I wanted your intake on whether Civ 7 for console is worth it for ps5 specifically. I really want to preorder it but I don't have a gaming laptop or pc ( I use a Mac air for civ 6 and im not planning to buy a gaming pc setup for a while. So my best bet is to buy it for my PS5 but the question is it worth it? Play wise ( with a controller ) and graphics wise also. Thanks in advance !!

And I plan to use ps remote in my laptop to have to feel of playing in computer , if I buy it.

first time playing canada, got my first on purpose diplo win. Emperor difficulty

Ive put a ton of hours into civ and a big reason I like to play VI is because of the aesthetics and the dynamic interaction your buildings have with each other and with the terrain. I’m so hyped for the visuals in Vii, sprawl looks genuinely mindblowing, and the customization and attention to detail looks nuts. Ive never been this excited for a game to come out. Only thing I’m concerned for in the aesthetics is with rivers. It’s a minor concern, I’m j wondering if anybody else is noticing this. The navigable rivers look great and I like how the city builds around them. That being said I’ve seen some districts get partially swallowed by them in images and videos, but that’s really not an issue. What I’m concerned about is the minor rivers. They don’t seem to bend around the edges of hexes anymore, they seem to go straight through. The problem is the sprawl just goes straight on top. I saw a mine and some other improvements made on top of these minor rivers and they just go right on top, the river starts and ends around the tile as if nothing were there. It will be a little issue that won’t really affect how I enjoy the game at all. It’s just that vi not only didn’t have the problem but a lot of tiles had built in interaction with the bend of rivers, like bridges. Also, the same happens with the city hall, it just goes on top of the river and its plaza just blocks out the land underneath. Just wondering if anybody else has noticed it.

I’ve done so many domination games I don’t really know how to build momentum without capturing cities. It seems like the ages go by faster in peace, and even when I stay peaceful and start taking the lead…Neighbor declares war/joint war/surprise war or religious emergency or both, and my military is too underdeveloped to make a strong counterattack.

I guess my main question is. When doing other victory types do you still throttle your neighbor?

I'm creating apostles like crazy and for a short time I had the translator promotion available but now I don't, how do I get it back and how do I access Proselytizer, I've never seen that option?

The first thing that comes to my mind are civs that are represented in a certain age but are also present in other ages (like England and France for exploration, and Egypt and Spain for Modernity), and also Independant Powers that could very well be a full-fledged Civilization, like the Olmecs (las stream we saw Colossal Heads, but I highly doubt they're going to be playable civilizations on release). There are also some civilizations that they might not give the same importance as the most popular ones, which I hope isn't the case. But anyway, which civilization would be a safe bet to start developing as a modder?

I've been playing CIV5/6 for more than ten years now, and I have only recently heard about the competetive CIV6 scene. I didn't know that there were dedicated discord servers that organized CIV6 MP games, and it was a pleasant discovery for me to know that they exist. I really want to join one in order to try testing my skills in organized CIV6 MP games, and yet I don't know whether I will be able to that, since I have a feeling that there are virtually no MP games organized for EGS CIV6 players. I would have gladly bought a Steam version of the game, if it was possible to do in the region I'm currently residing in

So with Mississippi being confirmed today, all but one of the antique civs are confirmed, and almost all of the exploration era ones are. (as it's 10 civs for each era at launch, plus the exploration era Shawnee)

As we have information, I wanted to look back at what potential historical pathways could be for civilizations, as some links have been confirmed by the devs, but many haven't been, including how many historical paths there will be for civs (the Normans were indicated for three predecessors, but does that preclude others from having 1, or 4?), and obviously which missing civilizations fill in blanks. I recall some of the confirmed paths but am probably forgetting others that devs have confirmed, so please feel free to point out that I'm missing some!

I'm using https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1g1a4vh/what_are_your_predictions_for_the_last_couple_civs/ as a reference which is quite helpful, so shoutout to ChickenS0upy!

1. Maurya - Chola - Mughals. Pretty straightforward as it's *essentially* India the whole way through. Would not be shocked for the Chinese or other Asian civs to be options that you get for being any Maurya/Chola, though. 1 confirmed evolution, easily two more.

2. Han - Ming - Qing. See above, very straightforward as this is a very oversimplified history of China (Ming and Qing are not confirmed, but were leaked with the Han and other information that turned out to be correct, I believe). Han will almost definitely allow you to get Mongolia as an option too, and India/Japan/other civs in the area could definitely be possible. 1 confirmed evolution, easily more.

3. Egypt's paths - Abbasid/Songhai. Unless there's another African civ in the exploration era, I see this as pretty open/shut. Neither Abbasid/Songhai are direct successors to Egypt, but since they're understandably limited, I assume exactly those two are the options.

4. Greece's paths - Normans/Spain. I believe both were confirmed for Greece, which make sense, none of the other confirmed exploration civs would make sense unless I'm missing historical/cultural ties. Seemingly two options, not seeing more.

5. Aksum's paths - Abbasid/Songhai. Same as Egypt, this is a "they're the closest civs" but I think that unlike Egypt, they're close enough for Chola to potentially make sense, despite the lack of cultural ties? Seemingly two options, not seeing more.

6. Rome - Normans/Spain. Same as Greece, nothing to add.

7. Khmer - I believe this is similar to the India and China paths, where Khmer - Indonesia (people have noted that the symbol for a civ shown in gameplay was the same as Indonesia's in Civ VI, hence people treating it as a soft confirmation of Indonesia) - Siam (Siam was leaked, like the Ming/Qing, as a modern civ). Again, I am very aware that this is not a straightforward historical path, but it seems close enough to be intentional. Khmer's location would lend me to think that Ming and Chola are also evolution options. One very likely evolution, easily more.

8. Maya. This gets interesting, as right now the only American civ for the Exploration era is the Shawnee, which is a preorder bonus, so obviously there has to be another option. Right now there are two empty civ spots for the exploration era, so logic would seem to dictate that one of them has to be another one in America for Maya to get a remotely logical evolution. Inca or Aztec have seemed to be the community's best guesses so far, and I agree. Zero (non-preorder-bonus) evolutions, presumably one.

9. Mississippi. Confirmed today, and a very similar boat to the Mayans. No clear evolution right now. If the Incas or Aztecs are the Mayan successor, are they shared with Mississippi? Maya/Mississippi having a combined one historical civ option at launch would be possible, but you'd think that's a bit of a competitive handicap, right? If the Greeces of the world get extra options of who to go with, that'd provide more flexibility if you need to pivot strategies. Not pertinent to this topic, but an interesting point. For now, I'll just pencil in Incas/Aztecs. Zero likely evolutions existing, likely one.

10. TBD.... so I'll bounce back to this a bit later in the post, when I've done this from the perspective of the exploration era civs below, which will be a little less penwork since we've already gone through quite a bit of it.

Exploration Era:

1. Chola - Main path is from Maurya, maybe some other Aksum/Khmer options, as discussed. One confirmed predecessor, easily more.

2. Abbasid - Egypt/Aksum, as mentioned, but I think it's also close enough in touching Africa/Western Asia and taking up the Middle East, that a number of existing Antiquity civs, unrevealed civs, or DLC options could fit. Likely two predecessors, pretty easily a third.

3. Songhai - Egypt/Aksum, similar to Abbasid but further isolated that I see the above as less likely. Likely two predecessors, not seeing more.

4. Normans - This is interesting, because I believe in a gameplay showcase, we saw that there were three antiquity civs that could evolve into the Normans. Greece and Rome, but another was covered up at the time. The other antiquity civs don't seem to fit. Maurya? Unlikely. Egypt? Same unless the vague Ptolemaic Rome connections. Aksum? Unlikely. Han? Unlikely. Maya, Khmer, Mississippi? No way. Unless I'm missing an obvious cultural link that fits instead of a geographic one, this seems to imply that there's a Western-ish Europe Civ in antiquity that hasn't been shown. Three predecessors confirmed, but not seeing the third one.

5. Spain - Greece/Rome, I think open and shut as of currently-projected civs, and nothing to speculate on how this could impact unrevealed civs.

6. Mongolia - A bit of an odd duck here, in that they obviously tie into China geographically and historically, but aren't *the* historical evolution from the Han, and as of now, the Qing seem to be the only historical successor, but again, aren't the main one, so Mongolia's a bit on its own here. Other predecessors here could be the Maurya due to geography, perhaps, but otherwise I'm not sure. I'm sure there are appropriate antiquity civs in the region that could qualify as a legitimate option for pre-Mongolia here, but given that there seem to be other holes to plug in the antiquity era and I'm not familiar enough with Mongolian history, I don't have anything to contribute here for speculation. One likely predecessor, maybe another one?

7. Ming - From Han, can probably also be from at least one of Khmer/Maurya due to proximity, perhaps Japan as some have speculated that there will be a Yamatai - Japan - Japan pathway? More to come on that. One confirmed predecessor, easily another one or two.

8. Indonesia - From Khmer, likely from Han, Maurya, or another southeast Asia civ. Again, Yamatai could be a possibility, so could a number of Polynesia-area ones. Vietnam has been confirmed to have an antiquity-era leader, yet it seems unlikely that antiquity Vietnam will be a civ at launch. One very likely predecessor, easily more.

9. Speculated Inca/Aztec/something in America - From Mississippi/Maya. Again, we're in the thorny question of, even if there is a civ that fits as an evolution to Maya/Mississippi due to proximity, is it just one for both options? Presumably nothing else can evolve into it, or from those antiquity civs, unless the devs really squint their eyes and draw a connection from other civs that have shared cultural traits through coincidence. If this exists at all, two likely predecessors.

10. TBD

Not doing the same analysis or numbered list for the modern era since we know fewer civs, fewer confirmed pathways, and at that point it's building guesswork about guesswork, but I'll touch on it some.

We've also seen other material that people have taken as confirmation that there's a certain civ in the game (Polynesian-looking people indicating Hawaii or another Polynesian civ, Persian-looking buildings, etc). They might be, but we don't know for sure. There are independent powers, we don't know entirely how they work, and for all we know, someone's suzerain of Persia and using them to build uniquye architecture and then go to war against the independent power Hawaii (shoutout Gastroid for that point). Likewise for people assuming that certain civs *have* to be in the game, like Germany, Russia, Persia, the Aztecs, etc. I think there's a good chance they all do by the time DLC is done, but when you look at the confirmed civs, I don't know that I see clear predecessors to Germany, for example. That doesn't mean that they aren't in the base game, but it also doesn't mean "of course they'll be in it, they're Germany."

That being said, out of the modern civs, plenty have clear historical predecessors (Chola/Mughals, Normans/Britain/France, Indonesia/Siam (I'm well aware that the Khmer/Indonesia/Siam are different geographically, I'm just speculating that it's sort of a path like that), Ming/Qing, etc.) Africa to Buganda is as close as a link as we'll probably get there, exploration Native Americans (if existent) to America being in the same boat. Meiji Japan, though, doesn't, and I don't see them having Indonesia or China evolving into Meiji Japan.

So for my money, I think that Japan will exist at least in the exploration era, as the final civ. For the final antiquity civ, I do think it'll be something like Persia or the general vicinity (aka not America), but it could be anything. Yamatai wouldn't surprise me, the Gauls would make sense, etc. For the two modern day spots, I do think Spain evolves into something Western Hemispheric. Only one of the eight modern civs so far is in the Western Hemisphere, a Mexico civ makes lots of sense, Brazil (though not Spanish of course) could make sense as another one in the region, as an "evolution" of Incas/Aztecs since Portugal isn't a civ right now. The Ottoman Empire would make lots of sense though and that area is also terribly scarce in modern civ confirmations so far, they could get away with making it an evolution of the Abbasids. And this is all neglecting Australia, Canada, Germany, Russia, tons of Middle Eastern options, etc. The short version is that there are lots of great options :)

This was meant to be more of a pathway progression thought experiment than another "what civs are left" post, but they lean into one another so much that it sprawled into both and I had to change the title. As always, none of this is meant to be critical of the Civ VII team or telling them that they better have a certain civ, that they can't do certain pathways, etc. just my expression of excitement and appreciation for the upcoming game. Thanks for reading, and:

TLDR: The numbered lists at the top of this show which civs I think will be historical predecessors/successors to one another in the first two eras!

Hey guys, i have a question. I am not 100% sure this is allowed. I have wemod downloaded and i would like to play with it on civ6 the gathering storm however my game keeps on crashing or wont even launch. I dont know what is causing this. Any tips?

Playing civ 6 I keep losing all of my city's to rebellions. its starting to get very frustrating it usually gives me like 10 turns then gives them to whoever else please someone tell me what I'm doing wrong here this is getting tiring and very annoying

Any ideas for Modern Native American/First Peoples Civs? I think it would be great to not have a progression into the USA for peoples whose destruction was a formative part of American history. Perhaps the Iroquois Confederacy, Navajo Nation, or something else? Maybe even Hawaii? I'd love to see a Hawaiian Kingdom Civilization.

Obviously we want every faction ever in the game, both as civilizations and independent powers, but we know that's probably not gonna happen (without mods), so I ask you, which ones should be playable and which should be npcs? We know that each civilization on Civ VII have an extensive list of unique traits, so I believe that they're going for the ones that fullfill all these requirements a faction that doesn't have a wonder probably won't be playable, for example). We're used to see some of the less popular civilizations as city-states, but I believe that now, with Civ VII new mechanics, it's a great opportunity for them to shine like the others. For example, I think that Nazca, as a predecessor for the Inca, would be a great addition, same for the Olmecs (as predecessors for the Aztecs). I also think that Rome > Papal States > Vatican is a really interesting combination. Other names include Israel (Jerusalem), Argentina (Buenos Aires), Dacia and Bohemia. Meanwhile I can't see how some city-states could be playable with all those unique traits. So, what are your opinions on the matter?