Civ 6 Domination Victory

isau

isau

Deity
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
3,071
Have we seen an actual screenshot of the Domination Victory conditions in Civ 6 yet? This is one area I am on pins and needles about. I'm hopeful they've changed from Civ 5, but don't want to get too disappointed. Is there a screenshot of them that's turned up?
 
I thought they changed domination victory to percentage of land conquered - but from this video it's obvious that domination victory is still the same like in civ 5 - you need to conquer capital cities. What a bummer, i don't like this ... since you can't keep a friend or two and still win domination. I am really negatively surprised by this, because i swear i was reading somewhere that domination victory condition is different from civ 5.
 
Balkans said:
I thought they changed domination victory to percentage of land conquered - but from this video it's obvious that domination victory is still the same like in civ 5 - you need to conquer capital cities. What a bummer, i don't like this ... since you can't keep a friend or two and still win domination. I am really negatively surprised by this, because i swear i was reading somewhere that domination victory condition is different from civ 5.
Click to expand...

You can still switch to science victory.. and kill all youre enemies
 
Balkans said:
I thought they changed domination victory to percentage of land conquered - but from this video it's obvious that domination victory is still the same like in civ 5 - you need to conquer capital cities. What a bummer, i don't like this ... since you can't keep a friend or two and still win domination. I am really negatively surprised by this, because i swear i was reading somewhere that domination victory condition is different from civ 5.
Click to expand...

Saying you can't "keep a friend or two" in domination, is like saying you can't avoid researching techs in "science victory"...that's the point.
(Although you can keep friends in Domination, you just have to take their capital pre-renaissance so they know who dominates the friendship)
 
Acken said:
Why is it necessary to have friends that will help you win always sounded strange to me :/
Click to expand...

Isn't it the same concept as research agreements; friends helping you win science victory? Or friends who you can buy World Congress votes from for diplo victory?
 
KrikkitTwo said:
Saying you can't "keep a friend or two" in domination, is like saying you can't avoid researching techs in "science victory"...that's the point.
(Although you can keep friends in Domination, you just have to take their capital pre-renaissance so they know who dominates the friendship)
Click to expand...

But you usually can win a science victory without researching some techs.
 
Lucius_ said:
Isn't it the same concept as research agreements; friends helping you win science victory? Or friends who you can buy World Congress votes from for diplo victory?
Click to expand...

Sure, but you still end up beating them directly in science, you still directly get more votes than them. If you win a domination victory without defeating them you aren't directly dominating them.
 
KrikkitTwo said:
Saying you can't "keep a friend or two" in domination, is like saying you can't avoid researching techs in "science victory"...that's the point.
(Although you can keep friends in Domination, you just have to take their capital pre-renaissance so they know who dominates the friendship)
Click to expand...

That's not the point. Civ IV allowed you to do that.
Domination is about dominating. The fact that a few city states and a lone civ remain not under your control shouldn't matter if you control 80% of the map.
 
I like the civ V domination victory as to win it all other civs must have lost a war or atleast their capital while you still control yours.
 
What i meant by keeping a friend was more like - for example - i'm in the middle of pangea, i keep good relations with 2 civs from edges, cause a few wars, manipulate, kill neighbours and claim my throne on two thirds of a map ... yea , it's a few turns to crush remaining civs but where is the fun in that.. but never mind, it's just an image of how i perceived a more interesting domination game..
 
Civ IV/III domination wasn't purely a focus on military, it was more to represent your Civilization controlling so much of the land and population to make global influence a certainty. While you may achieve much of that via military might, you certainly also acquired a good deal of it from simply claiming land and growing cities. Heck, there was even a Realms Beyond challenge that called for achieving a Domination victory with "always peace" enabled.

"Conquest" was an entirely separate victory condition that depends on eliminating all rivals. Civ V seems to discarded Conquest and made Domination the military victory type. Civilization VI is continuing the trend.
 
Magil said:
Civ IV/III domination wasn't purely a focus on military, it was more to represent your Civilization controlling so much of the land and population to make global influence a certainty. While you may achieve much of that via military might, you certainly also acquired a good deal of it from simply claiming land and growing cities. Heck, there was even a Realms Beyond challenge that called for achieving a Domination victory with "always peace" enabled.

"Conquest" was an entirely separate victory condition that depends on eliminating all rivals. Civ V seems to discarded Conquest and made Domination the military victory type. Civilization VI is continuing the trend.
Click to expand...

It certainly seems so. I wouldn't mind if they renamed the victory to "Conquest."
My hope is that the new religious victory type ends up playing similarly to classic domination, especially with the holy war mechanic. Having a large stretching empire with tons of pressure is pretty much (religious) domination.
 
I might actually find myself getting a domination victory if it was tied to say global population % as opposed to "kill everyone"/"be the only one retaining original capital". I find conquest victories tedious and if the text is right Civ 6 is going to be worse than Civ 5. If you were lucky in Civ 5 some horrible warmonger captured a bunch of capitals and then you just had to grab his.
 
It was discussed several times. The approach to conquest victory could be:

Civ4 (% of territory).
Pros: Don't need to attack your allies, unless they are big enough.
Cons: Could be won (and lost) relatively early, so to protect yourself from losing you may need to do conquest if you were planning to play peacefully.

Civ5 (control capitals):
Pros: Need to actually defeat everyone. Allows real peaceful play, since protecting your land is enough to not loose conquest.
Cons: To win you need to attack your allies.

We know in Civ6 you need to control all original capitals to win, but the tricky thing is - we don't know what the word "control" means. The first big difference from Civ5 is what original capitals could be razed - we don't know how the game calculates this situation (most likely it counts as -1 capital to be controlled). Also, there could be diplomatic option to somehow dominate your ally, so his/her capital will count as "controlled" for conquest victory. We just don't know this yet.
 
Note that the Con you quote in Civ4 is considered as a pro by some players. Being forced to do something about the rest of the world in order not to lose rahter than just turtle is a plus for some players.
Also, Civ IV is % of territory AND pop. So you can't ICS your way to it.
 
LDiCesare said:
Note that the Con you quote in Civ4 is considered as a pro by some players. Being forced to do something about the rest of the world in order not to lose rahter than just turtle is a plus for some players.
Also, Civ IV is % of territory AND pop. So you can't ICS your way to it.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but in general being forced to conquer land while you're playing peacefully limits your strategies to conquest - more or less active.

IMHO, good victory conditions have active form and counterplay being different, so:
- For conquest victory you need to conquer your enemies. To defend against conquest victory you need protect your lands.
- For religious victory you need to convert other civlizations to your religion. To defend against religious victory you need to maintain another religion in your lands.
- For cultural victory you need to attract tourists from other civs. You could counter cultural victory with domestic tourism.

Science victory is an exception, but it could be used as late-game replacement for score victory. If no one is able to win in other ways, the most advanced civ could win science. This victory doesn't have "passive" counters - you need to either win first or use military or, probably, spies.
 
stealth_nsk said:
We know in Civ6 you need to control all original capitals to win, but the tricky thing is - we don't know what the word "control" means. The first big difference from Civ5 is what original capitals could be razed - we don't know how the game calculates this situation (most likely it counts as -1 capital to be controlled). Also, there could be diplomatic option to somehow dominate your ally, so his/her capital will count as "controlled" for conquest victory. We just don't know this yet.
Click to expand...

Wishful thinking. You are reading too much into it. It's just wording. I'm 99,9% sure it means exactly the same it meant in V.

I think domination should be renamed conquest and then introduced IV style domination as additional victory :p
Sure, they'll overlap quite a bit, but not as much as in IV, it was impossible to get to conquest before you reached domination IIRC. With V-VI style "conquest" it's very much possible, you could 'control' all capitals without 'dominating' 80% of land and vice versa.
 
Mustakrakish said:
Wishful thinking. You are reading too much into it. It's just wording. I'm 99,9% sure it means exactly the same it meant in V.
Click to expand...

There's one thing people often miss. Game developers aren't natural disaster, they are people who try to make the game as best as possible. If some idea is good (and something which looks good to players isn't necessary well for the game actually) and doesn't cost too much in development, developers are likely to put this in game.

The problem is - we don't know anything about late game diplomacy, so I can't say how well the idea fits in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

planetfall
Best diety game config options?
Replies
9
Views
647
DeckerdJames
D
K
Key mods for re-starting Civ 6
Replies
8
Views
2K
Jub64
J
B
Could use help as possible new player to Civ 6
Replies
8
Views
858
Konspiratsia
Konspiratsia
planetfall
What is the advantage, if any, of enabling barbs?
Replies
5
Views
454
planetfall
planetfall
L
Civ 6 King Level Ridiculousness
Replies
10
Views
1K
Oberinspektor Derrick
Oberinspektor Derrick
Back
Top Bottom