more sense to how my brain works!
@@Velahra yeah I never noticed what having/not having amenities ACTUALLY did. Like I tried to make them go up with Scotland and sort of noticed production and stuff felt high...?
@@Sco10 It was basically city happiness. negative amenities lowered your city growth. having 2-3 extra gave you a 10% bonus to growth speed and like 4+ gave you 15% city growth. You can see the bonus/penalty on the city screen.
Gotta admit amenities was just a bad system. It was arbitrary and could be manipulated in so many ways but also hurt wayyyyy too much. There needed to be much more granulated steps to it than just +3 to -3. I played incas a lot and it would just be murder on my civ in the industrial age because I’d have like 6 20 pop cities by then and they’d pretty much all be at -1 or -2. Stopping production for an entertainment district was just murder on the snowball effect.
@ Yeah I understand the rationale, but its pretty hard to feel it when just playing the game
I'm sorry but I don't see how removing something that faded away over time (like pantheons) is a bad thing, its in line with the ENTIRE theme of 'history is built in layers' IMO it was always weird to have a fully built up Catholic Spanish run and still have them worship some random river god from 3000 years ago
while it's strange to have them worship it, old pagan beliefs still impact people to this day. We're still filled with superstitions from that era and special holidays related to it. Pantheons taking a different meaning under organized religion still makes sense.
But you just described Catholicism
Also even if the beliefs don't hold, they impact the culture still. Having +1 production from fishing boats in the modern age isn't because the people believe in a river god but because they descend from people who have been fishing for centuries.
You keep the special abilities that your ancient civ has, even though you change to another civ twice. They even praised how you build your civ into a unique combination of stats and abilities with persistant choices that add up to create it. Why shouldnt a pantheon stick over time when ancient civ abilities do?
Yeah, I closed the video at this point, it just became all nitpicking. We're complaining that one tiny little bonus is going away a third of the way through the game? Give me a break.
I'm all for sharing concerns but holy moly
Two comments for this video so far. Religion sounds better in my eyes, I hated civ 6 religion and this sounds more like what I wanted to see from religion. Secondly they said the production bonus from the event was until end of era not the entire game. Might have been a bad choice of words but if you misunderstood I wanted to clarify.
Not having piracy in a game where treasure fleets exist is criminal. Also treasure fleets move too fast to be intercepted
Gotta save some things for DLC, friend
@DSJaha Spains civic tree increases fleet movement by +1, so that's also why it seems to move so quickly. Also remember, while Spain has a treasure fleet right off its coast within like 10 tiles, the other nations have to go the long way to acquire their treasure fleets. I think they move fast enough, it's the island being so close that really throws it off. Plus I agree with potatoe, it should have to go back to a dock then any body of water connected to the main land under your control.
I'm just hoping plenty of piracy goes on with this one ;). It'll hopefully teach them not to rob people blind with their content release highway robbery tactics.
This is the main thing I'm excited for this age sounds so much fun and a reason for me to build naval units
Agreed. Naval units were always an afterthought for me in Civ 6.
Man I always liked the idea of being a Naval power in an empire building game. This might finally do it
@@patrickearlpastrana9006 yeah same, larping as great britain with absolute naval supremacy would be LIT
I would basically build one or two just so I could fend off barbarians until I got late game where battleships and missile cruisers would destroy any coastal city in range...
It is gonna be great to play with naval in the mid game
@@jamesjiaoand many other 4x games unless you’re playing a Pangea map. Queue the Family Guy episode goofing on Aquaman.
Hope things take a turn for the better for you, bud
One thing I noticed which I haven't heard mentioned before is that population count of cities is significantly higher in Civ 7. It seems like in late game 40 pop cities will be normal.
About things being hard lately. My dude. I’m JUST on the other side of perpetually being kicked in the nards by life since 2022.
And things are FINALLY starting to look good. I’m saying this because that’s the period where I found this channel and the content really helped during a rough time for me.
Thanks for everything and just know WE are rooting for YOU!
@@DongusMcBongus thanks 😊
Thanks 😊
"Welsh people look away, New Zealanders too."
Completely took me out lol
I vastly prefer religion being more focused on spreading it and needing to actually engage and interact with it beyond the initial founding. It feels more engaging to actually need to interact with other players rather than just hyperfocusing on my own religion. I felt like I never wanted to go out and spread my religion, only keeping my religion within my own cities. Religion and Culture like tourism always felt linked and too similar to me.
I disagree with the religion thing. Like in civ 6 most of the time religion was a means to stock pile faith for culture victory or for a crusade push i a war game. Other times you really didnt care or only cared enough to defend it. If everyone is going to get a religion, then its important to make a reason to play around the religion. The bonuses being mostly for spreading the religion rather than simply having one make that incentive to at least be actively engaged with the system.
His whole point doesn't make sense, how is getting more food in tundra tiles related to a religion in any way? Religions should be based around followers, that's why they're relevant culturally for a civilization in general. The problem is he's so Civ brained that a more simple and realistic view of religion is seen as a downgrade because "it doesn't buff enough" or "it's not as relevant".
@@JuniorOliveira-lp4fo I wouldn't go that far. Like I get it that there two real high points in creating a religion specifically in civ 6: the race to forming the religion and using the faith afterwards to as a form of currency to win the game, whether it be combat units or naturalists and rock bands. It also didnt help that the time when you were supposed to be engaging in religious conquest was the most fun part of civ 6, the real expansion era and when you starting cities were really setting up their important districts and doing builder management and there wasnt a lot of depth for religious focused wins other than hitting theocracy. I understand he doesn't like that theyre removing the two religion highs of the game, but i disagree with the characterization that religion was fun in it of itself, and not just a means to an end in most playthroughs you bothered wit it. And while they were more useful, from a game design perspective, passive boosts from religions that scaled just with you allowed you to just stockpile faith for the late game if the ai deided to just not bother you in the game.
@@wanyaisneed3972 But it doesn't need to be fun in that way, it can be fun in other ways. That's the point. You can kinda break the game with boosts that don't make sense in civ6. that's why its annoying McWhiskey, he sees it as losing a buff instead of seeing it as a gameplay mechanic.
@@JuniorOliveira-lp4fohe’s upset about losing the gameplay mechanic that added an extra layer of complexity and fun for him. Even if it isn’t “realistic” I think it’s fair for Potato to be upset about losing a feature he found it fun to play with. I disagree with his reasoning, I disagree with the idea that it’s an important feature to have or that the game needs that level of complex religious mechanics, but I don’t disagree that it SUCKS when a game removes a thing that I had fun with, so I see where he’s coming from in that sense. Hopefully he’ll find that other aspects of the game fill the space he feels is missing that religion had filled, but I’m certainly not going to miss the Civ 6 religious system.
@@Hazlius I think this incentivizes more complexity then civ 6's system. It rewards you for going out and doing the thing. As opposed to in 6 where it was just yet another way to get yields that will eventually go towards building a space ship.
Carl and Ed looked so uncomfortable in the beginning.
Having seen them many times in past livestreams like the ones for Civ 6's various passes, I'd say that's just how they look tbh; they've always been a little awkward and probably not super comfy being on camera being broadcast to thousands live. It also doesn't help that most of these streams seem to be totally unscripted and unrehearsed judging from how they awkwardly try to demonstrate in-game stuff.
Often a good sign for the game if the people in charge aren't hired for being overly charismatic and perfect on camera. That should mean they actually know what they are doing technically instead.
Two dorks sat next to a pretty girl lol
I would definitely take a shot or two before doing something like this.
Naval gameplay has always been so mediocre in Civ. Even on more naval-oriented maps (like archipelago), there has been little incentive to lean heavily into building a navy unless you're going for outright conquest. Civ6 sort of tried with more naval civs and requiring naval techs to get to industrialisation (to mirror the historical importance of navies to that process) but Civ7 will finally make it a central part of the gameplay.
I think the big issue has always been the movement was too fast, and their sight range was too low. Like, ships are sloooow. IDK why they always made ships so fast. Like, a tank is waaaay faster than a battleship, but battleships have more points. I believe Civ 4 had a lot more naval combat if I remember right due to slower movement
The +50% gold to buy naval units might be there to avoid the stacking of -33%'s that lead to free stuff at times.
(Edit: which you mention nearly an hour later)
Is this equivalent to only needing to pay 2/3 the listed price?
@@CraigNull for just one buff its equivalent, however if you have multiple buffs it differs. Lets say you have +50% and + 50% you have +100% which is comparable to -50% cost. If you have -33% - 33% you have -66% which is more and in the extreme +150% is 2/5 the cost while -99% is basically free.
Tjat doesnt mean naval units are 50% off?
@@poisonpotato1 it usually means your money is worth 50% more. For it to be “half priced”, your money would need to be worth 100% more
Potato. You mentioned that you're sad at the shallowness of Religion in Civ 7. I think you missed something:
At 2:01:01, you're seeing a civic tree. Notice there are Spanish Civics, Exploration Civics and... Theology civics.
They haven't showed us what theology civics are yet, but that will probably make religious gameplay a tiny bit spicier at the least eh?
The events system is actually pretty nice. Thousands of events that have a chance of firing with specific conditions, and some of them are unique to certain Civs/Leaders. Think about this as added, semi random bonuses that allow for increased player agency in determining future actions with increased replayability. I play a lot of Paradox games and hate the events (due to frequency and the lack of win conditions making options objectively correct), but a 4X game allows these infrequent events to facilitate different ways of playing the game through relatively minor buffs.
My favorite way to play is to risk everything and claim a distant continent for myself. It rarely works out well on harder difficulties but it's just so fun when it works out. Exploration age is often peek civ for me so I'm glad they are putting more into it
i feel like the religion gameplay is a consequence of the ages solution to snowballing.
I see the deep influence of board games now. Religion is now a actual gameplay mechanic designed to create conflict. In civ 6 it was a makes numbers go up, put in your investment and then passively collect. Now religion is an actual active mechanic. The point is to go out and convert cities and the bonuses incentivize this behavior for you and for the AI.
"It feels like they're taking a feature out of the game."
I wonder if they'll try to sell it back to us in a future expansion...
for real
At least this one is shipping with Religion - if very boring version of it.
@@CityState_of_Valletta The more I have studied history, the more I realized religion's impact for individual countries was minimal. It was a more macro scale thing for most of modern history. There was a bit of drama during the reformation and the schisms in the muslim religions, but that being modeled in this game seems impossible unless they revert to more of a civ 4 style religions where it spawns randomly. There was the fight between the catholics and the muslims, but that was a clash of moral systems and militaries. You couldn't simply waltz in and convert a city like Civ does. Its the attempt to model the real world with civ mechanics and failing pretty bad
Main problem with civ 7 rn? World size. It feels small, feels like a board game more than it resembles actual world with many nations. Another gameplay with small amount of rivals and a map which resembles lower end of world sizes in prior Civs. Clear trade-off from rich city graphics. They look nice but you don't launch Civ to play this Age of Empires/mobile strategy game-vibe. Hope im completely wrong but rn it feels like even if there are bigger maps available, they won't be stable enough to sustain advanced era gameplay with 10+ rivals.
I really appreciate you going through these. I watched the stream when it aired, but I feel like I have absorbed so much more with the extra commentary pauses.
Keep up the awesome work man.
Thanks for all you do, potato~! You're a good dude and you deserve to take as much time as you need~! Be safe~!
it would be cool it have a mechanic where if you have a friend joining a game late then they start in the new world. So they have a whole contentment to themself to help them catch back up, and are separated from other players to help protect them from conquest, but they are behind technologically. Could create an interesting dynamic
Love your videos man, hope you know that tons of us get excited every time your videos pop up. Regardless of what’s going on in your life you have an entire group of really cool people rooting for you constantly. You got this brother.
i could comment a lot but the one most important thing that worries me most is that they always show continent type of maps so it fits nicely into the age progresion, but about other types of lands? pangea, islands etc. How will age progression and map size behave on those types? are those removed? they also dont mention multiplayer a lot
I'm thinking how do all-land or mostly-land maps work
I think pangea wont exist anymore. Just does not work woth the gameplay For islands i think you could have homeland islands and far lands islands
If I had to guess, pangea's distant lands are small islands off the shore. Not really pangea themed tho
Didn't they say the UI was a work in progress after all the testers complained about it? But it doesn't look like anything has changed? Really not a fan. Many of the icons look like Google clipart by different artists with different styles. Looks amateurish almost.
Keep in mind the game comes out about a month and a half from now and that livestream came out on a WIP build back in November. A lot can change in that time.
If not changed by release , I’m sure will be a mod released swiftly with nicer looking text and icons at very least
I don't care much how it looks, just put everything useful 1-2 clicks away and show more information in a view. In the trees and narrative events, most of the effects of choices were revealed only on hover cards. I don't understand why you wouldn't show as much as you could side by side when there's so much unused screen real estate.
13:20 Later on, perhaps in the Modern livestream (my memory is far from perfect), we find out that there are civs that start in what are the Distant Lands to you (Only as advanced starts? Not clear), but your home land mass is their Distant Lands for game mechanic purposes.
I remember civilization 1 when I was 12 years old, it’s what really got me into strategy games and I love the game to this day, syked for 7
The best thing civ7 can do is make it easy to mod.
Let the player base make mods they want, or its not going to last long unless it is perfect.
It's gonna need a custom map maker on launch or it will suffer. Civ 6 was known for having absolutely atrociously bad map gen at launch, especially in MP placing people within 6 tiles of each other.
Big ups, I usually turn off Religious victory path in Civ 6 so you already know how I feel about these religion changes...
As someone who plays the game purely for fun and not for min/maxing, I love how much they're streamlining what (to me) were granular, "crunchy" elements of the gameplay. It feels more like a city builder, which I LOVE
These changes look more fun. It feels like your choices get challenged by the world around you in interesting and granular ways, rather than just playing the same min/maxing focus for the entire span of a game. I’m going to have a lot more fun in this game and I think I’ll be able to get a lot more friends into this series now
I kinda disagree with your take on religion. It was basically just a worse version of a domination victory. You pretty much need to only worry about one yield and have very few unit varieties or strategies. Basically just send your units straight out the enemy city and that was it. I think it’s much better as a supporting act for culture victory.
But I definitely disagree with the event system. I think it is a fair critique if certain events are unbalanced (which I would be cautious to say before we actually played the game), but the whole system isn’t taking away your choice, it’s giving more of them. It is small bonuses that are random and minor enough where you don’t build a whole strategy around them, but they liven in the game up so that following a predetermined bill order isn’t always the best move.
I get why potato is annoyed by the religion part, but im kinda happy with it. I always felt pigeon holed into fast tracking religion, and if you didn't get it, it's a feels bad, so sad moment. Or you ignore the shit entirely. With civ 7, you can interact with it as much or as little as you want, it seems. And i quite like that.
I am glad that religion got dialed back … felt compulsory in Civ 6, and I am not a fan of compulsory religion … as a rule
I miss board gaming a ton. I grew up with board games, had a great group of friends to play with.
Board Gaming is still a thing and I imagine if you search you can find people to play with, especially if willing to look into doing it online (I don't mean digitally)
@@belovedwarrior3192 I might have to resort to that. I really miss the face to face part of board gaming.
depending on where you live, if there is a small (board) game shop, ask there, if they know some open game groups
@@schwingedeshaehers For me there is a small shop about 30 minutes away to go and play TCG games and probably board games too. I guess if you have the money open up your own shop and then you will always have a place to do that
RE: Cities should have 4 workable tiles.
I know Civ 5 has that plausibility as there's a fair certain amount of mods that does that, i.e. Vox Populi overhaul modpack lets the capital have 4 tile radius when you finish the tall social policy tree.
It's... super underwhelming to be honest! Remember that 1 pop = 1 worked tile, and the 3 tile radius gives you 36 workable tiles for the city which is a lot of tiles to choose from. Adding a 4th ring is more about reaching a pretty good resource tile in the 4th ring than actually working on all the new 24 tiles. There's also a certain point where working a new tile is not worth it on a super high pop city and would be better as a specialist.
I think the new building=district will be good enough to make cities feel large. Especially with walls, the "city center" will be moving around as you build more districts with the wall outline
You pretty much countered your own point though. Especially w limits on # of settlements, reaching more resources via one city is CRUCIAL. Even if you don’t work the tiles you claim, A) you keep them from an opponent and B) you can establish stronger borders for defense. Simply working all the tiles is not the only reason or even the best reason to argue for wider reach.
I really like the idea of "one-tricking" a particular civ and that gives you rewards or personalisation options. I'd love to identify with a civ and it would add a lot to multiplayer.
A pristige style system is interesting, kinda like the pantheon system in Age of Wonders 4, to give you incentive to actually finish and not abandon games to have outside meta progression.
Just as long as having it doesn't give a massive advantage in multiplayer.
I actually hated it for this reason. Having unlocks tied to play time means you will be handicapped even more compared to someone who has more experience with theirs. It discourages playing multiple civs, meaning sessions with friends are going to be less varied when people repeat the same strategies instead of trying new things.
In regards to the splash damage promotion on naval commander, it is easily countered by the +1 range. naval battles will have a bigger field of engagement, nothing's really changed, honestly. curious about the +1 range in terms of coastal bombardment, as +1 range is always OP in terms of bombardment.
2:41:00 They have ruthlessly pared back features from 6, presumably to make room for the many features they have added and modified to make age transitions what you focus long and medium term strategy around. Pantheons disappear in the transition to Exploration, and you have to start over with religion. The Antiquity tech and generic civics tree both go away, as do your ability to build or slot anything unlocked by them. It's as if they never existed. Buildings from the earlier age are left, but they lose their adjacencies, resulting, at least in this livestream, in paring back your culture and science output by nearly 50%. At least some of your cities get demoted to towns. The overall paring back makes whatever you have managed to carry over to the new age that much more important. These are your traditions, whatever you get with your legacy points, as well as however many settlements, commanders, and units you built. And given what Ed Beach said in response to the question about loyalty, I suspect that at least some of the crises will see you losing some of your settlements.
Overall, they seem to be changing more from 6 to 7 than they changed from 5 to 6. The paring back with age transitions seems especially bold, as the fan base is going to have a lot of anxiety when it is more widely recognized just how much age transitions will set you back. Pantheons gone, religion side-lined, the crises potentially looking a lot like Dramatic mode from 6, many of your yields pared back dramatically during a transition that resets everyone to starting a new tech and civics tree... Yikes!
I would be very worried if this set of devs did not have an excellent track record of integrating a complicated set of mechanics into a coherent whole. You can only get that right with exhaustive play-testing, and they seem to understand and practice that. We're just going to have to accept the loss of a lot of neat stuff from 6, a loss that will prove well worth it if they pull off this whole complicated age transition thing,
Thankfully, once mods are released, we probably won’t have to settle at all. As PW mentioned, modding out Crises will probably be one of the first things the community does. Same with modding ways to remove/manipulate settlement limits, I imagine
I hope things get better fast Potato! I'm already done with this year.
Imagine a survival 4x style game based on that concept. Like you build up a little civilization fighting other local area tribes with similar technology and then get invaded by more technologically advanced civs.
1:37:16 "Feels like they've taken a feature out of the game." Me, a total war player, "First time?"
"If we ever going to have a lake civilization this would be a great map for them."
Oh does this mean FINLAND is confirmed?!?
That would be amazing
You could have a "Vikings" Civ and/or leader with War and Economy focus.
They start with a a costal bias unlike most other civ who have River bias.
The vikings outside of piliging were also fishermen and traders.
So they could have +1 gold bonuses from water tiles (similarly to Egypt +1 production from rivers)
which could help kickstart a war economy.
As a special unique you might have a berserker who get bonus power outside of your boarders.
Or unqiue longship that can do coastal raiding somehow.
As for unique buildings you could have a special "longhouse" building or a "Stave Church" Altar. Combine them both ( or with a another culture building ) And you could combine into a Unique Urban districts called "Thing" or "Allthing" if its unique to the capital.
You could then have them turn into "Sweden" who could be a Military civ for once( instead of diplomatic ) With a focus on great generals with under Gustav Vasa as its leader.
Sweden did take a few American colonines in the end of the age of exploration.
But Sweden mostly fought around the home country and was big fish in a small pond of around the Baltic sea.
They were somewhat famous for its military expansion and navy around that time. You could give them some science/economy/some unqiue great people bonus from expanding to help with the exploration age theme.
but they could possibly have a unique playstyle like Mongolia too who can win from fights on the home continent.
And in the Modern age Sweden could then turn into Finland.
Finland around that time had just declared independens after being anexed by russia after after Finland separated from Sweden in 1809.
Finland's key economic sector is manufacturing, and their main export is somehow Refined Petroleum despite not haveing any oil in the homeland.
Give them some Oil related War benefits like stronger airplanes and/or the slower heavy ships class.
And slap on some economical benefits from miltary resorces ( like oil ) if they do not originate from the home country.
Finland could then be a defensive economic powerhouse which helps finish Operation Ivy ( The hydrogen bomb ) or transition into a economic victory ( World Market ) .
it could also be Canada in way considering it borders the great lakes and has most fresh waster lakes
@@nealdalston7265 That's who comes to my mind as a LekMod player. Canada goes CRAZY with 2-3 lake tiles near their capital.
Probably Mexico or Aztecs
I'm happy they got rid of religion victory condition but don't think they needed to strip the mechanic this much.
33:00 The buildings from the old age lose their adjacencies in the new age, and revert to only their base yields. Specialist yields seem to be dependent on adjacencies as well, so they also drop.
Specialists are dependant on population growth so I believe they should stay ?
@@sennarghal691 You get them by assigning a new population point to be a specialist, but their yields are spoken of as depending on the adjacencies of the buildings in the tiles they are assigned to
Stay positive man. You are always so thoughtful in your breakdowns of Civilization topics, we are SO early yet haven't even seen Modern. Let's let the devs cook a bit and then we can all enjoy together (or hate together).
I like that they really really listened to the player feedback. So you can keep playing the leader and maintain that concept like being expansionist Isabella, or you can convert some other direction.
I don't watch this guy's content and I generally think of him as a power gamer; someone who plays much closer to optimally than I do. So I was surprised to hear him say that Emperor is the most fun difficulty; that's what I play on, and win on virtually every time despite playing ironman and only using mods and options that increase difficulty and variance.
I never chop for example. I never plan district placement ahead of time, or place districts early to lock in their costs, or plan IZ coverage over multiple cities. I never plan an aggressive strategy. I focus on production over gold, when I'm pretty sure the meta is the reverse. I usually neglect specializing unit promotions to take advantage of combining them into armies. etc.
I'm surprised that he and I both prefer Emperor, and are both able to win on Deity.
Dragging the Welsh out the gate. 11:15
honestly, sounds more like something i would like. I disliked 6 and played 5 for as long as i could. this sounds like they are getting rid of a lot of the things i didnt like about 6
The dev team must have had a lot of fun testing these
40:20 Overbuilding is important as early as you can manage it early in a new age because, not only are their base yields higher, buildings from your new age get adjacency bonus yields. The old building, because it is from the prior age, no longer has adjacency. An advantage for overbuilding is huge.
I'm assuming "+50% A towards B" is a way of wording this to communicate how same bonuses stack together.
For example, "-33% gold cost" means you pay 2/3 cost. If you have this twice and they stack, this results in 1/3 cost, and 3x stack means 0 cost. You can even go negative.
With "+50% towards" you pay the same 2/3, but when you stack multiple bonuses, this will go 2x: +100% => 1/2 cost, 3x +150% => 2/5 cost, 4x +200% => 1/3 cost, etc.
How does a +50% cost towards mean you pay 2/3 cost? Talk to me like I'm a dumb ass
@@BigPurpleCarrotsomething costs 90 gold. You put 60 gold towards it. The bonus puts 50% extra towards it - 50% of 60 is 30 gold. So you've bought a 90 gold thing for 60 gold, 2/3 the base cost
@@sjc9832 What? That makes no sense. Where has the 60 come from? If something costs 90 gold I need to pay 90. So if something put 50% towards it it'd be 45.
@@BigPurpleCarrot Gold was maybe a poor example, lets try Production.
Something requires 90 production to build, and you have 6 production in your city, but you have a bonus that gives +50% Production towards building it. As a result, where you would normally be taking 15 turns to build it (90 / 6 = 15), you are instead taking 10 turns (6 * 1.5 = 9; 90 / 9 = 10), which is 33% less time.
@Jfrost9101 Ah I see, perfect explanation. Thank you
This feels like a sequel to Humankind, not Civ 6
Same
I don't think they ever set out to make a Sequel to Civ 6. Just a game that stands on its own. Also considering Humankind was something I really wanted to work but didn't, i'm hoping Civ 7 can make the concept work how I envisioned.
I wouldnt go that far but adopting the worst mechanics from Humankind could be a fatal blow for this game. No shot it's going to be as popular as Civ 6.
@are3287 Oh I would agree, I doubt it will be as big as Civ 6
@are3287 i think it will be a huge hit. Unfortunately the more i see of the game, the less it appeals to me, i will buy it- but in a few years from now when it is on sale.
CIV VII visuals are so muted, give me good contrasts! If they don't launch with a Settings options to increase contrasts I pray that someone makes a mod to make it look better.
Did you notice that Greece had its own narration and ending screen? That's nifty. It seems like it might be particular to the victory type, too.
Take the time you need to rest and deal with whatever you’ve got going on, disembodied voice of Potato. Things are tough; we’ll figure it out, but not without rest.
I so want a currency mechanic in the game, instead of gold as the economic aspect. Like each civ has to develop a currency, have it backed by like a resource or something they produce and have to get it to be either the only currency used or have the highest value as a wincon. Idk someone smarter than me can flush it out, but that seems on theme
Sid Meier's Fiat Currency Simulator
@@dillonrodriguez1575 Interestingly I was weeks in developing a mod to what you described for Civ 5 had extensive lua for it to function. I had each currency linked by region or in Civ 5 it was prefix “Asian_” for example. Had USD, Peso, Euro, and Yuan. I had it coded where it dynamically changed based on how many cities, buildings, pop, technology researched, and military strength with UI display in GDP/C. Idea was generating currency would provide increasing benefits based on stockpile threshold, you could also convert currency to gold if needed. Also had dynamic valuation, you could how each currency was performing translated in gold (basically conversion rate) Also had an idea for inflation if the player or AI was generating too much too quickly. The biggest struggle and why I abandoned it was trying to get the AI to effectively use it, there was also a performance hit.
I imagine that’s why other notable mod creators (JFD and Sukritact) haven’t done it either
@ damn, yeah that sounds like grueling work. I have no idea what it takes to make these mechanics into a reality. That’s so cool how far you got
@@dpurdyciv4417 a boy can dream 😂
My heart goes out to them gritting through this while chaos happens in the background
So as a really big fan of Jadwiga in 6 I'm really torn about the religion changes. On the one hand I love the new reliquary systems. Reliquaries was a super fun way to play a religious Civ in 6 despite the initial hurdles of trying to farm relics without void singers. But on the other hand, it kinda seems like the whole identity of religion is kinda gone, I get that "a lot of people weren't fans of religion" but like I was. I'm not a big fan of science but we didn't gut the science tree, ya know? Its just super disappointing to see my identity go like that.
Cross platform saves is probably more relevant to you than you'd think, just because it means if you have a save file, or you do any series playing viewer save files any console players you have watching can take part in that
3:42 40 days before release, it's still work in progress. Should be QA tested and patching now surely.
I read another commenter mention that the build they were streaming was from early November rather than the newest version.
Still worries me- its giving 'Early Access Beta for 6+months' vibes.
No. This stream is several months old. I have no idea why potato posted this now.
Everyone else is talking bout religion, so I’ll share my opposite take that I actually am really excited for the narrative events. But hey different strokes for different folks, and if it ends up that you don’t like the game, Civ 6 will still be here in all its glory
2:00:53
There is a Theology tree so there might be some more depth to religions outside of "spread for x bonus"
I like the way religion works here. It gives me a reason to actually do things with religion where before it always just seemed to kind of sit there not doing anything.
Every time they talk about the narrative, it raises my hype so to each their. Pretty much every one of these changes i see as a massive improvement.
regarding Linux support, Steam Decks running Steam OS are using linux so if you are supporting running the game on steam decks you basically get Linux support for free. I'm also sick enough of Windows that I'm trying out Linux on some of my devices and Civ games are one of those games that I might want to play on my linux laptop while out and about not just on my home gaming rig
Exactly why does microsoft need to be involved when I'm playing civ but even if there wasn't a native linux build proton is a thing. It will be interesting to see the performance differences between native and running it via proton. Steams linux is above 2% now, that's higher percentage than any of AMDs GPUs (individually) and once valve officially release SteamOS I can see that number more than doubling over night
I love a lot of changes about Civ 7. One big issue I have though, is how blatant the hexagons are at times. Coastlines and walls in particular feel like they're yelling at you, "these tiles are HEXAGONS in case you forgot."
Hexagons are bestagons, but I want the game art to be smoother. Civ 5 had smoother edges for Pete's sake, and that was 15 years ago.
Same thing with the minimap. Civ 5's minimap was better than Civ 6, and now Civ 7, in the year 2025.
I never liked the religion gameplay in any Civ, but as a bonus that synergizes with your chosen gameplay, it was pretty good. Making religion dependent solely on spreading it to other civs is not only bad design, but also makes no sense. How does religion not affect your empire in any way at all? What if i want to be religious but wanna play huge map with only one other civ? Not good.
Oh my god. I didn't realize. I was thinking the way the map worked all players were on the same continent and then they can travel across the seas, but for the entire antiquity era there will just be players disconnected from each other until the exploration era. That's amazing.
Civ 7 is looking to be the most intriguing civ in many many years. I really hope this unites all civ players under a single game as a true step forward for the series unlike civ 6 which split people.
Hey take your time dude. Do what needs to get done. Happy New Year and all that. Cheers!
Potato, I would watch your boardgame channel. Thanks for all you do.
Why oh why, would someone playing a narrative game open up the wiki site to look up an event chain? Do what looks most interesting and nine times out of ten it will reward you.
I was gonna comment the same thing. I've played my fair share of Stellaris, and the only time it makes any sense to do it is if you're 100s of hours into the game and min-maxing at the highest difficulties.
I get that optimization is the only thing that's fun for some people, but exploration of the game is equally or more important for many others.
(And off the top of my head, in Stellaris, even the min-max question is more about whether you should complete an event chain, not which path to pick.)
@@danieltatar7575 I mean to be fair I'm the kind of person who will go in blind for the first ~50ish hours of gameplay but then have the wiki at the ready for the next 500 hours of gameplay. So even if its fun to explore for the first few weeks of release it will eventually lead to stressful memory games and regrets when you miss a cooler+better path.
Losing a long run to Giant Alien Spiders in FTL: Faster than Light because I forgot what button to click (no save files or undos) is only funny so many times.
Boardgaming channel would be dope potato...I want to see you playing TI4 lmao
Reverse Colonization scenario: not a power fantasy, a survival fantasy
Narrative events are simply goodie huts with a choice.
I'm really liking the religion system. There were more founder belief menus. Plenty of things to come. I don't think it was overly-focused on foreign settlements. Civ 6 has lots of those. It's thematic, too: having a strong belief in your native country, like Shinto in Japan, isn't as powerful .Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and the rest, they all benefit their founding nations because they're global. I'm also glad to see a system that I recognize. Given everything else that changed, I'm glad to see something familiar. I mean, Civ 7 feels like Civ, but man, they're ambitious. That makes for a complex game.
I feel like these options are all interesting now, but when the meta settles everyone will play one of 3 or 4 builds.
Why do the graphics look so nice, but the leaders look like they got farted out of a Snow White remake?
They did specifically say the religions were one of the areas that they were likely to make changes to before the game went live so I wouldn't focus too much on the specific beliefs from this stream
I’m worried about this game. These new mechanics seem to add depths of complexity, but that doesn’t mean more fun for the average joe.
Seems like a make or break thing whether the exploration age works out. 1 scenario nobody bothers expanding out and sim citys instead, scenario 2 people settle everywhere because its too valuable not to do. Hopefully there are "builds" of equal strengths in both scenarios so 1 doesent get drowned out.
11:30 "Look at those Sheep! Welsh people look away... New Zealanders too."
It took me a few secs to get this... Thanks potato I spilled my drink. XD You are so Stupid. I love it.
they are ignoring Legends because its an online registration feature that was mentioned when presenting the preorder stuff, i cite "Each leader possesses a unique ability and can further be improved with customizable attributes earned through gameplay".
its not clear if only in MP or not.
1:33:40 I kinda wish they did the tooltips similar to how paradox does where you can highlight keywords, would be great to see a list of "marine" tiles or what is a settlement.
And it's a double edged sword, civ 6 had you rushing to get a religion online so you werent locked out, I do like that it is able to be accessed by everyone. Though religious combat and such going on in the background was a pain too however.
Those story events will turn into "I don't read the text, just compare the rewards" kind of thing, the same as it is in all Paradox games (where to be fair, more people role-play).
Love the idea that every nation gets its own Religion. It would be interestng to see some of the extreme options that might be offerable to specific religions, I'm looking at you Aztecs. Maybe some religion mods would be cool as well.
Hearing about how religion changes from age to age it sounds like they really went heavy into making each Age feel like a new game. So instead of playing a continuous game with generally defined technological ages, we play a game of Civilization: Antiquity, then get a New Game+ mode to play Civilization: Exploration. Your previous choices will have impacts on whats available to you, but some mechanics are basically reset to give you the feel of playing a new game.
1 hex lake tiles (and to some extent that 1 hex desert island) don't do it for me, they look odd and frankly old. I'd prefer something like within each hex are smaller hexes to offer more variety in shapes / details to lakes / mountains / islands etc
@1:48:31 Its for the Age, so during the Exploration Age.
I can’t wait for your Civ VII tutorials!
Love these vids regarding civ 7!