Civ 7: Why Wars Should Persist Across Ages

In Sid Meier's Civilization 7, the new Ages system forces some major changes on the player that can be extremely disruptive and confusing without knowing what to expect. Many of these changes are justified by the idea that Ages represent the passage of time and an empire would not remain identical across so many years. Unfortunately, on a practical level, the changes feel very abrupt and interrupt the flow of gameplay in a somewhat frustrating way. While the Ages act as chapters and divide gameplay up to make it less cumbersome, certain aspects of the Age transitions need refinement.

One extremely disruptive shift is wars ending in Age transition, with conflicts essentially fizzling out in the space of a single turn at the end of an Age. For anyone who has played past iterations of Civilization, the idea that a War ends without seeing it happen on screen is about as strange as it gets. Aside from creating the illusion that time is passing, wars ending as Ages transition is likely the result of the need for units to update. Ultimately, the game's structure may have limited the options, and the end result feels like a momentum killer.

Wars End Abruptly During Age Transitions

Relationships Are Adjusted Toward Neutral

While the concept of a big time jump makes sense on paper, in practice, the Age transition happens within a brief timeframe. Up to that point, players have amassed their troops, sent them out to raid and conquer Settlements, and built up momentum toward an eventual climax to the Age. However, instead of an ultimate showdown or some form of forced reconciliation, any war efforts are immediately ended, troops are reset, and the relationship with the enemy even turns slightly toward neutral.

While the enemy is still going to be Unfriendly and have a negative relationship with the player, there are no apparent consequences for a cut-off war. The whole thing feels very abrupt, removing the sense of progress a player gets from amassing an army, establishing front lines or strongholds, etc.

This mechanic makes the Ages feel more like three mini-games than one grand strategy game.

The need for units to reset to some extent does make sense for the Ages structure, but it seems like there should be a compromise in terms of diminished troops, relocated armies, or impact on diplomatic relations. Alternately, wars could simply continue into the next Age with the units' next-Age equivalent. These solutions wouldn't necessarily conflict with the Ages structure, and it isn't clear whether the current system is a permanent fixture or could possibly be updated to allow wars to persist.

Losing Units And Relocating Them Kills Momentum

Troops Should Maintain Their Positions

The fact that troops diminish in number across the Ages is strange and doesn't follow any clear logic. It's understandable why the specific units would change or possibly even revert to a weaker unit type. A change in unit numbers, however, makes it feel like the resources invested in obtaining troops were more or less wasted. When pursuing any form of Military or Domination tactics, this mechanic makes the Ages feel more like three mini-games than one grand strategy game. Simply maintaining the number of troops as Tier 1 Infantry or Ranged units from that Age would be an improvement.

Relocation of troops is a further disruption in gameplay that doesn't translate practically. If a war carries across to the next Age and troop numbers remain identical, there's no need to reset troop location either. While there are options available to bolster an army with Legacy Points, the process is unnecessarily arbitrary and introduces complexity when something more straightforward is entirely possible. These resets also limit the timeframe in which a war even makes sense, and there is a point of no return where it's simply no longer worth it because the war will end within a few turns anyway.

It Might Not Be Possible For Wars To Persist

The New Ages System Might Prevent Wars From Carrying Over

Because of the way the Ages system works, it might not be possible for wars to carry over across the Ages, leaving the current system as a permanent fixture of the game. There are quite a few systems in place that are directly connected to this mechanic, and changing it could require some major overhauls. At the same time, there does appear to be some middle ground with plenty of space for revision. Developers have already made a major update to how City-States function, allowing them to persist across the Ages instead of disappearing entirely.

Above all, the transition between Ages needs to be reassessed from a player's perspective. Certain features resetting or shifting is acceptable, such as Discoveries or increased yields from outdated buildings, but a complete reset and relocation of all units and the abrupt ending of wars at the end of an Age is simply an unprecedented change without as much merit. For now, wars are set to fizzle out when the new Age starts, and Civilization 7 players will have to decide for themselves if this is a deal-breaker.