Search results

Thanks!

Thanks for the reply. The game was started on the 7th of March, saved three times on the 8th, and crashed on the 10th. I don't know exactly when the "March update" was released, but the explanation may fit.

This particular game crashes every time on pressing Next Turn after turn 146. I've tried changing details in the situation, but it goes on crashing regardless. No mods.

My latest game has halted with a persistent crash when I click Next Turn at the end of turn 146. I don't use any mods, and haven't had this problem before, although I've been playing Civ 6 since it was released. I suppose I'll have to abandon the game, which is a pity, because it was going quite...

I just ignore religion. Not worth the trouble.

I sometimes play a peaceful game and don't take cities. However, if I start taking cities, I feel better if I can make a clean job of it and eliminate that opponent.

Clearly, this thread is about the single-player game. To win a multiplayer game with a policy of non-aggression (and not taking cities) would certainly be a challenge, but probably too much of a challenge. The non-aggression policy that I've described is just a voluntary decision by the player...

Thanks for the suggestion. I haven't considered it, because I have none of the funny little gadgets on which it runs: I use a computer running Windows. However, it seems to be much the same sort of game as Civ for Windows.

Because I find that capturing cities is a repetitive and tedious process, and I get bored with it. I have captured quite a few cities in the past, but I have more fun founding my own cities than capturing other people's. If I don't enjoy a large section of the game, it seems rational to ignore...

Possibly, but so far I haven't bought any DLC and don't know exactly how that scenario works. For example, I see that it's limited to 60 turns, so I suspect that it doesn't start in the ancient period; and I like starting in the ancient period. I suppose I could buy the DLC and find out...

After experimenting with non-aggression for a while, I appreciate spending less time and effort pursuing wars. However, (a) I still have wars to fight from time to time, even if only defensively, (b) fighting less often and less hard doesn't seem to benefit my non-military sector as much as I'd...

Recently I started turning off barbarians, and so far I feel no urge to turn them back on. Just an annoying nuisance.

Scouts are useful for scouting because they're cheap, fast (especially with promotions), and don't seem to annoy other civs. In the early game, they usually have enough defensive strength to survive one attack (after which they can run away). Of course, I find them particularly useful now that...

So far, I haven't noticed much effect. I still want most of the things I wanted before, apart from battering rams, siege engines, and catapults. There are probably some policy cards that are less useful, but I didn't tend to use them anyway because there are others that I found more useful.

As an experiment, I've decided to adopt non-aggression as a principle when playing Civ 6. For me, this has the following implications: Don't declare any wars. Don't capture any cities. Turn off barbarians. Because they're designed to be intolerably annoying unless you wipe them out. Anyway, the...

Really? Perhaps you played with all the addons. I played Civ 4 quite a lot, but stuck to the basic game. Which is what you should be comparing Civ 6 with, because the addons for Civ 6 haven't arrived yet. I can't play Civ 4 now, it won't install on my current computer. In any case, I played it...

You think Civ 6 is less complex than Civ 1? Blimey. It's a pity that old games are hard to play again because the environment changes, so we have only vague memories of what they were like.

I agree with the points I've quoted, but I don't agree that the game is going backwards: I think I enjoy it about as much as I ever did. The problem is that it's improving things marginally, while not fixing the main defects that the game has always had since version 1: it's too long and...

I don't think it's likely; but, if it worries you, you can turn off religious victory in the advanced setup when starting a game.

I think you can safely ignore religion completely (as I do) unless you want to try for a religious victory. The religious aspect of this game is poorly conceived and almost disconnected from the rest of the game. I play for score, and religion contributes little to the score, so I don't bother...