I saw that UN resolution and thought of just the perfect leader to use it on. Enjoy, Queen~

With all of the focus towards the upcoming fourth age, I thought it would be fun to step back in time for a bit and address the absence of one of Civ's OGs. Would love to hear other's thoughts!

Rare game where I was able to have 5 Campuses surrounding a plus-12-science Mahavihara (with 5 others on the outskirt. Geometrically is it even possible to have a 6-campus Mahavihara?

I'm recently getting into Civ VI, so I still have Civ V's mentality of building each city 6 squares away from the others. Is this still the best strategy, especially for civs that rely on adjacency bonus or is it better to found them closer to one another?

The past few playthroughs I have been getting declared on by then entire continent in the antiquity age. The last game really pissed me off, because I hadn't even really engaged in any diplomacy with any of the other civs. I was minding my business just working on my empire then boom, Machiavelli and Hatshepsut declare a joint war on me(where Machiavelli had +6 war support immediately). After holding my own and protecting my city states for a bit Confucius and Genghis Khan declared war on me. No one would peace out because I wasn't really taking cities and it just became me getting hammered from every side(I was in the middle of the continent surrounded by everyone).

Is it just me or has the computer been way more aggressive than it was before. I haven't played in a few months so I don't know if this is something that people have been dealing with.

Trying to get all trophies and doing my first proper run with Trung Trac! Deffo regretting not going for the Khmer now 🤣😭

I think I'd put a few hours into Sid the Sloth, as his unique Scrat unit has quite a lot of land breaking features, but Sid from Slipknot might be good too for a culture run. Which Sid are you gonna pick in your game of Civ Meier's Sidilization?

My buddy and I discovered a ridiculously long river and I wanted to share it with the world - we're doing multiplayer on Pangea standard. Leader portraits kinda block off the top bit!

Classical Age, I manage to win a war against my neighbor by taking one of their towns, and then one of their cities rebelled and joined me. Exploration Age starts, we go to war again, they take back the city, I barely hold on to the town. Then I check other civs yields... HIMIKO HAS 954 CULTURE 45 TURNS INTO THE EXPLORATIONS AGE!!??!?! WHAT? HOW?

Is this normal?

My friend asked but I couldn't answer because I don't know.

Which Civ/leader gives the best war and science combo beside trung trac

Yo so planning to get Civ 5 but considering it's a really old game at this point (15-16yrs?) and hadn't gotten a remaster or anything similar, I wanted to know if it's stable. What I mean by that is does it have crashes, bugs, glitches, etc. And if so is these fixed by mods? Thx

Yo yo so I know both these games are beloved in this sub since it's a Civ sub but I am not asking if they are worth buying. I am asking if they are worth buying together at the same time as a completely new to Civ guy (I will buy one either way). Like are they different enough where id actually want to play one over another for different reasons or do they both fill the same niche where I wouldn't see a point in playing the other. Also if they are both different enough, would U advise I start with one first and get the other later on or just get both. Thx

To those of you who are disappointed: remember that patience is a virtue.

I will try to share my thoughts as concisely and logically as possible.

So, what is the problem with Civ 7?

There are only two major issues from which all other sub-problems stem (yes, all of them).

Think of these two issues as a medical problem and a family problem:

Medical issue #1: A premature birth.

You could compare Civ 7 to a child born prematurely—a decision made by its owner, 2K, to satisfy shareholders (I’ll spare you the details).

That said, Civ 7 is the offspring of both beauty and quality.

The depth is there, as is the ambition. It simply requires a bit more time to recover—that’s all.

To be clear, for a "vanilla" (base) release, Civ 7 is fantastic—especially when compared to the vanilla versions of Civ 5 and Civ 6.

It is a precocious child that will delight far more people than it has disappointed which brings us to issue #2.

Medical issue #2: "Little brother" syndrome.

We—the "big brothers" (i.e., long-time players who have experienced most, if not all, previous iterations of Civ)—were taken aback by the decision to allow players to switch civilizations mid-game.

Consequently, we viewed this "little brother" with suspicion, as he bore a striking resemblance to the kid from the floor below—the one who hangs out with the *Humankind* crowd (a game we all quite like, though we also enjoy poking fun at it when it’s not around). Ultimately, I personally adore this "little brother," though some others don’t quite grasp it yet—and don’t yet know how to love it—due to "problem #1."

In short, you can look forward to a real fireworks display when the next update, *Arc of Tomorrow*, arrives in 2027.

Like a child who was born prematurely but showed early promise, *Civ7* will soon evolve into a gifted prodigy—and that’s not even counting the upcoming *Earthrise* expansion, which will see it transition from child to adult.

Have a little patience; the best is yet to come!

I love Civ 4, especially with the Realism Invictus mod. But what I've been missing for quite some time are more diplomatic features and ways to harm my opponents without declaring war.

What about Civ 7? I hear it has added quite a few diplomatic options.

To all Civ 4 fans: Would Civ 7 be something for me?

Have the devs given a reason? Why can’t we trade money and resources and stuff anymore?

The current AI bots are stupid. Instead of playing strategically, they rely on unfair bonuses to combat strength, yields, and production to beat the player. They don’t know how to use commanders effectively, build cities with good adjacencies, or manage their settlements. They even place warehouse buildings on valuable tiles that could be used far more effectively.
On top of that, they spam thousands of units when you go to war with them because they can keep spending gold to recruit more every turn. Once they unlock walls, every settlement gets free walls making cities unnecessarily difficult to capture.
I want to be beaten because the AI outplayed me, not because it has an unfair advantage. That would make the game much more challenging, rewarding, and enjoyable.
So with the current technological advancements, is it really that difficult to create stronger AI opponents? The only downside I can think of is longer turns due to more processing power.

For me, the rigid upside-down tree system from the old classic Civ5 still feels much better. The choices are more interesting and they weigh heavier, the completion like an actual accomplishment.

With Civ6 they changed it and went with a river-flow, like research. Back then this already was a questionable change. Didn't really make sense compared to e.g. how science is an focused effort. But then also policies were short lived, sometimes not even living through the actual turn just one click for workers to gain maximum charges.

Civ7 has the same river system and fleetingness, but without min/max potential. I personally don't see the upsides and also think the devs missed an opportunity with how the crises system and policies are like an symbioses, a reason and an opportunity for changes.

What do you think?