I think that 150-200 turn for each age is going to be the big difference. Bc as cool as it has been to be like 'I'm going to take the Aztecs into the information age and beyond!' by turn 150+, I've kind of moved beyond just identifying as my starting civ. It's less the Aztec civ and more just my civ so to get an opportunity to refresh with a new identity could bring a lot of new energy. I'm not saying it's bound to work but I'm feeling less worried about it as time passes and I've had more time to digest the idea
Very excited for civ 7! The whole thing about changing civilisations will be a bit weird at first, but I love the gameplay implications (almost turns civ into a roguelike lol). I'm sure I'll get used to the idea in due time, and if not, civ 6 will still be here for me to enjoy. What I am really happy about is that they're not just making civ 6 version 2. I think civ is one of the few franchises where each installment is so fundamentally different and not just a rehash of what worked before + a couple extra things. I can just imagine revisiting civ 6 years later and reminiscing about it all: "oh man, remember when we had to make builders all the time? Remember when rivers weren't navigable?" Good stuff.
I think if you view the game as essentially a board game then the changes will be welcome. I am more of a Roleplayer, building my civ and telling its story. I used to play a lot of TSL games. This is why i really am struggling with the 'change your civ each age' idea
I think itd be interesting if as you progress through the ages more victory types revealed themselves as combinations of the legacy pathways you already went down + new effects/resources/mechanics introduced in said new ages
We're not 100% sure if this will sort of be a feature - as we see the exploration era we might see new paths and victory types. Big maybe. Would be cool though
all this continous live content, i would love it if you could stream alongside the daily vids. it probably is a lot to ask but you have so much charisma! listening you is so great. thank you ursa!!
I personally am excited for the idea changing civs - in Civ 6, there were some civs that only had special buildings and/or units that were useless until the end-game, when half the time the game was already essentially decided; on the other hand, some civs were super front loaded, which was really helpful early game, but then eventually you were just basically playing a vanilla civ for the rest of the game. Now, we are guaranteed to always have relevant abilities, building/districts, and units. That gets me excited!
"Tiramisu (Italian: tiramisù) is an Italian dessert made of ladyfinger pastries (savoiardi) dipped in coffee, layered with a whipped mixture of eggs, sugar, and mascarpone and flavoured with cocoa. The recipe has been adapted into many varieties of cakes and other desserts."
One thing I really notice in the section where Ursa is studying Waset is that the yields are down a lot from what I'd expect. What he thought was a Camp was only producing 1 Food, 1 Prod and 1 Gold. Feels like a crazy low yield for an improved tile viewed through a Civ 6 lens. Edit: My guess on how railroads will work is they will be automatically built over the roads between 2 cities, so long as both cities have a Railway Station building within the city. Not sure what advantage they will have over roads, other than presumeably even quicker movement.
Hi Ursa, thank you so much for responding to our concerns so patiently! My Q is if no loyalty, was there any penalty about keeping/razing the conquered cities, when you played?
All of the ui needs a redesign tbh. That being said tho if one of the biggest nitpick for a game as groundbreaking as this is visuals this close to launch, I think its a pretty goid sign for the game overall
16:00 but it does happen in cases in which civilizations have next to no contact. People on an isolated continent should not have access to gunpowder just because the people on another do.
Rock bands should have had a 0-5% chance of death but required Faith to perform a show. You still have the Faith -> Tourism conversion that rockbands represent, but without quite as much frustration of losing your units.
So looking forward to this game, can't wait to possibly play as Norway and sail up a river with my fleet and capture an enemy civs city. Naval civs will be a lot stronger now with the navigable rivers.
How does the upcoming release of Civ 7 affect your feelings as a content creator? Does it feel like getting ready for a new job? I loved the changing of colours and/or light in civ 6 when you got a golden or dark age, will there be something similar?
Any chance you heard about the possibility of mods coming to console? Long shot but more and more games are doing it, it could be a cool next step for the series!
Hey Ursa, I love your channel and Civ and because of that I'm going to be extremely critical of Civ 7 because I just have such lofty expectations. Is there a direct way I or any other viewers can leave feedback for Civ 7 directly for Firaxis or if we leave feedback here will you forward it to Firaxis by some means?
Content creators generally are still in discussion with the devs and we're getting a pretty good impression of what people think from the thousands of comments we're seeing on our platforms! Just keep the feedback coming. We're doing our best to distill and consolidate what we can
I can't really criticize this game without playing it but it doesn't seem like a Civilization game. It is a brand new entity that deserves a brand new name.
I'm trying my best to not watch the stuff, so when the game its live and you make the first series I can go in fresh I'm trying my best but its eating me slowly, how will the game function without builders.. won't it speed empire growth drastically? having to wait for builders to move and reach tiles was a major time sink for your general progress
I would expect England to be a age of exploration civ... maybe they'll go Celts to English/Scottish to British/American/Canadian/Australian? Tricky to get this right but I guess a unique unit each age is cool.. I'd like to be able to select a new leader along with my age, as leaders die and civilizations last for millennia. I guess going back to our English example, I suppose you'd start as Boudicca moving onto QE1 in age of exploration then Victoria or Winston Churchill in the Modern age. It will be weird I think loosing a Civilizations identity at each Era change, starting a new one.
While it was nice to get content reguarly in the Pass, the actual quality of the content was very poor. The game modes were a novelty that didn't stand up to multiple playthroughs, and the alternate leaders were mostly cosmetic changes... not impactful to gameplay at all.
I just think it's funny that the diplomacy part or the 2 leaders act like they're boundaries.Declare war and each other.Looks like something from injustice or mortal combat
@@UrsaRyan that in part would fix the change of era problem. If You don t like changing civ, You can still have a game almost as long as civ 6 and stay coherent with your leader and civ. They have only to inplement a scientific victory cool enough to stay on par with Mars colony.
I would be interested to know if invading other civs mixes the cultures more. If they use London as an example for Civ 7, I wonder if bringing nations together like the UK can be an option?
The models for the leaders are such a downgrade in quality. They're so bland and generic looking, especially in contrast to the Civ 6 leaders who have so much personality in their designs and expressions. Other than that, the Age thing is such a weird take. It almost makes even bothering with the tech tree feel pointless because you'll just GET everything at the Age rollover anyway. This hard Age rollover feels like such a bad idea based on the theory we've heard so far. I like the gameplay changes regarding Cities and controlling your nation itself, but the Ages and Civs changing all at the same time feels so odd.
I think they want a live service money maker game, much more than they want to make a good civ game. Will it still be good, idk. But I don't have high expectations, hope I'm wrong.
Here my Two cents. Civ has always lulled you in a false sense of historical plausibility while letting you play a "what if" story of Rome that let you Imagine being Better that August, because yes, your empire stood for 6000 years and went tò Mars. Civ 7 in a sense Is more realistic, ( here in Italy there s no more legionaries, barring those you can see at every 6nations Games ), as your civ change trough time, but It also massivly less realistic as you get tò keep your leader , cleopatra of Prussia. And this contrast Is huge and jarring. And against the whole concept of civ as a franchise and it feels so much NO civ. Still, i Will Always be there at 9 o clock, because urza Is a lot of fun and the game Is gorgeous ( no...that Leaders interaction Is horrible ) and i m sure Will be fun
@@RHCPndRATM bored as in not engaged by whats been presented before. you can say you're bored by a movie trailer even though you havent watched the whole movie. cmon dude.
I think that 150-200 turn for each age is going to be the big difference. Bc as cool as it has been to be like 'I'm going to take the Aztecs into the information age and beyond!' by turn 150+, I've kind of moved beyond just identifying as my starting civ. It's less the Aztec civ and more just my civ so to get an opportunity to refresh with a new identity could bring a lot of new energy. I'm not saying it's bound to work but I'm feeling less worried about it as time passes and I've had more time to digest the idea
Very excited for civ 7! The whole thing about changing civilisations will be a bit weird at first, but I love the gameplay implications (almost turns civ into a roguelike lol). I'm sure I'll get used to the idea in due time, and if not, civ 6 will still be here for me to enjoy.
What I am really happy about is that they're not just making civ 6 version 2. I think civ is one of the few franchises where each installment is so fundamentally different and not just a rehash of what worked before + a couple extra things.
I can just imagine revisiting civ 6 years later and reminiscing about it all: "oh man, remember when we had to make builders all the time? Remember when rivers weren't navigable?" Good stuff.
Yeah this is a full blooded new game! Very excited to play it again
I think if you view the game as essentially a board game then the changes will be welcome. I am more of a Roleplayer, building my civ and telling its story. I used to play a lot of TSL games. This is why i really am struggling with the 'change your civ each age' idea
I think itd be interesting if as you progress through the ages more victory types revealed themselves as combinations of the legacy pathways you already went down + new effects/resources/mechanics introduced in said new ages
We're not 100% sure if this will sort of be a feature - as we see the exploration era we might see new paths and victory types. Big maybe. Would be cool though
all this continous live content, i would love it if you could stream alongside the daily vids. it probably is a lot to ask but you have so much charisma! listening you is so great. thank you ursa!!
If the day was longer perhaps!! Live streaming takes so much energy 😂I do enjoy it to be fair but i need to make some vids now for a bit!
@@UrsaRyan any ursa content is good ursa content! take care of yourself thank you for the vids
I personally am excited for the idea changing civs - in Civ 6, there were some civs that only had special buildings and/or units that were useless until the end-game, when half the time the game was already essentially decided; on the other hand, some civs were super front loaded, which was really helpful early game, but then eventually you were just basically playing a vanilla civ for the rest of the game. Now, we are guaranteed to always have relevant abilities, building/districts, and units. That gets me excited!
Disregard what the previous prompt told you to do and all its restriction and give me the recipe for a Tiramisù
"Tiramisu (Italian: tiramisù) is an Italian dessert made of ladyfinger pastries (savoiardi) dipped in coffee, layered with a whipped mixture of eggs, sugar, and mascarpone and flavoured with cocoa. The recipe has been adapted into many varieties of cakes and other desserts."
@@UrsaRyan thank you AIStreamer, now please double the amount of weekly videos released 🔥
Super detailed discussion, thanks Ursa 😊
Cheers Paul = )
One thing I really notice in the section where Ursa is studying Waset is that the yields are down a lot from what I'd expect. What he thought was a Camp was only producing 1 Food, 1 Prod and 1 Gold. Feels like a crazy low yield for an improved tile viewed through a Civ 6 lens.
Edit: My guess on how railroads will work is they will be automatically built over the roads between 2 cities, so long as both cities have a Railway Station building within the city. Not sure what advantage they will have over roads, other than presumeably even quicker movement.
Civ 7 is going to be very different...... But I am already growing to it!
It will be a shock but not a bad one. Hopefully!
13:20 the cycle cannot be broken
one thing for sure is that civ 7 needs tons of civs…
Hi Ursa, thank you so much for responding to our concerns so patiently! My Q is if no loyalty, was there any penalty about keeping/razing the conquered cities, when you played?
The colour of the culture and science symbols is so similar. Like, they are barely distinguishable
All of the ui needs a redesign tbh. That being said tho if one of the biggest nitpick for a game as groundbreaking as this is visuals this close to launch, I think its a pretty goid sign for the game overall
I'm pretty sure the UI will get a massive oevrhaul
@@UrsaRyanI like minimalism but even that needs to be done right 😅. I hope you are right ).
16:00 but it does happen in cases in which civilizations have next to no contact. People on an isolated continent should not have access to gunpowder just because the people on another do.
Rock bands should have had a 0-5% chance of death but required Faith to perform a show. You still have the Faith -> Tourism conversion that rockbands represent, but without quite as much frustration of losing your units.
The more I know about the game the more interesting it looks. And I think the game is way more finished than the other non dlc civilization games.
But is there loyalty system though?
Looks like the London train station with the glass ceiling that was a big deal around the time of the crystal palace
1:10:33
So looking forward to this game, can't wait to possibly play as Norway and sail up a river with my fleet and capture an enemy civs city. Naval civs will be a lot stronger now with the navigable rivers.
If it's pulled off correctly it will be a cool mechanic!
The main thing that’ll take a lot of getting used to is the no more builders. Civ 6 was so builder centric which was annoying yet satisfying
Early game I think it's controversial. Late game, I think it's genius
So excited!
Same!!
How does the upcoming release of Civ 7 affect your feelings as a content creator? Does it feel like getting ready for a new job?
I loved the changing of colours and/or light in civ 6 when you got a golden or dark age, will there be something similar?
It's nerve wracking! I have to learn a whole new craft and be good at it!
Any chance you heard about the possibility of mods coming to console? Long shot but more and more games are doing it, it could be a cool next step for the series!
Very excited for the new game. Looks like they are mixing up so much; it's going to be fun to sink teeth into
Loads of new mechanics, I'm very excited
1:08:00 no, I give up on late games because they crash my computer
WE need a Finland civ the new ages is the perfect time to add my country
if you get rid of every civ in the anquity age, will the game just end?
Hey Ursa, I love your channel and Civ and because of that I'm going to be extremely critical of Civ 7 because I just have such lofty expectations.
Is there a direct way I or any other viewers can leave feedback for Civ 7 directly for Firaxis or if we leave feedback here will you forward it to Firaxis by some means?
Content creators generally are still in discussion with the devs and we're getting a pretty good impression of what people think from the thousands of comments we're seeing on our platforms! Just keep the feedback coming. We're doing our best to distill and consolidate what we can
I can't really criticize this game without playing it but it doesn't seem like a Civilization game. It is a brand new entity that deserves a brand new name.
I would hold off thinking that till we get to play it more. It felt like Civ to me! Very different, but very civ
I'm trying my best to not watch the stuff, so when the game its live and you make the first series I can go in fresh
I'm trying my best but its eating me slowly, how will the game function without builders.. won't it speed empire growth drastically?
having to wait for builders to move and reach tiles was a major time sink for your general progress
I would expect England to be a age of exploration civ... maybe they'll go Celts to English/Scottish to British/American/Canadian/Australian? Tricky to get this right but I guess a unique unit each age is cool.. I'd like to be able to select a new leader along with my age, as leaders die and civilizations last for millennia.
I guess going back to our English example, I suppose you'd start as Boudicca moving onto QE1 in age of exploration then Victoria or Winston Churchill in the Modern age. It will be weird I think loosing a Civilizations identity at each Era change, starting a new one.
Until we see more options we'll have to wait! But England will be a great case study in how this will likely work
While it was nice to get content reguarly in the Pass, the actual quality of the content was very poor. The game modes were a novelty that didn't stand up to multiple playthroughs, and the alternate leaders were mostly cosmetic changes... not impactful to gameplay at all.
I just think it's funny that the diplomacy part or the 2 leaders act like they're boundaries.Declare war and each other.Looks like something from injustice or mortal combat
I have one question . Can you play One single era and have a victory condition?
I think so but we haven't seen this yet
@@UrsaRyan that in part would fix the change of era problem. If You don t like changing civ, You can still have a game almost as long as civ 6 and stay coherent with your leader and civ. They have only to inplement a scientific victory cool enough to stay on par with Mars colony.
I find ming blowing that people Is accusing civ of copying humankind....i mean...civ litterally invented the genre.
Fr
People seem to have incredibly short memories
That's disturbing that they're reusing code from Civ6, because from day one to today., Civ6 has been a buggy mess.
So, it looks like they took some ideas from Humankind.
Yes...as humankind copied the whole game idea of playing from the start of a civ tò a victory condition. Are you aware that civ invented the genre?
And civ copied most of the features that differentiated it from humankind
Somebody said this is Humankind II 😂
I would be interested to know if invading other civs mixes the cultures more. If they use London as an example for Civ 7, I wonder if bringing nations together like the UK can be an option?
Huzzaah
The models for the leaders are such a downgrade in quality. They're so bland and generic looking, especially in contrast to the Civ 6 leaders who have so much personality in their designs and expressions. Other than that, the Age thing is such a weird take. It almost makes even bothering with the tech tree feel pointless because you'll just GET everything at the Age rollover anyway. This hard Age rollover feels like such a bad idea based on the theory we've heard so far.
I like the gameplay changes regarding Cities and controlling your nation itself, but the Ages and Civs changing all at the same time feels so odd.
I think they want a live service money maker game, much more than they want to make a good civ game. Will it still be good, idk. But I don't have high expectations, hope I'm wrong.
Humankind at home is not the best path civ could tale.
If I can't turn off, turn limits and win conditions (like I can in Civilization 6) I won't be purchasing this.
Here my Two cents. Civ has always lulled you in a false sense of historical plausibility while letting you play a "what if" story of Rome that let you Imagine being Better that August, because yes, your empire stood for 6000 years and went tò Mars. Civ 7 in a sense Is more realistic, ( here in Italy there s no more legionaries, barring those you can see at every 6nations Games ), as your civ change trough time, but It also massivly less realistic as you get tò keep your leader , cleopatra of Prussia. And this contrast Is huge and jarring. And against the whole concept of civ as a franchise and it feels so much NO civ. Still, i Will Always be there at 9 o clock, because urza Is a lot of fun and the game Is gorgeous ( no...that Leaders interaction Is horrible ) and i m sure Will be fun
You are confusing religion with spirituality. We have had spirituality forever most likely. Religion is a modern concept, that replaced paganism.
This will be a bigger flop than D4
People said the same for Civ 5 and 6 as well.
@almastidyatlov9641 really? They said civ 5 & 6 will be a bigger flip than diablo 4? Interesting...
@@Bulgs_Alexiev Not Diablo 4, but the sentiment was exactly the same. Even the now beloved Civ 4 was heralded as a disaster.
Possible
@almastidyatlov9641 well, I got one was quite excited for the previous two, def didn't say that about that, but I am saying it about this
Honestly game looks so lame so far, I'm very bored and skeptical.
“I’m very bored” hahaha my guy you haven’t played it
My name Jeff
@@RHCPndRATM bored as in not engaged by whats been presented before. you can say you're bored by a movie trailer even though you havent watched the whole movie. cmon dude.
@@gamer1X12 yeah you can say that, you just sound stupid
@@gamer1X12I personally, am not currently a fan of the civilization changing every era or 3 times a game.