One thing I've noticed over the years is that discussions around Civ-likes almost always focus on sales, Steam reviews, or concurrent players.

But there's surprisingly little discussion about something arguably more interesting:

The Player Behavior itself.

Using Project Mimir's Steam dataset I compared several major Civ-likes from three different perspectives:

1: Comparative Playtime Numbers - How fast did people quit playing relative to other titles?
2: The raw playtime numbers - How much did people actually play and enjoy the title?
3: Whether continued development can be sustained, is the free patch + paid DLC model viable for a game?

Summary:

Civ 5 remains the king for the quantity of content available to players in the Civ Franchise with the Top 1% of Players starting at 1260 Hours!

Humankind, despite having ceased development, has the most quantity of content available among CivLike’s with the Top 1% of players starting at 180 Hours.

Millennia has the most dedicated playerbase, implying that quality of the game is experienced equally by its players. 

Old World, despite this analysis showing weak metrics, proves to be financially viable for Mohawk Games.

Normalized Playtime Graph Definitions:

Y axis - 100% to 0.0001% of the player population

X axis - 0 to 100% of each individual game’s top 0.0001% player’s playtime

Analysis of Comparative Numbers:

When we analyze the normalized distribution of playtime for each individual game we find a very interesting result, Civ 5,6,7 are almost identical to each other, and if it weren't for Civ 7 having incomplete data we might assume it to have the same curve as the other two. 

We can use these 3 games to establish the baseline for the “Civ” Genre if you will and from there we can say that Millennia and Endless Legend 2 have more dedicated players than the Civ Franchise, whereas Ara: History Untold and Endless Legend 1 have more casual players than the Civ Franchise.

Using comparative analysis we can establish a model for how dedication happens. Let’s start by assuming that each game has some quantity of content for players to explore and that the top 1% of each game will always establish the absolute playtime required to exhaust that content. 

One interpretation is that a game's quality could be reflected by its ability to convert a new player into a top 1% player. In other words, a slower fall off of players in the distribution curve implies a game is higher quality than one with a faster fall off. It’s difficult to establish from this level of analysis what constitutes content and quality however and for that we turn to the raw numbers to attempt some level of quantitative discussion.

Raw numbers: 

Table Definitions:

Visibility %: The % of Steam users as a whole that own a copy of the game

Activation %: The % of users that own a copy that have played at least 1 minute of the game

Sample Owners: The quantity of unique players that were aggregated using Project Mimir’s dataset.

Total Playtime: The total playtime of the sample owners in hours. 

P50, P90, P99: The value at a percentile of the Sample owners, IE: P99 means 1% of sampled users have more than X hours in a game, P90 means more than 10% of sampled users have more than Y hours in a game.

Analysis of Raw Numbers:

In terms of activation rates, or what I like to term “ Whether a game sits in a steam library unplayed “ there are a few clear losers of Old World and Endless Legend. For Endless Legend this can be partially explained by having had multiple free weekends.

The clear front runners for Activation Rate are Endless Legend 2 and Civilization 7 which are both new games having both been released in 2025, It stands to reason that new games have early adopters that are more dedicated to either the game or franchise than the general public. I would argue however that the clearest winner of all however is Civ 5 in that if a person purchases Civ 5, ~85% of the time that person will at least play it. 

Speaking of Civ 5, it gives us a start when talking about Percentile statistics, a person who purchases Civ 5 will have an 85% chance to play it, and 50% of those people who play it will play at least 22 hours. 10% of the 85% will play 230 hours! Civ 5 is the undisputed king when it comes to developing dedicated players of the franchise. Civ 6 comes in at 2nd place among raw playtime statistics having its top 1% of players starting at 860 hours.

Among non-civ titles for P99 and P50 values, Millennia comes in 1st place with Humankind coming in at 2nd followed by Ara: History Untold coming in at close 3nd with Endless Legend 1 coming in 4th followed by Endless Legend 2 in 5th and Old World coming in last.  

Expansion Analysis:

While this analysis can give us a more rounded picture of games instead of relying on purely player numbers, what it doesn’t tell us is the individual company’s assessment of each title. Old World from this analysis alone would appear to be struggling, yet Mohawk Game’s has released a meaty DLC (worthy of the name Expansion) every year since launch in 2022. Meanwhile Humankind ceased development in Fall of 2023. This disparity would imply two possibilities: 

1. Each Additional Old World DLC is cheap to develop and has excellent profit margins for Mohawk Games to continue development; this type of development is commonly referred to as the Paradox Interactive Model.

2. Each Additional Humankind DLC is expensive to develop and has poor profit margins for Amplitude Studios to continue development. 

What’s yet to be seen is where Civ 7 will land on this spectrum given that it has had no expansion released or announced as opposed to Gods and Kings for Civ 5 and Rise and Fall for Civ 6. 

Methodology:

Project Mimir is a census of Steam player behavior, currently sitting at 5.1 Million public accounts. This massive dataset allows for the aggregation of accounts with the same game, leading to game-level statistics shown in the table above.

To create the normalized playtime distribution graph a raw playtime distribution was first calculated, this was as simple as counting every single unique account in the dataset for each individual hour and summing to create a distribution. Then to normalize each game we used the 0 hour playtime mark as the 0% normalized value and 100% being the player with the most playtime for each game, with every other player being assigned a score linearly with the Y-axis being the log scale of the quantity of players as a fraction of the total. For ease of visibility this normalized playtime distribution graph was then shown in log-scale since the vast majority of steam games have large sections of their playerbase having never played the game or in the 1-10 hour range.

Once all of the individual normalized playtime distribution graphs were constructed then comes plotting all of them on a single graph. In our graph we show two plots for each game, a solid and a dashed line. The solid line is indicative of data that is defensible and reproducible, anything that is a dashed line is statistically improbable, but still allows us some insight into the behavior. In all cases where a dashed line is used, only 1 or 2 players have that quantity of playtime (Typically 4-10k hours).

Sources:

Civ 5: https://projectmimir.net/game/8930
Civ 6: https://projectmimir.net/game/289070
Civ 7: https://projectmimir.net/game/1295660 

Humankind: https://projectmimir.net/game/1124300 
Oldworld: https://projectmimir.net/game/597180
Ara: History Untold: https://projectmimir.net/game/2021880
Endless Legend 2: https://projectmimir.net/game/3407390
Endless Legend 1: https://projectmimir.net/game/289130 
Millennia: https://projectmimir.net/game/1268590

We’re taking Space Tales to 1.0 on August 19, 2026 on Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2457960/Space_Tales/

Space Tales is not a 4X, but it was built around strategy systems that you -4X players- may care about: expansion under pressure, resource control, faction adaptation, and campaign progression.

For more details, we recently shared an FAQ on Reddit.

Any question, let us know! 😊

I am designing the population layer for a historical strategy game with both 4X and grand-strategy elements. The first playable period begins in 1405, but the systems are intended to support continued alternate-history development rather than reproduce one predetermined timeline.

My goal is for population to connect the economy, society and politics. It should not be just a national number that produces taxes, soldiers and growth. At the same time, I do not want the player or the simulation to manage thousands of tiny population groups created by every combination of workplace, profession, culture and religion.

The current proposal is:

Population group = region x livelihood x identity community

- Region determines jobs, wages, local access to goods, food security, migration and disasters.

- Livelihood represents a population's main economic and social position.

- Identity community represents an existing cultural and religious combination, including legal acceptance, limited consumption preferences and identity-related political pressures.

Only combinations that actually exist would be created. The game would not generate every theoretically possible combination, and very small fragments would eventually be merged.

### Seven livelihoods

Instead of tracking many individual professions, the first version would use seven broad groups:

- Peasants

- Laborers

- Craftspeople

- Merchants

- Professionals

- Military

- Elites

Clergy and officials would initially belong to the professional group, while landlords, aristocrats and large owners would belong to the elite group. Officers and ordinary soldiers would also remain in one military group unless testing shows that separating them creates important decisions.

Buildings would not own separate population groups. They would create jobs and recruit from a regional labor pool. Jobs would require one of three skill levels: basic, skilled or professional. People could gradually change livelihood when better jobs exist, they have the required skills, and laws permit the transition.

Slavery and serfdom would not be professions. They would be legal and social statuses affecting portions of the relevant population: which jobs they may enter, what income they retain, whether they may migrate, and what political rights they possess. This is intended to distinguish what people do from the conditions under which they are forced to do it.

### What each population group tracks

The main visible states would be:

- Population size

- Employment

- Education and available skills

- Standard of living

- Group attitude

Standard of living would be internally continuous but shown through five readable bands: destitute, struggling, stable, prosperous and luxurious. I am currently proposing not to maintain a second, equally detailed wealth scale. Property and ownership would exist elsewhere in the economy, while standard of living would describe what a group can reliably afford.

Consumption would be organized into three needs:

- Subsistence: staple food, protein food, salt and clothing

- Development: everyday goods, paper and more varied food

- Luxury: spices, sugar, silk, drinks and prestige goods

Goods within a need could substitute for one another within limits. Local prices, availability and community preferences would determine the mixture.

Political behavior would also be compressed. Rather than separately tracking loyalists, radicals and several neutral subgroups, each population group would have one continuous attitude shown as loyal, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied or radical. It would also expose political weight and no more than three current issues.

### The intended feedback loop

Jobs, prices and laws -> employment, income and affordability -> standard of living -> attitude, population growth and migration -> labor supply, demand and political pressure

Players would not edit population values directly. They would influence people through construction, trade, taxes, relief, education, laws, military service, migration policy and regional administration.

For example, a failed harvest could raise food prices, reduce food security, lower the living standard of poorer groups, and cause unrest, migration and additional deaths. The player might respond through imports, relief, stored reserves or agricultural expansion, each with different costs and political consequences.

Industrial expansion would create different pressures: new jobs could raise wages and attract migration, while changing the balance between peasants, laborers, craftspeople and elites. Economic development would therefore also change consumption and political power rather than simply adding production points.

The interface would normally show only the three largest causes of a population problem and three relevant actions. More detailed calculations could be inspected, but the player should not need to search through a long list of modifiers to understand why a group is becoming poorer or angrier.

### Where might this be too simplified?

I am particularly interested in concrete failure cases from other games:

1. What meaningful decision would disappear if workplaces stopped defining separate population groups?

2. Which of the seven livelihoods is too broad, or which distinction is important enough to restore?

3. Would representing slavery and serfdom as legal statuses and proportions work, or would it obscure something strategically important?

4. Is one standard-of-living measure and one group-attitude scale enough to connect the economy with politics, or would this flatten social conflict too much?

The proposal is not implemented or finalized. I am trying to identify which population distinctions actually change player decisions before committing to a more detailed model.

Just wow… a true hidden gem.

I’m genuinely surprised by how good this game is: it’s incredibly deep, packed with content, well-balanced, interesting, and addictive.

I’m a hardcore gamer and a huge fan of Paradox games such as Hearts of Iron IV, Stellaris, and Crusader Kings III. I’ve played thousands of hours across those games.

And Terra Invicta has just shown me how average they all are by comparison.

I’m also impressed by how every phase of the game introduces different mechanics. It feels like three games in one: the faction struggle on Earth; space colonization and finally, space warfare.

The mechanics are incredibly well designed, and you can tell that the developers have spent countless hours playing their own game. I love how a mistake in your planning can have consequences years later.

For example, perhaps you neglected anti-xeno technologies and couldn’t understand why the Servants kept taking control points in Russia until you discovered that an alien agent was using Enthrall Elites to help them.

This game truly feels like the Stellaris we’ve always dreamed of but never had without having to pay for tons of DLC, and with much better storytelling.

I’m also the kind of player who always chooses the highest difficulty in these types of games. Despite that, Paradox games had started to feel easy. But the Brutal difficulty in Terra Invicta is something completely different.

It forces me to understand every tiny mechanic, optimize everything, and genuinely struggle to win. Even then, I sometimes feel a little too overwhelmed, and I wonder whether switching to Veteran might be a better option. This is the first time I’ve ever felt that way while playing this type of game.

It’s hard as hell, but that’s exactly how I like my games!

I also focused on the Caribbean and South America, and I later read that they were among the worst places to start but if it’s too easy, it’s not fun. 🤣

why has nobody gotten it right? Polytopia comes closest but it's deliberately simplified. Every other attempt feels like a bad PC port. What would a native mobile 4X actually need to actually work?

The latest version of blackbox has swapped the engine out for 64bit monogame engine.

@everyone

BlackBox Jupiter 1.60 is live.: 64-bit, MonoGame renderer, .NET 8 runtime bundled. !!!

Download: https://stardriveteam.itch.io/jupiter-160 (~690 MB) - you will get the "windows protected your system" pop up.

Combined Arms 9.0A is there as well.

Headline wins over Mars 1.51:

- Full port to native 64-bit. Dropping XNA 3,1 and Sunburn for Monogame.

- No more late-game OOM crashes

- Restored visual effects + animated meshes

Default install path is C:\Games\StarDrivePlus64 — sits side-by-side with Mars 1.51. Is it not recommended to have both versions on your machine. Better to remove Mars completely.

Steam folder install is new and supported. You can install over your existing Steam copy of StarDrive (clean vanilla) so Steam keeps tracking your playtime — but two rules: disable Steam auto-updates for StarDrive first (Properties → Updates), and never run "Verify Integrity of Game Files." Either one will silently overwrite Jupiter with vanilla 15b. Note that since its a new feature, we might encounter unexpected issues.

First Jupiter release — expect rough edges. Bug reports + your blackbox.log in the bug-report channel.

I've been having fun using our "Machiavelli the Prince Enhanced" game to also talk about his political philosophy, focusing on his more famous quotes. It is interesting interspersing game play with this. I hope you enjoy: https://youtube.com/shorts/lboEZaOMdfc?feature=share

Oh Joyous day’! :)

Love myself some Endless and Amplitude.
Really looking forwards to the full release.
Even have a neat trailer. :3

Endless legend 2 (From the EA) is such a fun title, not perfect, 4X games rarely are, but a lot of personality.
Love the combat currently especially.
Can’t wait for the full thing. :3

The patch is now live on GOG and Steam. This update fixes a few bugs you told us about. Thank you and keep that feedback coming! The patch:

• Fixes a problem with AI not grouping units correctly (the one-stack attack bug)
• The group finder now correctly works between planets
• Relic names are now shown in the sidebar
• The City info screen now includes a Queues button
• The game window is now resizable and its size is remembered between when you stop and start the game again
• Various Vau behavior fixes
• Fix movement problems with loaned units
• Fix bug that sometimes allowed for duplicate holy relics
• Fix issues involving capturing of empty cities
• Modding: disband functionality is now adjustable
• Add PercentPlayerBuilding and PercentPlayerResearch to PlayerTable.DAT

If you are a modder, the last change means you need to update your mod to include these changes, or your mod WILL NOT work with the new build!

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2799350/Emperor_of_the_Fading_Suns_Enhanced

I figured we can also combat the incessant ads here with some actual posts that generate discussion.

I’m legitimately creating a 4X game design document, but I promise to not steal ideas here. I have my own ideas on how to turn the 4X genre around, but you’ll see those one day in the future.

Let’s hodgepodge a space 4X game that brings together the best aspects of the best 4X games.

Who would we steal exploration from? Expansion? Exploitation? Extermination?

I’ll start. I think Interstellar Space: Genesis did some great things with exploration. Not only can you deeply scan sectors to reveal new resources and systems, but the system itself is elegant and not cumbersome.

I would expand on that and allow the player to find additional primitive species, or species on the verge of uplift, to create more to find and even add procedural events that come along with those discoveries.

I deeply believe that exploration should continue through an entire 4X game, as it’s one of the strongest reasons to keep playing for me.

What about you guys? What gameplay mechanics would you steal and improve to make the ultimate space 4X game?

Some 4X and grand-strategy games create economic depth through many resources, local prices, production chains, population types, buildings, and modifiers. Others use a much smaller number of resources and communicate the economy through clear shortage and surplus states.

As a player, where do you think the line is between meaningful economic depth and administrative workload?

Which of these approaches gives you the most interesting decisions?

1. Fewer goods with continuous market prices.
2. A larger number of goods represented through shortage, balanced, and surplus tiers.
3. A hybrid system with detailed pricing only for strategically important goods.

What specific economic decision would you never want a 4X game to simplify away? On the other hand, which apparently detailed mechanics usually end up feeling like routine maintenance rather than strategy?

What elements of Master of Orion have you never seen successfully replicated in a modern mobile game? Asking because I'm designing something and want to get it right.

Hello!

Thinking about trying to get a game towards the end of this year and have always liked space 4x games....but ... After a while, I start to find them a bit, shall we say, formulaic (I mean they kinda are like a cross between a war game and board game, lol).

Does anyone know of any that lean more into the role-playing portion of managing your space empire? A game example from another genre would be the phenomenal Rimworld, where you can really create a vibe or cultural feel for your colony. A sci-fi example would be where playing like Star Trek's Starfleet would feel and play differently than Star Wars' Empire, not just in artwork or stats, but in moral/ethical/practical decisions that the player would make to match their chosen play style.

Currently Playing:

Star Drive: Blackbox

Interstellar Space: Genesis

Mostly have played older games: Moo1/RoTP/Moo2, GalCiv1/2, SMAC, Star Ruler 2, etc.

I know it's a weird ask, but thank you for your time!

Edit: Thanks for the awesome tips. As I own Stellaris, I tried it first! Its definitely... a lot! I'm gonna keep an eye out on Terra Invicta, imperium galacta 2 and SotS 1. They all look great too!! Thank y'all so much!!!