[NFP] POLL: Civilization: historical or fantasy game?

What Civilization game should be like? More or less realistic?

  • As historical as it possibly can. No exceptions!

    Votes: 14 5.2%
  • Historical in general. Some less historical content is ok but NO! to any mythic or SF stuff!

    Votes: 104 38.5%
  • Basically historical, but some fantasy in a game is ok. Even SF and myths don't bother me much

    Votes: 97 35.9%
  • 100% historical with one exception. Fantasy features are ok only in separate small fantasy DLC

    Votes: 29 10.7%
  • Devs can go nuts with fiction. No problem with myths, SF, pop culture if they are well designed

    Votes: 26 9.6%

  • Total voters
    270
* starts with the strength of your strongest unit.
I want to point out for clarification that the vampire's base strength will always be the strength of the current melee unit you have unlocked in the game.
Edit: Nevermind I guess this doesn't seem to be the case. I assumed so because the strength stayed the same when I got archers.

If anyone wants a "nonmagical" explanation, it's basically an assassin unit that can hop across a global network of bases, gets better at killing with practice, and is so elusive that it can't be killed, only maimed, at which point it retreats and regroups.
Yes the unit literally does look like an assassin in game. The fact that you can also name it means you can give it a historical assassin's name if you want.
 
Last edited:
That I actually like the secret societies mechanics makes its clumsy aesthetic approach all the more frustrating for me. As I mention in another post, I'd like to see Civ just repackage religions using the secret society mechanics. This would liven up the incredibly dull religious game while giving secret societies an acceptable aesthetic veneer.
I agree. I hope they drop Religious Victory and rework religion into something passive in Civ7; religion should be something the state reacts to, not invents. After a religion is encountered or founded, then you can make it the state religion and promulgate it and have religious wars and all of that.
 
I agree. I hope they drop Religious Victory and rework religion into something passive in Civ7; religion should be something the state reacts to, not invents. After a religion is encountered or founded, then you can make it the state religion and promulgate it and have religious wars and all of that.
If anything I can see them expanding on the religious victory with cultists now.
 
If anything I can see them expanding on the religious victory with cultists now.
I can see it, too, but I don't want it. :p While on the whole I feel like Civ6 is a superior game to Civ5, all of Civ5's victory conditions felt far more compelling than Civ6's; the end game in Civ6 is just tedious--and in an attempt to make it less so Gathering Storm made it more so. :(
 
and you know this how? The game isn't even out yet and you are complaining that it will be bad just by the announcement?
Also I told you before :
ALL SECRET SOCIETIES HAVE BASIS ON HISTORY!

If you cared to read the post of mine you quoted, you would see that it referred to Apocalypse mode, which has been out for some time. Also, pushing entire army units into active volcanoes does not have a "basis on history" [sic]. It is just a silly idea.
 
I can see it, too, but I don't want it. :p While on the whole I feel like Civ6 is a superior game to Civ5, all of Civ5's victory conditions felt far more compelling than Civ6's; the end game in Civ6 is just tedious--and in an attempt to make it less so Gathering Storm made it more so. :(

Eh, the culture victory was really lame before BNW. And in BNW, it was a lot like it is in Civ VI. I do miss that awesome pen scratching sound, though.
 
Eh, the culture victory was really lame before BNW.
Civ5 was really lame before BNW; we don't talk about those dark times. :p

And in BNW, it was a lot like it is in Civ VI.
On paper, yes, it looks similar to BNW's, but in practice it doesn't feel anything like it. Civ5's Culture Victory felt much more proactive and involved.
 
On paper, yes, it looks similar to BNW's, but in practice it doesn't feel anything like it. Civ5's Culture Victory felt much more proactive and involved.

I guess I'll have to take your word for it. I played a lot of Civ V back in the day, but I haven't played V since VI was released. My memory isn't good enough to remember how cultural victories felt.

... But I'm pretty sure that it was mostly building wonders, collecting great works, and generating tourism that overpowers everyone's culture. So... bring back the pen scratch sound?
 
I guess I'll have to take your word for it. I played a lot of Civ V back in the day, but I haven't played V since VI was released. My memory isn't good enough to remember how cultural victories felt.

... But I'm pretty sure that it was mostly building wonders, collecting great works, and generating tourism that overpowers everyone's culture. So... bring back the pen scratch sound?
I think the difference is tourism interacted with other systems in Civ5 so it didn't feel like filling up an isolated bucket like it does in Civ6.
 
I think the difference is tourism interacted with other systems in Civ5 so it didn't feel like filling up an isolated bucket like it does in Civ6.
Since religion and tourism already go hand in hand I think the easiest thing to do is let artifacts produce some sort of science to differentiate from other great works.
Other things could be letting amphitheaters generate amenities or Art Museums granting gold when themed.
 
Top Bottom