Civilization VI

Fight_sl said:

I think Civ4 + expansions was the better game to Civ5 + expansions. Both vanilla versions of the game were pretty shallow and bad.

The problem I have with Civ5 is that every game plays out the same way. It doesn't matter the leader you take, or the victory condition you go into the game seeking. The AI stupidity leads you down the same path each time. Around turn 150, you are forced down the path of least resistance and you realize "oh, this is turning out the exact same way the last 5 games did..."

Superior gold and economics --> Superior relationships and bonuses from City States --> Superior military and expansion --> gg

Click to expand...

Yeah, but there are some ways out there to use faith mechanics to Bomb the shit out of sciences and stuff. And Cultural victories are viable, just boring. There are a ton of interesting cities like Venice that change the experience, but yeah the core loop is the same, farm the fuck out of population and science. if you maximize your population you win the game, especially if you go down rationalism.

I'm pissed. I just learned about this on a fucking Engadget article with the subtitle "One unit per turn is gone." I got so excited, thinking if one unit per turn is gone maybe they're going back to a lot of the core principles from IV, maybe even some features from 1+2. Then a little reading shows 1 UPT isn't really gone at all, you can just combine a couple units together so that each square can now both defend and attack well. Fuck that, I hate 1 UPT and will not be trying this out, especially with those shitty iOS graphics. The Civilization franchise is trying to cater to the common man the same way MMO's now try to do so. Hand holding and no danger. The danger level you feel in Civ V is a fucking joke compared to Civ IV.

My ideal next gen civ game starts with the core concepts of Civ IV (loved towns, don't know why they killed them in V), maybe takes some of the social policies from Civ V which was one of the few new features I really liked about that game. Bring back stacks, but implement some of the old school features to help with the SOD problem a bit. In Civ 1 and 2 when the top unit in a stack died, the whole f'ing stack died as long as it wasn't in a city or fort. So you could stack but you had to be very careful how you did it. That might be a bit extreme, but you could easily tune it a bit... kill the top unit in a stack and there's a variable chance to kill another 20-50% of the stack or something... it's not hard to fix SOD's without going to the shitty 1 UPT.

So many old school players hated 1 UPT, and Firaxis is saying we don't care. They put a tiny band aid on it with this crappy unit combination thing (did not care for armies in Civ 3), but for the most part it seems they just don't want to admit they were wrong on it. Will definitely not be putting my money towards this unless I see some old school Civ players giving it a lot of props and say it's more like the originals (1-4) than Civ 5.

You mean one unit per tile?

Pharazon_sl said:

In Civ 1 and 2 when the top unit in a stack died, the whole f'ing stack died as long as it wasn't in a city or fort. So you could stack but you had to be very careful how you did it. That might be a bit extreme, but you could easily tune it a bit... kill the top unit in a stack and there's a variable chance to kill another 20-50% of the stack or something... it's not hard to fix SOD's without going to the shitty 1 UPT.

Click to expand...

I've thought about the SOD vs 1UPT problem a bit and honestly I think the best way to solve it would to look at the supply limit mechanic in EU4. Different terrain offers different supply limits, and if you go over the supply limit with your stack then each month you take attrition.

So an example for this game would be - Ice 2, Tundra/desert 3, plains 4, grassland 5, forests -1, hills -1, jungle -2, coast +1. And then with different era techs you increase your supply limit. Each turn if you are over your supply limit, your whole stack takes 15% damage. Additionally you could use generals to either increase the supply limit or reduce the attrition rate/turn. And whats cool about this is that there would be a trade-off: Forests and Hills are better defensively to defend on but reduce your supply limit, so you'd have to make a decision between moving quickly and without attrition through normal land or take a more defensive route but move in smaller stacks.

Though in general, if I had to choose between 1UPT and SOD I'd rather do stacks. But I think there's a middle ground that can be done, and EU4 does it well imo.

I wish there was a way to highlite a bunch of units and tell them to move a general direction. It's a pain to embark a big army across an ocean etc.

The problem with Civ combat is that it's turn based but the combat isn't set up and resolved in turns simultaneously in a strategic engagement, it's like an odd quasi round robin thing.

Mist_sl said:

Combat has been bad in Civ for a long time, it is just a production war. 1 UPT didn't make it any worse I don't think.

Click to expand...

You couldn't defeat infinite units with 5 strategically well placed units in stack of doom engagements. That's the difference, and that's why combat in Civ 5 is trivial even on Diety.

Quineloe_sl said:

You couldn't defeat infinite units with 5 strategically well placed units in stack of doom engagements. That's the difference, and that's why combat in Civ 5 is trivial even on Diety.

Click to expand...

Unless you get a snowball Hiawatha, or Snowball Shaka, or Snowball Poland, or Snowball Washington, or Snowball Korea, or Snowball Russia. once they get planes you will never make any real progress until nukes /Xcom units. If they have enough cities to churn out 4-5 units per turn you will just have a war that wont end. If Korea is near you lategame their science boosts will fucking end you.

Yeah, that's the other thing. Standard game, all random, you might lose but not because you made mistakes, but because the AI cheating works so much stronger with some nations than with others.

Graphics look like shit. Thought it was an old Warcraft game. And it's not like the base game is going to be a huge evolutionary jump in game play over 5, which I could never get past about a hour of playtime (only thing I found interesting was making friends with city-states). Played all through 4 way too much, but wasn't ever into 5 enough to bother getting the expansions to fix the game, so probably won't even get 6 at all. I guess I've just outgrown the series or whatever. End of an era.

The Graphics are actually growing on me. I do like a ton of the stuff i heard/saw I really like. Like being able to place harbors without being a costal city, the use of rivers and stuff, rocky cliffs cant be embarked. The only thing is that if the AI is turds again it will not matter.


I would absolutely get the expansions and just TRY a few games. It makes the game have so much more depth. But ehh your money is your money.

Civ 4 stack of doom fix - New technology line, group dynamics: Can only stack 3 units until this is discovered, then you can stack 5 units. Group dyamics 2, stack 7units, etc. Set some final limit at 10units a stack or such.
Civ 5 fix - Get ride of city states! I play civ to rule the fucking world, not have to kiss ass to some punk ass city state that provides the ONLY way in game to get the resources I need to grow my empire!
Civ 6 fix - see above and fix the damn graphics!

Huge Maps and India or Russia and you can go as wide as possible. There is also a "witcher" map on the workshop that seems to encourage wide play. I am currently Greece with 8 cities and im rocking about 30 excess happiness and I haven't even built colliseum's yet. I'm taking composites and 3-4 Cavalries and a Hoplite and im trying to crush Siam before they get those stupid fucking OP elephants.


Wide play russia means getting as much strategic resources as possible and trading them for luxes you do not have, and keeping cities SUPER specialized, with low pops, except for science centers and the capital.

Jimbolini_sl said:

Hands-on: Civilization VI adds Teddy Roosevelt, ditches workers, and feels great | GameCrate

Click to expand...

Why are they writing "end of 1 unit per tile combat"? That is the one thing they're really happy with and keeping.

Ditching workers sounds very interesting though.

Random writers calling it the end because they can't process that the "support units" are just barnacles attached to actual units to give them a modular benefit; it's still effectively 1Unit Per Tile.

From UI/graphics looks like it's supposed to be on iOS or Android. :/