Millennia

I have mixed feelings about this game. I'll preface that a lot of the things civ 6 did with ages, especially after Rise and Fall, didn't sit well with me. It felt incredibly unnatural and destroyed a lot of what I liked about the natural feel of world evolution form prior games. Well Millennia takes that concept and makes it the core gameplay element around which their entire angle is pitched, and my opinion how it is implemented is mixed. For one I wish the ages stayed grounded throughout, even if they had a fantastical aesthetic. Something like the age of heroes being implied to just be normal people being glorified through classical mythos naturally through gameplay. Think something like records mode for Total war troy (admittedly one I haven't played so I could be wrong about it's implementation), where instead of just pure fantastical monsters the monsters instead looked like amalgamations of real animals that would have seemed fantastical to some ancient greeks, like a trader bringing home stories of Phoenician elephants to their isolated village. Secondly, I feel like ages should be more nation centered and less universal. Seeing as the age of heroes is locked into the post bronze age in game, the period is well into the last millennium BCE, a period that for some could be fairly represented like the high watermark of classical greece after the conquests of Alexander (even though the classic greeks were just mythologolizing the bronze age Myceneans), or completely unfair to the narrative of others like the collapse of the Zhou and the warring states period in ancient china. Eras should not be map wide but either shared by region (We bronze age together, we bronze age collapse together), or specifically locked to nations own progression. Doing otherwise compounds the unnatural feeling of the game. Gameplay wise the AI is completely and utterly incapable, unless you lead the game in tech (Which means you're only allowed to access a single playstyle) you can generally count on going through the worst eras. The reason why I am conflicted is because at the end of the day a lot of what the eras do is actually fun, it's not like civ 6 where I'm getting a full priced DLC for one or two niche features/civs that otherwise objectively makes the game worse. On the other hand, being forced into a plague era because you didn't keep up the tech grind (only 7 turns behind too, my fault for deciding I wanted some industry RIGHT? RIGHT? HOW DARE I TRY TO BRANCH MY PLAYSTYLE RIGHT? TIME FOR A PUNISHING MECHANIC THAT WILL LITERALLY IMPACT THE ENTIRE REST OF THE ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ GAME) and losing your city population across the map because the AI can't manage their own sanitation is beyond infuriating. It's such a consistent trend with paradox IPs that I'm convinced their dev teams don't play their own games, otherwise I don't understand how the game is so absolutely incapable of playing itself. Not talking about age implementation: -Econ- Games strongest suit, good micro potential that allows nations to excel and specialize in fields dictated by a combination of geography and national spirits. -Warfare- Ehhhhh, but you're not gonna get better than ehhhhhh unless you're playing civ 5. Better and more complicated than 6, less interesting than humankind. -Map and just general graphics- Not ugly per se, but we've definetly been spoiled by the industry standard. I'd say this game is even worse looking than civ 5. If you showed me a pic of this game 2 decades ago I'd ask what mod of civ 4 you were playing. Roads sometimes don't connect, models are very jagged especially the ones for ancient cities/towns where the buildings are more sparse so you can really notice. Does not compete with any game in the genre made within the last decade when it comes to appearances, the only innovative edge it has lies in the econ mechanics. I was just playing civ 3 and you'd be shocked how marginal of an improvement this game is visually. Overall, this was never going to dethrone civ and probably wound up being even more underwheming than Humankind for how little it actually tries to accomplish. I don't hate it. I think the more I play the more I like it more than civ 6, and I'm not touching the festering wound that is 7. The age mechanic in its current form is just unfun, I can't really put it another way, and mires an otherwise positive impression of the game.

Everything new about Civ7 was ripped from Millennia. Just play this but get it on special, just go back and play Civ5/6, or maybe even play Humankind. I'm posting a positive review because I think this is the best Civ competitor currently being developed so I'm hoping the hype for Civ comes over to the superior clones. It is a bit janky the first couple of playthroughs but I highly recommend sticking with it and just playing through it on an easy difficulty whilst figuring out the essentials of this game.

♥♥♥♥ you mom paradox ——---————/´ ¯/) —— ———--/—-/ — ————-/—-/ ———--/´¯/'--'/´¯`•_ ———-/'/--/—-/—--/¨¯\ ——--('(———- ¯~/'--') — ——\————-'—--/ ———-'\'————_-•´ — ———\———--( —— ——-\———- .

Game never got there but it had potential. Then they just gave up on it and took our money. Do not support this company any further.

鉴于P社最近的行为，不推荐任何P社有关的游戏

Bon. Vous aimez Civilization ? Moins depuis, allez, le V pour les moins boomers d'entre nous ? Vous avez tâté du Endless/Humankind (perso : mouais), du Old World (perso : OH OUAIS), et même du Age of Empire (wololooo) et du Rise of Nations (oh yeaaahh) ? Et bien faites un mélange de tout cela, secouez non agitez et vous obtenez : Millennia. A part Old World, qui reste bien à part, bien plus narratif et antiquito-centré, je pense que si vous vous mettez à Millennia, vous pouvez jeter tout le reste (surtout Civ). Ouais, tout simplement. Là il est tard, il m'a fallu 3 parties pour bien comprendre la plupart des mécanismes et subtilités du jeu, car telle une matrioshka (poupée russe) y a toute une succession de mécaniques dans tous les sens, donc je vais pas m'épancher trop, mais clairement, ce jeu est une tuerie et renvoie Civ à un jeu pour mobile et bas du front. La richesse de Millennia est INCROYABLE, le jeu se décompose comme Civ et les autres en Ages et pioche les idées à droite à gauche des titres que j'ai évoqué mais il le fait tellement MIEUX (globalement, y a quand même de grosses erreurs de jeunesse notamment ergonomique, comme l'absence de file de construction, en 2024, lol, ou de centralisation des bâtiments, ou des données, ou de quel bâtiment on a ou pas, ou tout simplement de statistiques globales), énormément centré sur la progression enrobée de narration, et surtout, surtout ! le jeu est LONG. Vous n'avez pas l'impression de rusher une partie et ne passerez pas de l'âge de pierre à l'âge final en 2h (ni 3h, ni 4, ni... non, partez pas), chaque âge est DEVELOPPE, chaque âge limite se suffirait à lui-même et quand vous passez au suivant, vous hallucinez face au contenu, aux nouveautés qui arrivent, et paf ça recommence... jusqu'au endgame, d'habitude rushé, on en a marre, on veut plier la face du malandrin d'en face mais nooooooooon, non seulement de nouvelles mécaniques apparaissent pour se faire (et même non violentes, comme d'habitude, mais biennnn plus intéressantes qu'ailleurs) mais vous avez même un "jeu post-générique", oui madame ! Voilà, vous en avez marre, vous balancez la purée et niquez la planète sous une holocauste nucléaire, après moi le déluge de radiations, toussa... MAIS LE JEU CONTINUE SA MERE. Enfin si j'ai bien compris. Parce que j'ai évité ce funeste destin en finissant bien. Ah oui je vous ai pas dit, il y a des AGES PARALLELES. De ouf. Vous avez des "âges du chaos", qui vous font dévier de la trame principale pour passer un âge temporaire de gros malus ou bonus, un peu comme les Ages d'Or/Sombre de Civ ou de Humankind mais BIEN plus intéressant. Bref. Vous aimez Civ ? Vous lorgnez Civilization 7 ? Humankind vous l'avez rincé, ou il vous a déçu ? FONCEZ SUR MILLENNIA. Voilà. Cordialement. Bisous.

Уважаемые господа дайте шанс это с виду неказистой игре. Она на голову лучше поделки под названием Цивилизация 7