Too much sacrifice

[synthphase]

And no, I'm not talking about soothsayers.

In my most humble of personal, preferential opinions, Civ 6's balance hinges too much on player sacrifice to be really, really fun. It's all about the tiles you see. What I get my jolly's for is tiles. Good tile yields has always been one of the most immersive aspects of Civilization gameplay for me. Just look at those glittering luxuries along a sparkling coastline and harken to those herds of wild cows and sheep making their cute cow and sheep noises and - BAM! a commercial hub has destroyed your cows! You used a builder to slaughter all the sheep and now there's an oracle on the hill instead. Yay. Also a luxury is blocking a better spot for the commercial hub so that's fun.

In Ursa Ryan's tier list video he mentions these difficult sacrifices, particularly in regards to the Incan civilization's terrace farm. "There's huge competition for for those mountain tiles, normally if it's a good terrace farm, then it would also be a good campus, or a good holy site." This comment is what inspired me to make this post as I realized that "tile competition" can apply to any civilization in the game. I've gotten used to it somewhat, but I used to hate districts. I used to say that any game that requires you to have supplementary reference material is not a good game (in this case a jpg of districts and adjacency's) but now I kinda have it memorized so it's more fun. I would say Civ 6 is more punishing for new players then Civ 5 though, not to mention how hard it is for the ai to do proper district placement (plus 1 campus huzza!). District's are essentially a hidden mechanic for new players and amenity distribution is a hidden mechanic even for experienced players. And how many times do I need to play the game to know what wonders would be good to keep a spot open for next to this or that district? Oh, did I mention that that spot is also the best one in your entire empire for your unique building?

It's like the game is simultaneously encouraging min-max gameplay and discouraging it. Make up your mind, game. In other words it's saying you can have this but then you can't also have that. But just once, once I want to have this and that. Having both this and that is why I play video games, as I can't have my cake and eat it too irl.

Maybe I'm just not smart enough to play an optimal game of Civ 6, but when I put a holy site in a really sweet spot next to a natural wonder but in the process nuke a 6 yield tile, I just get a little sad.

 

[GloriousCause]

I understand your frustration. I often get mixed feelings when trying to decide between a good district placement and a solid tile yield. I have one mod on that leaves the woods on a tile that you place a district on. Not sure what the solution is, but I feel ya.

 

[DeckerdJames]

Placing a district is remaking the tile yields starting with the adjacency bonus.
I am not 100 that my numbers are correct below because this from memory, but they should be close.

In gathering storm according to fandom wiki
For example, a campus changes tile yields to science
Library +2
University +4
Unpowered Research Lab +3 and powered +8
Specialists +2 each until research lab built then +3 each so +9 max

So, the base yield with powered research lab is +23

Adjacency bonus is 0 to 6, maybe more, so let’s say the range is +23 to 29

Scientific City states enhance
1 envoy gives +1 to every library
3 envoys give +2 to every university
6 envoys give +3 to every research lab
Total +6 to every completed campus kit

That makes tile yields
+29 to 35 science with one city state with 6 envoys
+35 to 41 for two city states with 6 envoys each
+41 to 47 for three city states with 6 envoys each

If you find the choice difficult then perhaps you can build the district at a later time. Wait until the university or research lab is available in the city. Even a very good terrace farm with +7 food and +3 production might not stop you from placing a district that yields over 40 science. Also, if you must have the district early, consider whether you can do with a smaller adjacency bonus. As the game progresses even a district without any adjacency bonus can still be very good. For example, if you have a food rich city without mountains or reef, don’t be discouraged from placing a campus without an adjacency bonus if you need science, especially if you already have envoys in a scientific city state. With just one envoy and a library and specialist you would have +5 science on the tile which is good for the early game. You trade 2 food for +5 science total in that example. If you need production more than science, you still get +3 without the specialist. Worse case, you have a +2 library because you can’t afford the specialist and have not found a scientific city state. In that case you might produce some scouts or horse units to search for them.

City states are a big deal and really pump up the value of their corresponding districts. Not to mention, the first envoy in a city state always enhances the capital. Don’t forget the incredible diplomatic quarter. This district can be enhanced by all city states once you have the consulate and/or chancery. Choosing which city to place the diplomatic quarter in is a significant choice because like the capital it gains yields from industrial and militaristic city states when producing the relevant items. For example, if you plan to have a high production military academy where you will place the governor Magnus with the black marketeer promotion, the diplomatic quarter will boost that city’s production while producing units as you gain envoys in militaristic city states. That arrangement would allow you to produce corps or armies more quickly while getting an 80 percent discount on strategic resources from that academy, while units that don’t need resources can be produced elsewhere. If you are conquering the world the diplomatic quarter can be used that way. Of course, you could put that military academy and the diplomatic quarter in the capital, and you would get the bonus from the encampment, the capital, and the diplomatic quarter when producing units. Very powerful arrangement if you have placed your envoys into militaristic city states. The bonus is +1 to the capital unless it is gold when it is +2. Six envoys yield +6 to the buildings or +12 if it is gold. The diplomatic quarter gets a bonus to its 2 buildings at 3 and 6 envoys, so it gets +5 or else +10 if it is gold. With these numbers, each militaristic city state with six envoys would give +1 capital, +6 encampment buildings, and +5 diplomatic quarter buildings for a total of +12 production. Having 2 or 3 maxed militaristic city states is very impactful at +24 or +36 production bonus in the capital when producing units.

 

[UWHabs]

I kind of like having that balance. Do you put the holy site next to the volcano because that's the best holy site yields, or do you pray to the God of Fire that it will erupt 4 times in the next 10 turns?

I think the game would be a lot more boring with less decisions like that. I mean, often in games, I find if I end up in an area where it's too obvious which the good tiles are and which tiles should be made districted, it just ends up being a simple game of throwing districts down anywhere. Having to take a second to decide if the +3 campus that burns a good tile is better long-term than a +1 campus that used a bad tile is an interesting decision to make.

Of course, I wouldn't mind a few more ways to be able to better balance the yields. The civs where you can get those massive tile yields from their UI, or when you get that perfect Nazca Line desert so those desert tiles get super juicy yields is one of the most satisfying parts of the game.

 

[Marla_Singer]

To me the major problem here is a matter of immersion. All the fun about Civilization comes from the idea that we're playing "History". Even if we know it's an oversimplified version of it, we still need to believe in it. In that specific case, there's no historical reason to assume that we should have to choose between a resource and a district. That only makes sense from a pure and abstract board game perspective.

I actually enjoy a lot the idea about weighting pros and cons in a game like Civilization, and I would like even more of this if properly implemented, but it should be done with the intent to increase immersion.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

It's all about the tiles you see. What I get my jolly's for is tiles. Good tile yields has always been one of the most immersive aspects of Civilization gameplay for me.

This is disagree with.
In fact, one of my biggest pet peeves is how Firaxis went completely bonkers on tile yields in this iteration of civ, and just keeps adding ludicrous tile yields.
Yes, I know the masses want that so-called "yield porn" and find it fun, but I don't - it can break the game, and this is part of the reason why the game is so easy to abuse and why the late game sucks.
For instance, starting next to Païtiti is more of less game over, in the sense that you get ludicrous amounts of yields that make your Deity game into a King level game.
Similarly, the late game just showers the player with increasing yields on improved lands, and there's a ton of wonders that just keep adding more to the lands.
And this breaks the game in the late game, because you suddenly start unlocking techs and civics that massively inflate both tile yields and other yields.
Mine improvements techs, Petra, Ruhr Valley, natural disasters etc. are one example, or Light House + Sea Port + Shipyard + fishing boats/fisheries/kampungs + Mausoleum + Auckland + God of the sea as another example - it's just way too much stacked on top of each other.
Then come envoys, % modifiers from civics and policy cards, powered buildings on top of that.
It's very telling in this game that you perhaps spend 150 turns to reach the Industrial Era with perhaps 250 culture/science, and if you give it another 20-30 turns your yields explode and you are suddenly sitting at 800, maybe even 1000 culture/science and more gold and production than you could ever use.
So while the last part of the tech/civics tree contain 5 eras (industrial, modern, atomic, information and future), they essentially feel like two eras in the term of how extremely fast paced the game suddenly becomes before you win the game.

I recently played civ 5 again, and the difference is like night and day.
Having a standard 2f/2p tile at the start is really powerful, as those are very rare early on.
Heck, even an improved 2f/2p tile is very strong, and in general having more than 3-4 yields of a single type (for instance, food) is rather rare (standard mines for instance give 3 production early on, but no food or anything else for that matter).
And getting to the Industrial Era is no free win either, because you will be stuck with Gatling Guns and Great War Infantry for quite a while until you can upgrade to the next tech level in the Modern/Atomic eras, which also take quite a while to play through.

All in all, the yield porn that Firaxis introduced was a terrible idea and totally broke the pacing of the game.
I hope that civ 7 fixes this and reels in the insane yields that civ 6 could shower the player with.

 

[synthphase]

@Oberinspektor Derrick

I agree with that for lategame, but early you really have no hope of keeping pace with the ai's in terms of science unless you have some crazy campus adjacencies. Again, this probably has more to do with the way I play civ. I'm an old civ 1 - 5 player and that informs my play style quite a bit. Particularly when I'm not out-teching the ai I feel like I'm losing which for civ 6 does not mean you are losing as much apparently.

There's so much balancing that goes into a game like this, and while one can go to uni for statistical analysis, or game design I don't think there's specific field for balancing a 4x game. So one has to wonder if the method for balancing civ 6 was "let's just throw a lot of opposing choices together and see what happens" without working out the complicated logical puzzle of how all those choices fit together. They might work on their own and be fun for a bit, but they don't feel cohesive. It make's sense in a way that this would happen. Civ 1's formula was so simple: You have food, hammers and gold, those are the three balls that you're juggling. Each game added more balls...

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

@Oberinspektor Derrick

I agree with that for lategame, but early you really have no hope of keeping pace with the ai's in terms of science unless you have some crazy campus adjacencies. Again, this probably has more to do with the way I play civ. I'm an old civ 1 - 5 player and that informs my play style quite a bit. Particularly when I'm not out-teching the ai I feel like I'm losing which for civ 6 does not mean you are losing as much apparently.

There's so much balancing that goes into a game like this, and while one can go to uni for statistical analysis, or game design I don't think there's specific field for balancing a 4x game. So one has to wonder if the method for balancing civ 6 was "let's just throw a lot of opposing choices together and see what happens" without working out the complicated logical puzzle of how all those choices fit together. They might work on their own and be fun for a bit, but they don't feel cohesive. It make's sense in a way that this would happen. Civ 1's formula was so simple: You have food, hammers and gold, those are the three balls that you're juggling. Each game added more balls...

You can keep up without high campus adjacencies, in fact I almost never build campuses early but instead rely on either settling, warring or other opportunities that arise.
That being said, campuses with high adjacency is something I detest in this game, because it front loads so much power and makes no sense from an immersion standpoint.
Why a small village would build a campus half a country away (3 tiles) in some god forsaken mountain region in the year 3000 BC, is beyond me.

 

[UWHabs]

You can keep up without high campus adjacencies, in fact I almost never build campuses early but instead rely on either settling, warring or other opportunities that arise.
That being said, campuses with high adjacency is something I detest in this game, because it front loads so much power and makes no sense from an immersion standpoint.
Why a small village would build a campus half a country away (3 tiles) in some god forsaken mountain region in the year 3000 BC, is beyond me.

Yeah, I think part of the problem is that since we are thousand year old Gods who see the future, we know that investigating reefs and geothermal fissures are like super awesome science places. But I can't imagine 5000 years ago them garnering nearly the same level of science acumen. I seriously doubt that looking at underwater plants is helping you lean the physics to launch a 90kg projectile at an enemy. If you are lucky with a +4 or +5 campus spot early that can literally double your empire's science output vs if you don't have a similar spot.

I do think and hope that civ 7 adds more immersion pieces to the game. Like you should not be able to build a district that is not connected to your city centre until you're into like Civil Service or Urbanization or something like that. In fact, arguably districts themselves probably should barely exist until much later. I wonder what the game would be like if "districts" as we know them didn't even come online until like the T2 building time. A lot of the time, districts as a whole are a very modern concept forced into ancient times. It still irks me a little bit that I can't build a library and market in literally every city unless if I plonk down a boatload of other infrastructure first.

 

[synthphase]

Yeah, I think part of the problem is that since we are thousand year old Gods who see the future, we know that investigating reefs and geothermal fissures are like super awesome science places. But I can't imagine 5000 years ago them garnering nearly the same level of science acumen. I seriously doubt that looking at underwater plants is helping you lean the physics to launch a 90kg projectile at an enemy. If you are lucky with a +4 or +5 campus spot early that can literally double your empire's science output vs if you don't have a similar spot.

I do think and hope that civ 7 adds more immersion pieces to the game. Like you should not be able to build a district that is not connected to your city centre until you're into like Civil Service or Urbanization or something like that. In fact, arguably districts themselves probably should barely exist until much later. I wonder what the game would be like if "districts" as we know them didn't even come online until like the T2 building time. A lot of the time, districts as a whole are a very modern concept forced into ancient times. It still irks me a little bit that I can't build a library and market in literally every city unless if I plonk down a boatload of other infrastructure first.

Yeah that is definitely part of the immersion killing aspect. The city center and workable tile asset's change throughout history, but afaik the districts always look the same. For example, the first science district should be a potter's hut or something, rather then a 16th century campus and library.

Since I'm nitpicking, I also miss workers. The slamming down from heaven animations are literally fourth-wall breaking, reminding you that you are god, sitting up above all of the action, rather then watching a civilization unfold by itself.

What if districts didn't give adjacency bonus but instead built unit's that do give them? If you put a campus near a geothermal or lil mountain cubbyhole, it would still give an advantage because the "scientist" would wander over there faster to do projects, kinda like how Galileo works. I thought the specialists in Civ 1 were brilliant as they're so directly related to the civilization having enough production to allow some citizen's to have leisure time. I know it still works this way but being able to change from entertainer to scientist without having "slot's" for them is more realistic, as anyone can stop hunting and be a philosopher or an engineer. Or an Elvis.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

I do think and hope that civ 7 adds more immersion pieces to the game. Like you should not be able to build a district that is not connected to your city centre until you're into like Civil Service or Urbanization or something like that.

This is one of my top wishes for civ 7.
I like the districts, but spreading them out and away from the city centre for silly adjacencies doesn't make sense, especially in pre-modern times.
In fact, I'd love it if districts were natural "extensions" of the city as it keeps growing, so that you would want to cluster districts right next to the centre to mimic a city growing by natural means.
And then let those districts actually be a part of the city, and not just a dead tile generating yields.
I'm talking about having to extend city walls around the extended city centre as the city grows, and giving benefits of installing and expanding the electricity grid and sewers to new parts of the city as it keeps growing - A miniature sim city if you like.
Personally I'd love that.

Edit:
A version of this was in civ 5, which I miss.
The city centre, when freshly settled on turn 1, is essentially just a collection of a few mud huts.
But once you reach modern times and you get a city to around 25+ population, the number of skyscrapers just skyrocket and spread out and beyond the original hex and onto adjacent hex.
In civ 6, the city centre just changes the shape of the buildings, and even in the information and future era in a huge city, the city essentially just contains 5-6 buildings.
This breaks immersion for me, and I miss seeing the city grow like that.

 

[GloriousCause]

Placing a district is remaking the tile yields starting with the adjacency bonus.
I am not 100 that my numbers are correct below because this from memory, but they should be close.

In gathering storm according to fandom wiki
For example, a campus changes tile yields to science
Library +2
University +4
Unpowered Research Lab +3 and powered +8
Specialists +2 each until research lab built then +3 each so +9 max

So, the base yield with powered research lab is +23

Adjacency bonus is 0 to 6, maybe more, so let’s say the range is +23 to 29

Scientific City states enhance
1 envoy gives +1 to every library
3 envoys give +2 to every university
6 envoys give +3 to every research lab
Total +6 to every completed campus kit

That makes tile yields
+29 to 35 science with one city state with 6 envoys
+35 to 41 for two city states with 6 envoys each
+41 to 47 for three city states with 6 envoys each

If you find the choice difficult then perhaps you can build the district at a later time. Wait until the university or research lab is available in the city. Even a very good terrace farm with +7 food and +3 production might not stop you from placing a district that yields over 40 science. Also, if you must have the district early, consider whether you can do with a smaller adjacency bonus. As the game progresses even a district without any adjacency bonus can still be very good. For example, if you have a food rich city without mountains or reef, don’t be discouraged from placing a campus without an adjacency bonus if you need science, especially if you already have envoys in a scientific city state. With just one envoy and a library and specialist you would have +5 science on the tile which is good for the early game. You trade 2 food for +5 science total in that example. If you need production more than science, you still get +3 without the specialist. Worse case, you have a +2 library because you can’t afford the specialist and have not found a scientific city state. In that case you might produce some scouts or horse units to search for them.

City states are a big deal and really pump up the value of their corresponding districts. Not to mention, the first envoy in a city state always enhances the capital. Don’t forget the incredible diplomatic quarter. This district can be enhanced by all city states once you have the consulate and/or chancery. Choosing which city to place the diplomatic quarter in is a significant choice because like the capital it gains yields from industrial and militaristic city states when producing the relevant items. For example, if you plan to have a high production military academy where you will place the governor Magnus with the black marketeer promotion, the diplomatic quarter will boost that city’s production while producing units as you gain envoys in militaristic city states. That arrangement would allow you to produce corps or armies more quickly while getting an 80 percent discount on strategic resources from that academy, while units that don’t need resources can be produced elsewhere. If you are conquering the world the diplomatic quarter can be used that way. Of course, you could put that military academy and the diplomatic quarter in the capital, and you would get the bonus from the encampment, the capital, and the diplomatic quarter when producing units. Very powerful arrangement if you have placed your envoys into militaristic city states. The bonus is +1 to the capital unless it is gold when it is +2. Six envoys yield +6 to the buildings or +12 if it is gold. The diplomatic quarter gets a bonus to its 2 buildings at 3 and 6 envoys, so it gets +5 or else +10 if it is gold. With these numbers, each militaristic city state with six envoys would give +1 capital, +6 encampment buildings, and +5 diplomatic quarter buildings for a total of +12 production. Having 2 or 3 maxed militaristic city states is very impactful at +24 or +36 production bonus in the capital when producing units.

Wow D. James, thanks for the insight. You should write a Civ 6 strategy guide. I learned a lot about Diplo Quarter, envoys and specialists Thanks

 

[DeckerdJames]

Wow D. James, thanks for the insight. You should write a Civ 6 strategy guide. I learned a lot about Diplo Quarter, envoys and specialists Thanks

Your welcome GloriousCause! City States are very important. I wish I had learned it sooner.

 

[iammaxhailme]

in a way, I kind of miss 5 where you couldn't chop or harvest as many things. except when I played inca and got some terrace farms ruined by sheep...

 

[ezzlar]

This is one of my top wishes for civ 7.
I like the districts, but spreading them out and away from the city centre for silly adjacencies doesn't make sense, especially in pre-modern times.
In fact, I'd love it if districts were natural "extensions" of the city as it keeps growing, so that you would want to cluster districts right next to the centre to mimic a city growing by natural means.
And then let those districts actually be a part of the city, and not just a dead tile generating yields.
I'm talking about having to extend city walls around the extended city centre as the city grows, and giving benefits of installing and expanding the electricity grid and sewers to new parts of the city as it keeps growing - A miniature sim city if you like.
Personally I'd love that.

Edit:
A version of this was in civ 5, which I miss.
The city centre, when freshly settled on turn 1, is essentially just a collection of a few mud huts.
But once you reach modern times and you get a city to around 25+ population, the number of skyscrapers just skyrocket and spread out and beyond the original hex and onto adjacent hex.
In civ 6, the city centre just changes the shape of the buildings, and even in the information and future era in a huge city, the city essentially just contains 5-6 buildings.
This breaks immersion for me, and I miss seeing the city grow like that.

Those are very nice ideas. I like the growing part, it reminds me of how Old World cities need some buildings next to city quarters. And techs/civics would boost the growth opportunities.

I would also like some limits to early age explorers. Travel the world in 4000 BC should not be possible. Not at least in the sense of actually returning, but that´s another story.

And regarding OP. I think tile porn is overdone. It also makes balancing the game almost impossible since there are so few rubberbanding mechanics.

 

[Naokaukodem]

I agree with all of you here. I have the same problem as the OP, I especially remember a nightmare game with Incas where I was going mad to not build campuses where they were needed. But the insight proposed is cool too, although a bit optimistic. I have to remember that my cities were nearly too much populated anyway... (above 15 pop points each, when I quit playing at least) As to the 'yield porn', that's what I see a lot on Youtube... that's what makes me say that the main attract of the game is to watch youtube videos... because never ever I would have the idea to play that way.

Since Civ1 launched, I always played the games as the developers intended us to do so. Majorly because I hadn't Internet and couldn't see other strategies. But even in Civ3, I rarely played ICS, because I struggled to see the benefit of it. Just pop in the middle of the continent and place your first-and-final cities around your capital, build defensive units, like spears, and wait for the first ICS player to come with a stack of horsemen that will crash on them, even if they are outnumbered. In Civ6 Deity, I just catch up lately in science to win on the edge, every time. (well, 2 or 3) I'm no "it's too easy" guy. As to Civ5, I won Deity once and never touched the game anymore.

 

[rocksinmypath]

There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the game doesn't force players to make enough tough sacrifices. The wide/tall imbalance suggests producing a settler over anything else is often an easy decision, you can make suboptimal decisions in the late game and be totally fine, etc.

The problem with the Incan terrace farm isn't that it competes with the campus and the holy site. It's that it rarely stands out as a good investment relative to the alternatives. A campus surrounded by four mountains, at baseline, effectively gives you a phantom citizen that earns +4 science and +1 scientist point per turn and costs nothing in terms of food, housing, amenities or future food surplus quota. A terrace farm in the same spot (along with the terrain assuming plains hill next to river), on the other hand, yields +1 housing, +6 food, +3 production. Essentially, a terrace farm provides accelerated growth (but no immediate new citizen) and some production, which is only really impressive in the very early game, and of course, it doesn't scale nearly as well as a campus.

In general, I think, for decisions that arise often (e.g. monument vs. granary), available options should be roughly equally attractive in the absence of situational knowledge. When there's an element of novelty (e.g. terrace farm vs. campus), there should be a significant bias toward the novel option, in order to encourage players to explore actions they don't always get to take. I consider civs that fail to do this badly designed. Germany is a rare example of a powerful yet poorly designed civ. The combat bonus against city states is useless because it's almost never a good idea to conquer city states instead of making friends with them. In order for the decision to conquer city states to compete with the alternative, Germany needs to partially retain bonuses of city states they conquer (e.g. get generic yield bonuses (all three levels) but not suzerainty bonuses).

District placement restriction is an interesting one, because luxuries aren't the only things that prevent district placement. Mountains do, too, but I don't think I've seen many people complain about that. I'm guessing that's because luxury tiles are generally very weak and provide no benefit to adjacent tiles. I'm OK with this rule because, as I said, the game needs to challenge players more, but they could make some changes around it. For instance, given how amenities work, there's really no reason for luxury resources to be as abundant as they are in the game. If luxuries were a lot rarer, players would welcome discovering them more and they wouldn't get in the way of districts as often.

Strategic resources also prevent district placements, and this is one of my least favourite features of the game. Hopping around the tech tree to avoid discovering iron is an unpleasant experience, and I don't like the element of perverse incentive this mechanism brings into the game. Some things should just be left simple. Why should maximizing science output and running up the tech tree as fast as possible ever be a bad thing? Deliberately kneecapping your own science output to be not be screwed out of a great district location is a bad type of sacrifice that I don't want to see in Civ 7.