The town mechanic is GENIUS for not having to manage 20 different production queues late game. You can have 5 cities that produce using production and spend gold in the towns when you need to build units or buildings.
@MuffHam It has existed in the previous games, it just wasn't explicitly stated. In Civ 6 you had massive amenity penalties if you had too many cities. The settlement cap does the same thing, it just makes it more obvious to the player.
I would say its the other way around. Towns are perfect to grab valuable ressources, while cities transform dead land into valuabe districts. Districts seem to not care, where you build them. So you can use towns to feed your city with valuable ressources from the map. You still want some production in your city, but you probably can also compensate it, by buying units in towns.
@@Grothgerek Is it not like Civ 6 where certain districts will get a buff depending on the tile? I.e. the campuses have a +1 bonus if adjacent to a mountain tile.
@silentmarkets probably not. If at all, buildings might have a adjacency bonus. But districts are now just district (with buildings in it). But we will see it in the future.
I personally hope that there will be war options to go after just a town, if somebody forward settles in my area that are less than going after the entire empire. So you have the traditional declare war option, but then a lesser dispute territory war option for towns rubbing up against your towns. If not, at least hopefully something like loyalty can still be used to absorb those aggressive close towns
@@larrote6467 oh no, people want improvements that bring in more people and increase enjoyment of the game. If you want an overcomplicated spreadsheet simulator just play Vic3 or something like me.
@@jhonthecat5061 Not in multiplayer... You could do single-player one city challenge in the previous games with no problem, but you were actively hindering yourself...
It was more in the sense of - tall in 5 was like 4 cities opener, max 8 cities (depending on tradition/liberty) and you couldn't really change that because of happiness... you could still play "tall" in 6, which was basically whatever number of cities you could have with +5 amenities OR you could go wide with less amenities, but that wasn't ideal... if you actually look at competitive Civ 6 MP lobbies ppl usually go for like 8-10 cities in order to meet +5 amenities requirement (with the bonus yields being nerfed by BBG mod to 16% instead of 20%)
Until now I was thinking towns would be like a support to cities, sending to cities all the culture and science and production and food they have. It seems more they exist for you to have a territory you want to control but is not good to have a city there, and, if you specialise them, then they are a food support to cities
Really appreciate this short and precise explanations. Especially since I'm still on the fence about being hyped or not for Civ 7. Thanks for the insights!
wont consider touching it until 2 expansions in.. and then only if the reviews and streamer gameplay intrigues me. I hope I am wrong but I am not hopeful for this edition.
Almost all of Humankind's design was brilliant, except for their idiotic war mechanic. Made the game unplayable. Your enemy is tired of this war that you are winning. Time to give back 3/4 of their territory.
So, correct me if im wrong, but towns being gold dependant, feeding producction to the capital and having city caps... does that mean that raiding (wars without wanting to conquer) are an actual viable strategy?
Its really exciting to see economic strategies looking more relevant. I would often end up with ridiculous amounts of gold and it was a lot of fun being able to buy loads of buildings and units quickly across the map to just have an insane amount of speed. Excited to see this get more competitive!
Hopefully the tiles are "smaller" in civ 7 vs older civ games. For example, in Endless Legend, the maps generally have more tiles and units can cover a larger number of tiles per turn
Instead of all towns sending food, I think that mining towns should send their production to cities, trade outposts should give a happiness boost in nearby cities, fort towns should boost defense in nearby cities (or maybe give the ability for a nearby city to train an extra unit), and farming towns send their food like they already do. This is closer to how small towns worked in history: they specialized in a single resource or task, and produced an excess of it, sending it to nearby cities, supporting them. Once you get to the industrial age or its equivalent, you should be able to get logistics as a tech or a civic, which would let you chose where towns send their goods. This would allow you to send the production from many different mining towns to one city to help it develop a big project.
Love the towns thought I wish there was an option to change the settlement limit to no-limit. (I a sure they'll add it in when it launches but if not it is something I would love to see added to the game.)
From this system here is what I can tell 1. In Civ 6, you were heavily incentivised to play wide, mainly due to how getting traders worked as well as district adjacency working across cities. This was a reaction to Civ 5, where if you didn’t pick Tradition (tall focused civic tree for that game) you were basically throwing. I feel like in this case, there is merit for both tall and wide, depending on what civ you’re playing. 2. This is an indirect buff to gold generating civs, as they’re able to play wide a lot more effectively by being able to settle and set up strong towns quickly. 3. My favorite part is that towns don’t require the late game macro. Its always annoying to be playing wide and in the late game having to juggle like 10 production queues at once. This seems like a good way to incentivise having less production queues, while still playing wide, having a lot of territory, and reaping the benifits of that.
Anyone remember everyone clowning on Humankind and now Civ 7 is integrating most of the more interesting ideas from Humankind? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Finally a good idea for both wide and tall gameplay. I like both in strategy games but usually one os often strictly better, usually the wide strategy, but that's just extra work imo.
There most likely will be. It's also possible that the nearby resources could also have an effect on what specializations are available as well. At least that's something that makes sense to me. 🤷
Finally!! It is not a game, where you need to shovel the things together and at the end you will have a mess on the map, but you have the chance to think about the settlement structure.
I was discussing with a firend about this game, we both thought it would be a nice addition to have towns and cities, then i see this video and it just made me happy. Although the way we thougth about it was having this towns specialize in something, like trade, mining or gathering resources, food production settlement etc. Anyways its a great thing to see it coming to civ
This sounds great, but i wonder if builders will be as essential ad they previously were considering how improvements seem to mainly take place when a city grows 🤔
Ngl this game just keeps getting better in my mind. When I first saw this game i thought ‘i don’t like this, i’ll stick to civ 6’ but it’s things like this that really do make it look like an awesome sequel
This is cool but I wish Civ would just pick a design and polish it. Civ 4 became really good because they stuck with a basic system and kept iterating on it since Civ 1. Since Civ 5 they keep reinventing the wheel every game, so you get cool systems but super unbalanced and unpolished.
But thats what they are doing here compared to Civ 5? This has a lot in common with a district system. And they allow you to move improvements which should remove some of the need to plan half the game in advance with district placement that so many people had trouble with.
@@DonutOfNinja A total revamp of systems should be a new game not a sequel. A sequel should be a continuation of a series design. So the game matures over time from sequel to sequel, but if you change every system dramatically you have to start from scratch again because each of your 4 new systems are gonna interact with each other at exponential complexity. Like with Civ 1-4 you saw maybe one new system per sequel, the rest focused on polishing mechanics, ui, and graphics. Hence why Civ 4 has so much more longevity because when you play it you can tell they have more than a decade of iterative knowledge on how that game plays out. With Civ 5 you had to wait for the modders to do the iterative development themselves because you had good bones but no polish.
@@pizzaman11 With 1-4 you saw less changes because coding or well, all the systems in general, were very limiting as were the graphics... nowadays it would just seem like (and probably be) a total cashgrab to release a redesigned game with the same mechanics... I am glad they are doing something different... ppl are still playing 5 and 6, hell even 4, and nobody forces them to switch, so if you enjoy those games, you can still play them.... I would say they are polished enough :)
I'm not a big fan of the city limit in its current form. It probably depends on how strong happiness is. I would prefere a softer cap and tools to increase it. I'm also curious how they will deal with war civs. Do we get back the vassal mechanic? Or are we not supposed to actually conquer enemies? A Vassal Mechanic would solve the snowball problem, because vassals would generate much less yields
Thanks for explaining the concepts. Exciting stuff! I'm a little skeptical of the settlement limit, but I guess I'll have to see the rest of the game to see how it pans out! I'm Investing heavily in this channel, I predict 150K subs by May.
Interesting that the settlement cap isnt split between towns and cities, but is instead both. I guess maybe you spread out with towns, build up city by city and eventually transition everything into cities, not sure why you would keep towns in the late game unless it wouldnt fuction as a standalone city, ie a town with 0 production. I do like the cap though, and i guess some civs/leaders will have a "go wide" empasis by expanding the cap or reducing the overcap happiness debuf
The settlement limit is good, but will it impact a computer opponent that is soaking up every city and town on the map? Hopefully the AI will also consider this and be impacted negatively.
I understand your point but this is the same game that has allowed you to play as the US since bronze age, they have to take liberties to ensure playability and enjoyment
I’m not sure how I feel about towns counting towards the settlement cap It seem like it pushes you to just make more cities I also wonder how viable it will be to make one mega city
I never like urban districts from Civ 6, they take away what you could of gotten from the tile otherwise. I like the idea of sending food between cities and towns though.
Here’s the thing. Every civ game takes 3 or more years for all the expansions and DLCs to release. I played civ5 BNW until 2020 after civ6 gathering storm came out, and I’ll be patiently waiting for civ7 to get complete dlc and expansion bundles and keep playing civ6 until then
I perfectly understand WHY they made it so you can simply move tiles you want to replace so that it doesn't feel like you're wasting resources, but honestly it really bugs me for some reason. I feel like it'd make much more sense to refund half of the replaced tile's original cost as production toward building the replacement district.
I assume this is not your footage? Res is kinda bad, the image is blurry in HD. But hey, thanks for the explanation! I dont watch much of Civ7 content yet cus I want the surprise to discover the game, but I couldn't resist a little peek :)
i knew this would happen as soon as HUMANKIND came out. They would slowly start to steal each others game styles till we can tell them apart, and CIV took the first step towards making it happen
The only question that matters, is the AI going to be able to properly manage these new features? Or is it going to be completely inept like it is with every other system, making the game pointless like the previous two entries?
I'm extremely worried that the settlement limit is going to balance the game into oblivion, with just some equally sized blobs for countries every game. Sure, I can also play Charlemagne and try to negate the penalty with infinite cities, but it definitely sounds like runaway success is what they're trying to eliminate
I LOVE the new town mechanic. It's something that was missing from CIV 6. I don't like the new city mechanics because it seems unwieldy and potentially game breaking. You could built linear cities that stretch across an entire continent. Or just invest everything into one mega city that is 50 tiles
I don't know how the algorithm works but it may be worth delisting the loud version? This is great by the way. I hope your channel blows up over the next few months.
I'm so on the fence about it. Never got 6 and I'm playing a game with Vox Populi on 5 now and it's still great! Think I'm gonna end up waiting for a sale. Or.... just might not get it again lol.
The town mechanic is GENIUS for not having to manage 20 different production queues late game. You can have 5 cities that produce using production and spend gold in the towns when you need to build units or buildings.
so it just reshaped idea of vassal town from eariel games wow
@@Har1ByWorld this is the same as humankind. looks like they have been taking notes.
@@DenouementFilmsNetwork pretty much. the whole gameplay is *borrowed* from it.
I don't like the settlement limit that's dumb.
@MuffHam It has existed in the previous games, it just wasn't explicitly stated. In Civ 6 you had massive amenity penalties if you had too many cities. The settlement cap does the same thing, it just makes it more obvious to the player.
Towns seem good for claiming areas of land that wouldn’t make for good cities (too little production around) but that you still want to control.
I would say its the other way around.
Towns are perfect to grab valuable ressources, while cities transform dead land into valuabe districts. Districts seem to not care, where you build them. So you can use towns to feed your city with valuable ressources from the map.
You still want some production in your city, but you probably can also compensate it, by buying units in towns.
@@Grothgerekthis is logical, you don't see mining settlements/fishing towns being cities
@@Grothgerek Is it not like Civ 6 where certain districts will get a buff depending on the tile? I.e. the campuses have a +1 bonus if adjacent to a mountain tile.
@silentmarkets probably not. If at all, buildings might have a adjacency bonus. But districts are now just district (with buildings in it).
But we will see it in the future.
I personally hope that there will be war options to go after just a town, if somebody forward settles in my area that are less than going after the entire empire. So you have the traditional declare war option, but then a lesser dispute territory war option for towns rubbing up against your towns. If not, at least hopefully something like loyalty can still be used to absorb those aggressive close towns
Towns using gold instead of prod is genius. Reduces late game micro and increases flexibility. Fuck yea
I’m looking forward to playing economic heavy strategies and loading my towns with buildings
Probably decreases turn time too for the AI for quicker turns in the late game!
So you're the reason c8v sucks n9w? Thanks to you console casuals that only care about eye candy...
@@larrote6467 Get a job
@@larrote6467 oh no, people want improvements that bring in more people and increase enjoyment of the game. If you want an overcomplicated spreadsheet simulator just play Vic3 or something like me.
I saw the comment where someone said your music was too loud and you said you uploaded again with less music. Just want to say good job on this one
Music is still too loud ngl
@@KyleHerbert13 Sounds good though
thats gotta be sarcasm. this video has an atrocious balance
music öoudness could still be reduced by 10%
@@Laroac *100%
Not necessary at all.
The fact that I can upgrade my city instead of trying to remember where I need to put a late game tile for 400 turns is aweseome
This feels very similar to Millenia with their towns, vassals, and outposts. Civ 7’s towns look like a mix of all 3
Which in turn is like Humankind. The one big innovator of the latest generation of X4s
Dude your videos are awesome, very clear and well explained. Thanks
Glad they're bringing back the happiness mechanic. In Civ VI there was no reason to play tall, and I hated pumping out settlers because I had to.
I think it was too punishing in V though. There you had to play tall. I think BE got it fairly right
Sounds like a skill issue
You can win Civ 6 pretty easily with 4 good cities. Skill issue
@@jhonthecat5061 Not in multiplayer... You could do single-player one city challenge in the previous games with no problem, but you were actively hindering yourself...
It was more in the sense of - tall in 5 was like 4 cities opener, max 8 cities (depending on tradition/liberty) and you couldn't really change that because of happiness... you could still play "tall" in 6, which was basically whatever number of cities you could have with +5 amenities OR you could go wide with less amenities, but that wasn't ideal... if you actually look at competitive Civ 6 MP lobbies ppl usually go for like 8-10 cities in order to meet +5 amenities requirement (with the bonus yields being nerfed by BBG mod to 16% instead of 20%)
Until now I was thinking towns would be like a support to cities, sending to cities all the culture and science and production and food they have. It seems more they exist for you to have a territory you want to control but is not good to have a city there, and, if you specialise them, then they are a food support to cities
and can still make them cities if you want! Epic
Really appreciate this short and precise explanations. Especially since I'm still on the fence about being hyped or not for Civ 7. Thanks for the insights!
wont consider touching it until 2 expansions in.. and then only if the reviews and streamer gameplay intrigues me. I hope I am wrong but I am not hopeful for this edition.
Really appreciate the diagrams and drawings you did on screen, really makes everything a lot clearer to me now
It feels like they're taking all the interesting ideas from Humankind and improving on them.
Almost all of Humankind's design was brilliant, except for their idiotic war mechanic. Made the game unplayable.
Your enemy is tired of this war that you are winning. Time to give back 3/4 of their territory.
@@bruceh9780 giving back territory was dumb but the siege mechanic and separate war turns mechanic were done pretty well imo
Was gonna say this
So, correct me if im wrong, but towns being gold dependant, feeding producction to the capital and having city caps... does that mean that raiding (wars without wanting to conquer) are an actual viable strategy?
They don't send production to cities, they convert it into gold
Heck, I do that is civ 6 already, pillage then move out, wait a while and repeat.
@@SnowWhite-z7c Norway has entered the chat.
Its really exciting to see economic strategies looking more relevant. I would often end up with ridiculous amounts of gold and it was a lot of fun being able to buy loads of buildings and units quickly across the map to just have an insane amount of speed. Excited to see this get more competitive!
This was so simple to understand. Great job man.
Hopefully the tiles are "smaller" in civ 7 vs older civ games. For example, in Endless Legend, the maps generally have more tiles and units can cover a larger number of tiles per turn
Instead of all towns sending food, I think that mining towns should send their production to cities, trade outposts should give a happiness boost in nearby cities, fort towns should boost defense in nearby cities (or maybe give the ability for a nearby city to train an extra unit), and farming towns send their food like they already do. This is closer to how small towns worked in history: they specialized in a single resource or task, and produced an excess of it, sending it to nearby cities, supporting them. Once you get to the industrial age or its equivalent, you should be able to get logistics as a tech or a civic, which would let you chose where towns send their goods. This would allow you to send the production from many different mining towns to one city to help it develop a big project.
Love the towns thought I wish there was an option to change the settlement limit to no-limit. (I a sure they'll add it in when it launches but if not it is something I would love to see added to the game.)
I was thinking the same, hopefully this option will be added later. If not, then I'm sure someone clever will make a mod that will allow this
From this system here is what I can tell
1. In Civ 6, you were heavily incentivised to play wide, mainly due to how getting traders worked as well as district adjacency working across cities. This was a reaction to Civ 5, where if you didn’t pick Tradition (tall focused civic tree for that game) you were basically throwing. I feel like in this case, there is merit for both tall and wide, depending on what civ you’re playing.
2. This is an indirect buff to gold generating civs, as they’re able to play wide a lot more effectively by being able to settle and set up strong towns quickly.
3. My favorite part is that towns don’t require the late game macro. Its always annoying to be playing wide and in the late game having to juggle like 10 production queues at once. This seems like a good way to incentivise having less production queues, while still playing wide, having a lot of territory, and reaping the benifits of that.
Anyone remember everyone clowning on Humankind and now Civ 7 is integrating most of the more interesting ideas from Humankind?
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
These changes are amazing! I love these changes and can’t wait to see them when the game comes out!
Best explanation of cities in CIV7 thank you.
Woah, this sounds so much more fun to me, makes me much more interested in Civ VII!
Looks amazing and so instinctive. Like it's a natural upgrade to the system we love.
Finally a good idea for both wide and tall gameplay. I like both in strategy games but usually one os often strictly better, usually the wide strategy, but that's just extra work imo.
Looks interesting. Looking forward to trying it out.
This is a really cool and exciting mechanic change, I cannot wait to try it
I really hope there's more town focuses beyond just those four.
There most likely will be. It's also possible that the nearby resources could also have an effect on what specializations are available as well. At least that's something that makes sense to me. 🤷
Finally!! It is not a game, where you need to shovel the things together and at the end you will have a mess on the map, but you have the chance to think about the settlement structure.
I've seen alot of changes for civ 7 that I don't like, but this one I can really get behind!
I am so excited to play this
I was discussing with a firend about this game, we both thought it would be a nice addition to have towns and cities, then i see this video and it just made me happy. Although the way we thougth about it was having this towns specialize in something, like trade, mining or gathering resources, food production settlement etc. Anyways its a great thing to see it coming to civ
So I know the early access beta releases this year, but when does the full game that actually has all the ages in it come out?
Several years and DLC later, of course. Wallets must be milked
This sounds great, but i wonder if builders will be as essential ad they previously were considering how improvements seem to mainly take place when a city grows 🤔
Good lord that town focus sending food is what I've been dreaming of in Civ VI
Sounds like they really took notes from games like Endless Legends.
Which isn't exactly a positive thing for me. Civ had way more intuitive systems, why change to these obsucre and limiting ones?
Whats the song called?
Ngl this game just keeps getting better in my mind. When I first saw this game i thought ‘i don’t like this, i’ll stick to civ 6’ but it’s things like this that really do make it look like an awesome sequel
I'm so stoked
Anxious to play this game!
Wait does this mean I cant conquer everything?
The devs played humankind and it shows. I can't wait.
Well that sounds very satisfying
Freakin love this
This is cool but I wish Civ would just pick a design and polish it. Civ 4 became really good because they stuck with a basic system and kept iterating on it since Civ 1. Since Civ 5 they keep reinventing the wheel every game, so you get cool systems but super unbalanced and unpolished.
Nah
But thats what they are doing here compared to Civ 5? This has a lot in common with a district system. And they allow you to move improvements which should remove some of the need to plan half the game in advance with district placement that so many people had trouble with.
It would be hard to justify a £70 price tag for what is nothing but a revamp. If you wanna play the same game over and over, you still can.
@@DonutOfNinja A total revamp of systems should be a new game not a sequel. A sequel should be a continuation of a series design.
So the game matures over time from sequel to sequel, but if you change every system dramatically you have to start from scratch again because each of your 4 new systems are gonna interact with each other at exponential complexity.
Like with Civ 1-4 you saw maybe one new system per sequel, the rest focused on polishing mechanics, ui, and graphics. Hence why Civ 4 has so much more longevity because when you play it you can tell they have more than a decade of iterative knowledge on how that game plays out. With Civ 5 you had to wait for the modders to do the iterative development themselves because you had good bones but no polish.
@@pizzaman11 With 1-4 you saw less changes because coding or well, all the systems in general, were very limiting as were the graphics... nowadays it would just seem like (and probably be) a total cashgrab to release a redesigned game with the same mechanics... I am glad they are doing something different... ppl are still playing 5 and 6, hell even 4, and nobody forces them to switch, so if you enjoy those games, you can still play them.... I would say they are polished enough :)
I'm not a big fan of the city limit in its current form. It probably depends on how strong happiness is. I would prefere a softer cap and tools to increase it.
I'm also curious how they will deal with war civs. Do we get back the vassal mechanic? Or are we not supposed to actually conquer enemies? A Vassal Mechanic would solve the snowball problem, because vassals would generate much less yields
Liking and commenting to boost engagement on the better version
'Never seen before'
Literally me playing Millennia right now: o.ô
Thanks for explaining the concepts. Exciting stuff! I'm a little skeptical of the settlement limit, but I guess I'll have to see the rest of the game to see how it pans out!
I'm Investing heavily in this channel, I predict 150K subs by May.
Fu. Fact: settlement limit was in Civ II, maybe the others too, but it was never a visible stat
I just hope they don't add back in the loyalty mechanic. I hated that so much in Civ VI, I had to install a mod to get rid of it.
Seems to be closer to civ 5 than vic 6 in the wide vs tall game
idk how to feel about the settlement limit
Settlement limits seem weird...
So early game conquering becomes really difficult to pull off and razing cities becomes the better option... huh
It's a soft cap, so you can conquer all you want if you can handle the happiness hit.
Its basically how it was in Civ V, the more towns to less happiness you have.
They want you to choose violence...lol
I mean historically razing a city was often what has to happen.
Interesting that the settlement cap isnt split between towns and cities, but is instead both. I guess maybe you spread out with towns, build up city by city and eventually transition everything into cities, not sure why you would keep towns in the late game unless it wouldnt fuction as a standalone city, ie a town with 0 production.
I do like the cap though, and i guess some civs/leaders will have a "go wide" empasis by expanding the cap or reducing the overcap happiness debuf
I think that is what the sending all the food to cities is supposed to counter to make towns more useful late game.
I’m very proud of Civilization VII for making it onto Civ Minute
I cannot follow the video, the music disturbs too much.
I hope we get 3x huge earth maps
Me too, that would be awesome
I like that there is the distinction, but I am not sure about some of the features.
The settlement limit is good, but will it impact a computer opponent that is soaking up every city and town on the map? Hopefully the AI will also consider this and be impacted negatively.
What the point of making a production town, if all production in the city is turned into gold?
Settlement hierarchy. Historically one of the signs of complex societies or... Let's have it, civilization. quite interesting lore-wise
i hated civ 6 because i was always behind my friends for having a hard time picking my second city state
Music mix is way too loud please lower so we can hear you better
Gonna be interesting from a localisation perspective. Many languages don't distinguish between "town" and "city".
This is amazing. Love the channel.
You have any ideas for content once Civ 7 releases? Cus I'm excited and subscribing :D
Why pre industrial cities are so large? I hate that system of unhistorical districtification of cities across the ages.
It's not historically accurate game, lol
I understand your point but this is the same game that has allowed you to play as the US since bronze age, they have to take liberties to ensure playability and enjoyment
Honestly i might buy. I dont like the leader mechanic but everything else looks fun
I’m not sure how I feel about towns counting towards the settlement cap
It seem like it pushes you to just make more cities
I also wonder how viable it will be to make one mega city
This is going to be the best civ since 4 beyond the sword holy shit.
This feels very similar to Old World 4x game. If anyone likes this, they should check that one out.
I find it funny, from all these early reviews, not one of these reviewers mention that this new mechanics all come from Humankind.
Hey thanks Good job on uploading a better version of the video! Wish more Devs had better community interaction! Sending love from the internet! 🫂
Looks nice. But I sometimes miss the civ 4 play style. Ever considered doing a Civ4 refractory?
This town idea is like a fancier version of Civ4 town.
Thanks Luigi
I never like urban districts from Civ 6, they take away what you could of gotten from the tile otherwise. I like the idea of sending food between cities and towns though.
Dude I wish the game would come out sooner lol
Here’s the thing. Every civ game takes 3 or more years for all the expansions and DLCs to release. I played civ5 BNW until 2020 after civ6 gathering storm came out, and I’ll be patiently waiting for civ7 to get complete dlc and expansion bundles and keep playing civ6 until then
@@Flowers4Fischlthat's a good "strategy" 😅
Nah, I'm fired for that. 🫥
Plus youll prolly get it on sale or morelikely too win win@FacialFischl
ppl without patience like is you is what ruin development process
@@jonnybravo595 🙈🙈🙈
Curious to see how the ai holds up creating smart and strategic towns instead of cities
I perfectly understand WHY they made it so you can simply move tiles you want to replace so that it doesn't feel like you're wasting resources, but honestly it really bugs me for some reason. I feel like it'd make much more sense to refund half of the replaced tile's original cost as production toward building the replacement district.
Where was this information released? Just curious about the source, I haven't been paying attention to the news.
I get all my information from the official Sid Meier’s Civilization channel, there’s lots of gameplay footage there
A gravação do jogo tá meio com uma qualidade bem baixa mesmo eu pondo em 1080p
Bringing the one thing i loved about humankind
I assume this is not your footage? Res is kinda bad, the image is blurry in HD. But hey, thanks for the explanation! I dont watch much of Civ7 content yet cus I want the surprise to discover the game, but I couldn't resist a little peek :)
i knew this would happen as soon as HUMANKIND came out. They would slowly start to steal each others game styles till we can tell them apart, and CIV took the first step towards making it happen
Now new settlements wont take 20 turns just to build one building.
Cs zoning equivalent?
1:58 no faith? they took religion out of the game?
Religion is around.
there's religion, most civs just won't be able to pump it out as early as we've been able to in previous titles.
It’s crazy how different this game is
that's what I like about the CIV series. Every CIV has a different gameplay and mechanic
The only question that matters, is the AI going to be able to properly manage these new features? Or is it going to be completely inept like it is with every other system, making the game pointless like the previous two entries?
But how is sweden gonna exist in civ7? They only have towns
this game feels so similar to millenia... i wonder if they took inspiration from it in the later stages of development
what is this? humankind 2?
I'm extremely worried that the settlement limit is going to balance the game into oblivion, with just some equally sized blobs for countries every game. Sure, I can also play Charlemagne and try to negate the penalty with infinite cities, but it definitely sounds like runaway success is what they're trying to eliminate
I LOVE the new town mechanic. It's something that was missing from CIV 6. I don't like the new city mechanics because it seems unwieldy and potentially game breaking. You could built linear cities that stretch across an entire continent. Or just invest everything into one mega city that is 50 tiles
I don't know how the algorithm works but it may be worth delisting the loud version? This is great by the way. I hope your channel blows up over the next few months.
A lot of the new Civ VII mechanics remind me a great deal of age of wonders 4
that change the game a lot. interesting
I'm so on the fence about it. Never got 6 and I'm playing a game with Vox Populi on 5 now and it's still great! Think I'm gonna end up waiting for a sale. Or.... just might not get it again lol.
wait, so 1 city games are possible?
Civ 4 - wide
Civ 5 - tall
Civ 6 - wide
Civ 7 - tall
i dont like the settelment limit, i like the idea of towns