Does Civ 6 have the potential to surpass Civ 4?

[labellavienna]

Hello, I'm wondering if based on your current impressions, does Civ 6 have the capability to be even better than Civ 4/5?

 

[ruhrgebietheld]

If you're part of the crowd that thinks Civ 4 is the franchise's crowning achievement, I suspect that there are factors at play that would prevent Civ VI from ever surpassing it in your eyes. If you don't already think that Civ 5 was better than Civ 4, you probably won't think that Civ 6 could ever be better than it either.

 

[lamaros]

Did you mistype Civ 5, OP?

 

[Acken]

Maybe.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

I'd lean no because I think 1UPT will be the fatal flaw (I know, I know, others love 1UPT, just my opinion). I think it'll be a pretty awesome game though.

 

[lamaros]

I'd lean no because I think 1UPT will be the fatal flaw (I know, I know, others love 1UPT, just my opinion). I think it'll be a pretty awesome game though.

Ed Beach has a pretty good record in addressing issues and making the game better over time.

I like 1UPT, too.

 

[Biz_]

it doesn't have much chance the way multiplayer has been designed

maybe if they perform miracles on the AI it might become a better game overall, but that's unlikely to happen

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Ed Beach has a pretty good record in addressing issues and making the game better over time.

I like 1UPT, too.

I think he has done and will do a great job, and that Civ VI will be a really good game. But I also think that in the end, the AI will never know how to fight, and combat will always be an absurdly easy charade. The non-combat portions of the game will be really strong though.

 

[lamaros]

I think he has done and will do a great job, and that Civ VI will be a really good game. But I also think that in the end, the AI will never know how to fight, and combat will always be an absurdly easy charade. The non-combat portions of the game will be really strong though.

There is no doubt that the AI will struggle with the combat side, but I do think they will significantly improve it upon what it is now. Basics like units upgrading, etc, will at the least be better.

 

[ThERat]

I am a little puzzled as to why Ed Beach let so many strange balance issues slip into the game. A few games and you know that Civ6 is sort of Civ 2 broken. All those easy exploits should have never found their way into the game

 

[Coastchub]

If the modding is as strong as it was for IV, then yes. Otherwise no. *hoping for FFH and Rhye's*

 

[CaiusDrewart]

I am a little puzzled as to why Ed Beach let so many strange balance issues slip into the game. A few games and you know that Civ6 is sort of Civ 2 broken. All those easy exploits should have never found their way into the game

I can't believe they didn't connect the dots between unit selling and things like builder charges and Scythia's UA. All that seems like it should be immediately obvious. Oh well, I'm sure it'll get fixed soon.

 

[wiggawuu]

The new movement penalties make moving units a bit aggravating, but whatch ya gonna do?

 

[Proteus]

I am sure it has lots of potential to surpass Civ V (especially thanks to tghe distrcits mechanic)
Dunno about Civ IV however, especially the large differences in combat system (1 UPT vs. stacks) make them hard to compare

 

[Sobornost]

My opinion:

Balancing of things is bound to happen so I'm not worried about that part.
Missing little feature and conveniences are bound to show up or be ameliorated in some way, not worried about that.
Mods will come in due time, it should at least be as vibrant as Civ 5, not too worried about that. Though Civ 4 I think was easier to work with. Love to have a Rhye's and Fall of Civ for Civ 6 someday.
Civ 6 seems to already be intent on working off of Civ 5's great array of interlocking features, not too worried about that.

I am worried that the AI will always be worse off that what it would be without 1UPT.
I am worried that 1UPT will always be a boring slog (maybe others enjoy it, but I definitely do not) to move all your units around with while at war.
I am worried that because of the complexity, plenty of systems (which on its own is good) that Civ6 does have that like Civ5 it'll take a good bit longer than Civ4 to really get into a solid well polished state.

On the side, I seem to remember Civ 4 games being brisker than Civ 5 games were. AI turns were definitely snappier. Playing through on epic speed with a friend online worked and was tolerable, even with us being both major imperialists. Maybe that's just another 1UPT problem too.

If Civ 6 doesn't surpass Civ 4 in my view, 1UPT is going to be most likely to blame. I don't see the other areas where they'll either keep pace with or exceed Civ 4 being that unrealistic to expect at all. 1UPT being just lame, from start to finish... yep plenty of reason to expect that. Sorry, like the other poster said I know other people like it. I do not. Seriously, what a wasted chance to implement limited-unit armies or something. The broad view seemed to be that a hybrid system was going to be the future of things, ameliorating the problems of both extremes and giving us something we all can like.

 

[ThERat]

I am worried that 1UPT will always be a boring slog (maybe others enjoy it, but I definitely do not) to move all your units around with while at war.

Unfortunately, you are dead right. In my first AW game, the AI was a total pushover. But moving the units around with the many end of move restrictions is a total nightmare.

 

[Proteus]

... Seriously, what a wasted chance to implement limited-unit armies or something. The broad view seemed to be that a hybrid system was going to be the future of things, ameliorating the problems of both extremes and giving us something we all can like.

The combat/army system of Civ Call to Power was such a thing.
It not only had a limit on army size (18 units IIRC), but also had all units take a role (Melee, Ranged, Flanking) in combat, so that players who would assemble their armies with a combined arms approach would be rewarded by a lage synergy of all of their units.

Not only did it have less micromanagement than 1UPT, but also had a combat in which you actually felt that 2 armies battle against each other ... a feeling that I never had this way in the normaql Civ combat (not even before 1 UPT, when SM-Civ still had stacks)

I still hope for a future Sid Meiers-Civ that implements such a system.
(To be more exactly it is my opinion that a "Greatest Civ of all times" would be one, that sensibly implements both, elements of Civ Call to Power (I/II), as well as elements of the newer parts of SM-Civ)

 

[Mr.WorldWide]

I don't think there will be another civ game that can beat the scope and scale of civ 4 mods such as RFC and FFH2 but as someone who loves 4 I think the default 6 experience is much better already.

 

[Pepo]

Nope, it can't. Unless they seriously rework the ai (not going to happen) or the diplo (Civ V diplo sucks after all the patches, so no likely to happen) it isn't going to happen. There are ofc other problems that I believe that are solvable , but 1upt did a lot of damage to the Civ franchise

 

[Mike Louis]

As long as 1upt remains on the main strategic map, the AI will always have problems with it. A better solution would've been to have the main map have unit stacks and squares while a separate tactical map (which you'll zoom in from the main map) have hexes and 1upt from which you can do the battles. A separate tactical map will also allow for naval transport units to make their return and also for airborne units once you get into the modern era.