I think the full price with the DLC addons(That should have shipped with the game) exceeds $129, I'll let the billionaires try it first :-)
[Reply]

Nope. Couldn't care less. $130. Completely fucked system. I'll wait til the modders unfuck it and it's on steam sale for $10 before I buy it, if I buy it. Rather play modded Civ 5.
[Reply]

Gave it a try tonight. Just accepted default settings and hopped into a game. It’s a shocking departure from Civ 7. Trying to reserve judgement right now as there’s a lot to get used to. Will organize my thoughts after a couple of games and share here.
[Reply]

Played about 500 turns. It is very different from previous incarnations. Somethings I like, somethings are just different, and somethings I don't.

It can become a great game but it certainly is not there yet.
[Reply]

Sounds like it should be Early Access and feature a pricetag of about $30
[Reply]

Finished my first game last night. So far I'm very disappointed. At no point did this feel addictive. In fact it felt like work to play. I have loved this game series for multiple decades now so I'm not giving up just yet. But right now I would need to see massive improvements made in order to feel like this game is anywhere near as good as Civ 6.

Even if they improve everything dramatically, I'm not sure I can get over something that is fundamental in this game, which is the "3 ages" game mechanic that includes changing your Civ name for some reason. The game I just played I started as "Mississippians" in Ancient Era, evolved to "Spain" in the Exploration Era, and then ended as "Prussia" of all things in the "Modern" Era. What?

Also seems like they've gone all-in on screwing up the leaders of each nation. Now all leaders are completely independent of country. Recent Civ games had already gone to making most leaders people you've never heard of. But now you might as well just make up names for the most part.

Funny nugget is Harriet Tubman is a leader in this game and is apparently the most war-like leader since Civ 2 Ghandi.
[Reply]

So after completing a game and several eras here are my thoughts.

Likes:
-Diplomacy is much expanded and feels less all or nothing.
-Barbarians, named independent peoples, combine the city states and barbarians. They are included in diplomacy and fit pretty much every play style.
-District system is more flexible and less reliant on the rng of the map.
-Narrative events feel good if a bit generic. Wish there were more with tradeoffs rather than one bonus or another.

Things that need work:
-Crisis are either crushing or not even an impediment to the player.
-Exploration era feels very short compared to Ancient and Modern
-Civ switching is fine but I would rather have leader switching each era.

Dislikes:
-There is a time skip between ages. You are not punished for failing to complete the techs and civics in an age.
-Legacy system tends to pigeon hole the player into all in on one strategy.
-Map needs clean up and UI improvements.
-Districts should empty of all your non ageless buildings at the beginning of each age.
-The rubberbanding at the beginning of each age is annoying. Having to collect your armies and remake some of your towns into cities.
-Small number of civs at launch. Number of leaders is fine.
[Reply]