Old World

This game makes me hate Carthage so much I think we should go to war with Libya in present day just on general principle.

I've played Civ II, Revolution, VI, and Stellaris, and Old World is far better than of those games. The UI is extremely easy to use and much, much easier to read. The gameplay is still tactical but moves along at a faster pace because of how straightforward it is to navigate your options, and there are also more interpersonal decisions to make with managing your council, relatives, and powerful families. I also really like the music, which I was not expecting going in. I thought I was burned out on strategy games, but I might have found my new obsession. There are so many quality-of-life and other tweaks that make this game feel really fresh. The tutorial is also excellent.

While there's a lot of good and interesting ideas in this game and I've enjoyed a lot of the features, the combat is just a real pain given how far so many units can move. Zone of control hardly means anything when even basic infantry can cross 20 tiles, no exaggeration, and walk around a mountain and attack from flanks or behind, and cavalry appear from beyond the distance of your screen. Wars are just a swarm vs swarm meat-grinders that are exhausting and tedious that eventually got me to throw my hands in the air because it's just more exasperating than fun for me.

Outside of that I've like rest of the game; the internal politics and external diplomacy, managing different the families in your faction, developing your cities and provinces. But I can't put aside my disdain combat in the game to enjoy the rest of it. I get that the maps are large and the "orders" resource is suppose to limit how much units can move, but as interesting as the idea is I'd rather just have a conventional movement system basic units could move 3 to 6 tiles per turn the fast ones maybe twice as much or so. And maybe slightly more durable units as well.

complex at first, but tutorials to guide you through, leading to a very rich Civ-like experience with story elements that affect the game.

This game is a masochist's heaven:

Research - You can't choose what to do next; you're given "cards" that never align with the tech you actually need.

You think you have a superior military, and the game even tells you so - WRONG! In two turns, the AI magically spawns 5-8 basic militia-style units from its scripted heaven, and these always critically hit your units, killing them in 2, maybe 3 hits tops. Your superior units (two tech levels above) need a ridiculous 6-9 strikes to kill ONE simpleton AI unit.

And if that scripted battle mechanic isn't enough, your leveled leader dies three turns into your attempt to have any fun other than punishing yourself for buying this sh** ... game. The throne is not taken by your also-leveled successor but by some incompetent, very powerful and important "character" you're seeing for the first time. They start with everything so bad that you can barely move TWO units in one turn, and all your resources were clearly bought from W*sh and crumble around you like the money you threw out the window when you bought this.

Oh dont forget diplomacy - it is not lacking behind - don't worry! Strong relationships are there only to further elevate your masochistic "experience" when alliances crumble in two turns just because some militia AI Rambos just annihilated your star units led by your strongest generals.

If life gives you lemons and you don't want lemonade to feel better - buy Old World - you definitely will feel worse!

The game is a little old but very enjoyable. It has a decent learning curve but is fun to figure out. If you're a Civ veteran and want more role-playing and leader variability this game is for you!

Great 4X game.
The developers continue to support and improve the game-play. The DLC's have added to the game and are reasonably priced what they give.
The thing I like about the game is how your well run empire can fall apart almost in an instant. Your heir dies. You die. Peaceful neighbors suddenly decide to invade. Religious war Calamities and of course you run out of money
Wonderful

I like the orders system. And that it is unpredictable.

The UI could have been designed better. I feel like it's somehow too simplistic in a way that it doesn't inform me well of what something is or does, making the learning curve a little difficult to overcome.

Apart from that however, it's an excellent 4X game. It's like Civ 5 with deeper mechanics and a focus on a specific era which helps a lot of immersion, coupled with Crusader Kings like character mechanics.

Must try for everyone that loves a good strategy game.

An enjoyable cross between Civilization and Crusader Kings, Old World is still a bit rough around the edges but it does enough fun, interesting and even novel things that one can happily gloss over the relatively minor and few issues. Then again it might be a question of how appealing certain aspects of the game are to certain tastes. I read that some people didn't like the combat for example but in my opinion it's one of the most balanced and straightforward examples in the genre, which I appreciate. If you want to win a war guess what, you're gonna have to focus on winning that war and make sure your units outmatch the enemy strategically, tactically and logistically. Again the game does the same old things in new ways and for people who like to try new things it's great, but for others who have become used to a certain way of doing things maybe they won't like it.

very fun, very different from civ, very complex

Easier to play than Civ VI...I also like the family progression aspect where people die and you have heirs! That's what was most unrealistic about Civ...the fact that your leader lived for 3000 years

Great game, love the new innovative game design choices.

I liked it but not enough. Designated city site, randomized research and Combat that always seems to be even. I have gone hard military in every decision only to find that my military power is always similar to the AI. Which shows me that the game mechanics are messed up. also tons of options of my chancellor and ambassador to do. but none that are really of any interest. Also having three factions to bitch back and forth through every play through is just annoying. I want to control one faction in one empire not 3 of them. I get so confused on who is from where and what religion they are its just annoying.

Old World is what Civ fails to be. No longer do I send swordsman to the front line, only for 450 years to pass and for them to be slaughtered by musketmen. I can intermarry and sell my children off to improve relations with other nations. My dumb decisions actually have far-reaching and complex consequences!

I hated post-industrial Civ4-5 (and also post-industrial society IRL, what a Kazinsky-dence!), and this game just avoids it altogether beautifully.


Civ4 is the "tarp in the bed of the pickup truck filled with water" of 4x strategy.
Civ5 is the kiddie pool of 4X strategy.
Civ6 is the dirty puddle in the pothole in the poor part of town of 4X strategy.
Old World is the indoor wave pool where if you're not careful all the fat kids and their floaties and innertubes will get thrown on top of you and almost drown you (true story)...of strategy.

I don't even play games anymore and I play this game cause I'm an old man in an old world

Completely locked in, I AM Nebuchadnezzar the Magnificent, I DID just slap down Cyrus's second invasion attempt and I HAVE just had my 5th child to celebrate.

10/10 Deep, engaging, criminally underrated and has my undying love for scratching the same itch Rome Total War 1's dynastic general system did.

Didn't want to give it a bad review because it's a fine game. I just don't like it. WAY too much micro for me. If you want a much more tedious version of Civ, you got it!

Old World has all the tactical depth and strategically interdependent systems one would expect from a first-class 4X game. Snowballing your fledgling empire with symbiotic military, infrastructure, science, diplomacy, and leadership decisions is really evident here. Don't let Old World fly under your radar. Highly recommended.

Found it to be just better CIV. Really like where they brought the genre of 4x games. Not too hardcore, not too casual. Love all the design desicions so far.

I enjoyed that its more a war\battle driven strategy game. It can be complicated or overwhelming at times but at some point the game just clicks. The only gripe i have is that I think its quite difficult to win if you have less land than your opponents. like you cant really build tall in this game. or maybe i just haven't figured out yet. Also there isn't many content creators for this game, so its hard to see what a good player does or to see things that you haven't thought of.

Old World is one of the best 4X games on the market still in 2025 (looking at you Civ 7...), thanks to its incredibly polished design and deep strategic gameplay. The AI is superior to that of any Civilization game (apart for Vox Populi mod for Civ5), offering a more dynamic and challenging experience. With high replayability it stands out as a must-play for fans of the Civ-like games!

As someone coming from Civilization VI, I would say this is an improvement in almost all areas.

1. The game feels like it goes from Ancient to Medieval era, which is arguably the most engaging part of Civ.

2. If you get too far ahead of the competition, there is a victory type exclusively to keep the game from dragging on (Double Victory).

3. Different currencies capping urban growth and military growth keep either one from getting wacky until the snowball is rolling. No easy shifting from quick-printing builders to quick-printing crossbowmen.

4. The leader itself has essentially been replaced by shrines(which act like a boosted version of civ pantheons). This leaves most of the customization to happen to the leader and families.

5. Families may make it feel samey to others, but if we're being honest Civ feels samey between whichever victory type you're pursuing. In Civ, the bump a non-gimmick leader choice provides usually fades 1/3 of the way into the game, leading to a slog of "can I grab the right tech or civic".

6. There are essentially 4 eras from a culture standpoint, and each city tracks it separately. This means no late-game wonders in fledgling cities. It also means tall play is viable, especially with the nations that have a culture boost.

7. The National Ambition(the in-game help file has a list if you search for that term) required for the Ambition Victory really rounds out some missing victory types and makes more sense for the Diplomatic Victory or Economic Victory people desire in Civ.

8. Religion absolutely matters. Avoiding it is a penalty to science and culture, but ignoring it while multiculturalism spreads can lead to an unstable empire. You have to make a decision about its impact, one way or another.

9. Instead of constantly chasing luxuries(amenities) like a kid collecting candy, there is a baseline unhappiness that can be overcome with unlockable improvements that don't rely on RNG.

10. Requiring a tech unlock to rush production with currency or buy tiles means that currency minmaxing is still filtered enough where beelining is not superior.

11. The inclusion of limited tech choices at a given moment (through the card draw system) and the dynasty mechanics provide enough variation and disruption to build order that every game can feel different if you permit it without largely affecting a favored strategy. This makes the game very learnable while playing if you go through enough playthroughs.

12. While I am not playing specifically for this feature, the events also create a sort of role playing potential for the game. There is sufficient automation that the memory of what happened in the game can become focused on your dynasty, court drama, and major city events. This doesn’t mean you ignore the 4x elements, but it does help distinguish games with the same leader. No more remembering games based on the crazy adjacency bonuses you got that one time or the coalescing of positive map RNG.

13. If roleplaying is your focus, the level of detail to provide an interesting twist on ancient records and stories is refreshing. I once had a game where my Egyptian leader was barren and had no heir, and a young Thutmose (Moses) magically appeared apparently out of nowhere to become an optional heir.

I'm only playing the base game, so I can only assume the DLCs expand upon those aspects even more. The DLCs seem optional, so I'm not in a hurry to grab them before I get a better grasp on the game.

With all that said, this game is not for casual breezing through the revolving door of historical events. I have reached a point in Civ VI where I can sorta autopilot through the game, making it not unlike watching a comfortable TV show. Do that with OW and you end up with Lazy McSpendsALot, the Superstitious heir, burning your empire to the ground or a lack of heirs to inherit the throne entirely (effectively a game over).

While Civ VI focuses on the theme of national success through building things that stand the test of time, Old World focuses on success through exceptional individuals, careful management of an initially unsteady court, and an age where your rulers, effectively your senior accounting managers, had to be chosen from a limited pool of the noble class instead of having the option to choose the best person for the job (and often just picking the most popular well-known person at the moment).

If you are looking to play as bombastic historical figures that are known by most of the general population, you might be disappointed. If you want a one-session game you can quickly jump into and finish with friends, this game is even worse at that than most 4X or Grand Strategy games. If you like conquering other nations in a video game, the combat system is superior by all definitions to Civ VI and the option is there, though it is not my preference. If you like slowly chewing your way through a re-enactment of ancient history where decisions made in the present shape your options in the future, this game is great.

Like Civilisation though limited by the Classical scenario (Old World!), it is a much deeper game with characters and events that will help keep your interest in the game. It does become computer-resource hungry by the mid-game so expect turns to take much longer as what you manage in your Empire increases and as the game manages all those other growing Empires around you. Definitely worth the discounted price for the game and DLCs, in my opinion.

I have been a lifetime CIV player since CIV 1 first came out. I love good 4x games. And this one is just a fantastic game with a great balance of combat, build selections, and a ton of character events that add a lot of twists and challenges. HUGE replayability with a multitude of choices for maps, game tweaks and five unique leader options for each of the ten nations available. If I had more than two thumbs they would all be UP!

So I finally fired this up earlier today, after hearing so much about it. It’s definitely a lot of fun, but as I kept playing there was a niggling feeling that something wasn’t quite right, and that only grew as the hours went by. You cant say I didn’t give it a solid go right from the get go, but that feeling only grew and grew as time passed, until finally it clicked - my neck, that is, for I had been sitting hunched forward for in the exact same position for 4hrs. Missed the evening I had agreed to go to at my friends to watch the result of our country’s federal election election which happens every 4 years.

10/10, far more entertaining failure of democracy than our 2 party system of “leaders”. Country needs an undo function, and so does Civ V/VI.

I try to avoid hyperbole but wow this absolutely fing ****s all over the most recent Civs. Not even close, and I’m not going to pretend it is. I’ve never played any of those family royalty strategy games before and I doubt I will. What’s the point when this is so f-ing fun?

After being let down by Humanity, wow this was a welcome surprise. Looking forward to evolving to the Chiropractor era so I can get my neck bent back into its pre”Old World Stoop”.

Hey, you can’t have progress without sacrifice. Infinitely more satisfying failure of democracy than watching our politicians. Cheaper too.

10/10. Virtual inept leaders over the real thing for sure.

Like it so far. Sure, you dont have the amount of tech like in Civ, but the family struggles amid your Empire give more immersion. I prefer this over Civ.

It is not a question of whether Old World is a good game or not; that in my opinion is indisputable, transparently obvious to anyone proficient in its genre. The question for me is if Old World is a perfect game.

If such a thing as a perfect game can exist, what qualities must it have? In my view it isn't enough for a game to merely have universal appeal within it's genre - that is to say, anyone who likes any particular 4X game could enjoy it. It has to go a step further and push the boundaries of what the genre is capable of; a perfect game has to hit a bullseye on a target you didn't even know existed.

Where do I start? Is it with the theming, how it excellently expresses the era it portrays, and is constrained to what best facilitates gameplay? The skillful iteration on 4X with the introduction of Crusader Kings-esque character mechanics, which I find better executed than the game it's borrowing from? The deep understanding of 4X that allows Old World to be the best example of many conventions of the genre, such as the spatial puzzle of the map, the abstracted-but-intuitive resources, and the innovative victory conditions? The mechanical systems, which punch far above their relative simplicity by interlocking like fine Japanese woodwork? The narrative that emerges from each game through events and characters, always managing to feel credible while capturing the legendary spirit of the age it portrays? The quality of life in how information is displayed and how easy it is to scrub back and forth through actions and turns, which are at once both innovative and obvious in hindsight? I only present these things in order as a concession to using written language, because in truth these elements feed into and bolster each other in such a way that none demand primacy.

Perfection is not a status that can be divorced from context - it is to be the state of the art, and as such can change over time. Just as Civilization was perfect in its own time, Old World is so in ours. The developers continuing to build on what they've achieved is an auspice for Old World retaining that status for some time. Anyone looking to make a 4X game would be negligent to not study the decisions made in the design of this game.

In short, if such a thing could ever be said objectively, Old World is indeed a perfect game. Get it!

Absolutely superb game. I'm glad I saw the praise on the subreddits covering strategy games because I would have overlooked this game otherwise.

The various systems come together in a way that really enhances the gameplay experience. Combine this with the best A.I. in 4x that can actually outplay you instead of just out bonus you and this quickly became my favourite civ-like 4x by far.

The civs are all very flavourful with Crusader Kings types of character stories and relationships. The DLC leaders have unique mechanics that change the way the civ plays to such a degree that the experience of playing Egypt under two different leaders is bigger that two entirely different civs in other games.

Units have their own mechanics that turns battles into a strategic challenge, and the A.I. knows how to fight.

Development of your cities has interesting depth thanks to adapting to changing circumstances rather than following a pre-determined plan. This is partly because technology differences aren't normally decisive by themselves despite adding new options, so you need to take game events into account rather than just bee-line towards the part where you roll over the swordsmen with tanks.

I notice that some gamers dislike the sound of the orders system, but where you can order every unit every turn aren't actually "you get to do that", they are "you have to do that" because the game is balanced for using every worker unit every turn. In Old World you don't get swamped with thousands of actions with tiny effects each for the sake of the cumulative effect of them all together, in Old World you make strategic decisions based on your priorities instead.

The wariness about not placing cities anywhere leave out that you can place hamlets/villages and forts anywhere so in reality you can't put the specific collection of game mechanics associated with major cities instead of villages and forts anywhere.

The DLC's add so much to the game that you should wait for a discount over getting base game only.

While it's certainly smaller in scope than Civ, and suffers some late game bloat, the addition of the orders system, events, the technology deck, and ambitions (as an alternative victory condition) are all great innovations.

Great game-play, although the game is rather bugged and it's constantly freezing. No BSOD or any other error, nothing in event viewer to show what's wrong, system has to be restarted through the physical button as otherwise you're looking at a frozen screen.
Hopefully that'll get fixed soon

very nice and addictive. Similar to Civ series but with its own twists (family and people dynamics especially). Research is different too.

I love Civilization 1 and 3. Played a little V. Own VI but doesn't play a lot of it. Try to get into Paradox games but cannot hold long. This game looks like a good "compromise" between Civ and Paradox games.

I really want to like this game

All the ingredients are there for a really cool and unique game. The issue is they are spread too thin. I feel as though this game has a bit of an identity crisis, it uses a civ style 4x4 medium to play the game what makes it cool is its way more than that, theres a million games that use such a medium go play them if thats what you want. But the systems and dynamics theyve laid on top - politics, interpersonal relationships, etc is what sets this game apart. unfortunately these systems lack depth, every new DLC that comes out i get excited that it will flesh out these systems but am consistently disappointed. Sacred and Profane was a step in the right direction but it still mostly an event pack. What this game needs is more direct control and management of such systems and in a much deeper manner.

Very good game. With more improvements it could be a solid replacement for Civ games.

Highly replayable, much less sucecptible to end game snowballing than most 4x games.

There are enough similarities to Civ to satisfy fans of the game, but more than enough tweaks and enhancements to make it a very different game. You'll focus on a small 200 year span of history that isn't directly tied to actual human history, but basically takes place within the 2000 BCE to 0 time window. Civs begin with individual characteristics with different starting conditions and advantages, but will take shape much more based on the strengths, weaknesses, and personalities of key leaders and your decisions about where to take your Civ. Your strategies, too, will need to adapt to the realities of your situation and your opponents. You can't (or probably shouldn't anyway) follow a formula to apply to every game. Can't just take the same Civ, build the same war machine or economic power, and smash your opponents every game. You'll have to adapt to the realities of each game, and determine your best approach.
I didnt expect to like this game this much, I expected just a re-hash of Civ. It is much more than that, yet there are enough similarities that you'll understand the gist of the game pretty quickly. I highly recommend this game - but only if you have a lot of spare time for your new obsession lol.

Eat a plate of feces OR Drink a jug of urine: every "event" in the game.

Also, you want to make your third child an Ambassador? Ha ha, despite their education subject having 4 career options with 2 of them being for that role, you better believe when they graduate the only 2 out of the 4 options the game will give you will NOT be for the role you want; even after the tedious save-scumming and cheesing you gone through the last decade to get alright outcomes from the education events this whole time, your "choice" always goes back to eating crap or drinking piss.

Ridiculously frustrating. And this is essentially baby mode, no issues with rival realms or barbarians or tribes, no threats there to the nation; all gameplay hamstring lock-outs for just character management and development. It wouldn't be so bad if all these lock-outs and restrictions on player choice didn't feel so random and arbitrary.

It is sad because what the game tries to do is incredible. I love Civilization, and I love Crusader Kings (genealogical aspects), and Old World is a game that has both of these, and does actually do it. The interface is solid, and the aesthetics of the game are great. But this hamstringing of choice and allowed player actions is just completely infuriating and undermines any enjoyment of the game. I would NEVER purchase this game full price (I got it $10 deep discount Spring 2025).

To new to it to really give a detailed review. But I do really enjoy the layers and depth of play. The Families really make a difference as well as assigning Ambassadors, Chancellors, Spymasters and Trade. The game has a lot going on and that's appreciated.

Best of the "civ-like" games that I've tried. Mix of Crusader Kings-style character mechanics with classic 4X empire building gameplay. The games focus is on iron age antiquity so the nations and tech stays centered on that. More granular than civ, with many resources to collect and spend on units/buildings/government actions.

The most interesting and unique resource is orders, and orders economy is what really sets this game apart. Every action you take uses its own resource, orders, making this the most powerful resource in the game and leading to many interesting decisions.

Bit of a learning curve and the event/character RNG can be a bit punishing at times, but once you wrap your head around it this game is becomes very good. Best civ-like game I've played since Civ 4.

If you want to play in a proper 4A game - this should be your choice. It keeps good balance of amount and quality of mechanics. It's not a gazillion of stuff that impossible to balance, like in Civ.

And it has unusual stuff, like families, etc.

I wish I could give a rating that's between yes and no. This game is such a cool mix of new and borrowed ideas and I want to like it. Unfortunately, every run turns into a micromanagement slog mid-late game and there just isn't enough differentiating the factions to keep things mixed up. I feel like I've gotten everything out of this game I can get.

Excellent game with enormous depth. Takes time and patience.

Similar to Civ. I like it. Almost a narrative game, if you're into that sort of thing. I actually am not, but tolerate it. A lot of the same things are repeated often between turns.

I wanted to like this game as I used to love the Civilization series but have been disappointed with it from Civ 5 onward. Unfortunately Old World (OW) ends up leaving me with a "meh" feeling. To explain, I find the game forcing you into certain city build areas takes away strategic planning. So too with workers ... there is rarely a need to override their recommendations so that takes away any need for planning. Like Civ you need resources to build things which you get through worker developments (technically Civ gives you them with the terrain as well but you optimize with improvements) but in OW there is some sort of "god" market from whence you can buy and sell unlimited resources, which magically appear or disappear from your inventory. Sadly, that's just silly and doesn't encourage a player to strategize resource development ... you just need lots of one resource or money to buy/sell your way to where you want to be. Empire building I also found less than stimulating. You start out building as many settlers as possible to scoop up all the empty city sites, then you focus on taking over the nearby tribes because there isn't really any benefit to keeping them around (I was allied with one and they didn't help during wars and didn't send me any resources that I could tell). After that there seems little reason to fight any major civilizations as you walk to a simple points victory. I could point out other things that made the game "meh" but I instead decided to play Civ 4.

I really wanted to like this game, but ultimately I can't recommend it. It does have a lot of nice touches in it, but the tutorial does not do a great job of explaining all of the various mechanics, and on some level it's just too busy. I don't need all of the shrines to build, and the family dynamics feel like they get in the way, and aren't totally explicable. I wanted a better civ, but I got something fairly different.

A lot of the standard things for games in this genre, but what I really enjoyed about it is the family/succession management. It's like the Sims meets Civ. Lots of fun.

This game is so deep, but it wears its depth so lightly. Everything interacts with everything else, but you can choose how much you want to immerse yourself in it all, and for me it was only at the upper difficulty levels that it really became necessary to study the systems. Yes, in many ways it's just Civilisation meets Crusader Kings, but I prefer it to either of those games: the characters and events give it so much more narrative interest than Civilisation, but equally the 4X structure gives it so much more direction than Crusader Kings. My biggest criticism is what a lot of other people have said: the gameplay differences amongst the nations are trivial, which means tomorrow's run with Greece is going to feel pretty much the same as yesterday's with Rome. Also, it's not exactly rich with visual spectacle, but then again I wouldn't choose a big-budget game with a bunch of loose ends and missing pieces over a mid-budget game with an obsessive attention to detail.

If you want a Civ-style game that is head-and-shoulders above Civ and is focused on classical antiquity of the Mediterranean and the Middle East, buy this game. I hope this developer goes on to make more games in this vein and look forward to buying them. There are innovations and quality of life improvements here that should have been in all games of this type years ago. The AI is shockingly competent, especially for combat. This game goes to show just how smaller and more focused developers can vastly outproduce major game studios these days.

All right, was sitting on this game for a long time, and admittedly kinda found it a tad hard to get into at first. But this little gem had that spark that pulled me closer. And part of that was, for me, the soundtrack.
It combines Greek orthodox church chants in both Greek and Arabic, and other middle eastern bangers that boldly link the Middle-East of the bronze age to that of more recent times. And that is not to mention the peppering of some of Phillip Glass' violin concertos, making the gameplay loop nigh unstoppable as the constant stream of pure musical gratification is bliss, and stopping that is just painful. The score sets a tone that proudly shows a love for the setting of this game, despite any historical mismatches. Frankly the only thing missing is Peter Pringle singing the Epic of Gilgamesh ;)

I'm not sure if soundtrack is something most players think a lot about, but it was a huge part of why I enjoyed spending so much time playing Civ 5, something that it's descendants in the series have blundered with tonal mismatches, non civilisation specific music and an almost offensive orchestral tone. Old World on the other hand solves this by scaling back its width and deepening it's scope. And that approach is insightful in more ways than one.

Another aspect Old World deeply understands is the desire to experience the story of your empire. The character driven gameplay intermingled with a surprisingly rich event system immersed me into the game, worrying about schemes against me, cheating on my married partner with some power-hungry up and comer, assassinating my heir because another royal succeeding me would be better for the nation... The order system adds to that in the sense that you're not some disconnected all controlling entity moving your pawns, but a ruler of an ancient kingdom trying to coordinate its expansion within the limits of your command structure.

Frankly, if you've been reading until here, just try it, start a game, restart when you realise you fucked up, and keep playing. Learning the mechanics of this game can be a bit daunting, but once you get it you start to realise how all of the resources dance together in what I consider to be one of the better balanced 4X games I've ever played.

fun enough for a while, but the base game gets fairly dull.
sadly, the mod system does not work. you are stuck on an infinite loading screen "please wait, checkng mods"
don't check the mods just load the freaking files, how hard can it be?