[GS] Another Era added? But I lost interest three era's ago in industrial.

[Tomice]

I created a thread&poll not long ago about how front-loaded AI bonuses are problematic for late game enjoyment:

TLDR: Do you agree that the way higher difficulties increase challenge is a hindrance to lategame enjoyment? Would a different approach (less AI bonus upfront, more during lategame) help?
____________________________________________________________

Gathering Storm will get a future era and many lategame additions, which I like.
Sadly, in most games, you'll have won long before, either literally by achieving a victory condition, or practically by being so dominant that you can hardly fail if you don't pull punches.

This is a problem that could be rather easily remedied IMO, because it's first and foremost connected to how higher difficulty settings help the AI to be more challenging.

http://civilization.wikia.com/wiki/Difficulty_level_(Civ6)

If you follow the link above, you'll see what I mean:
On deity, the AI gets a huge load of free stuff on turn 1 (4 free techs, 4 free civics, 2 extra settlers, 4 extra warriors, 2 free builders,...).
The ongoing bonuses are comparatively moderate (+32% science&culture, +80% gold&production, +4 unit strength,...).

The problem is:
A smart player can easily reap a ton of synergies that are too complicated for the AI to achieve - from farm triangles to golden harbor triangles (city center, harbor with seaport, commercial hub, Reyna --> mad yields). These synergies unlock as the game progresses and give the player an increasing edge especially in later eras. This effect will eventually dwarf the seemingly impressive +80% production (which will often be wasted on pointless, badly placed wonders by the AI).
Overall, it's a challenge of catching up - once you caught up to the AI headstart and bolstered your defenses, the AI has no means to ever threaten you again.
High difficulty games tend to shift from a deadly survival challenge where every click counts to a much easier experience later on.

Another problem:
The huge initial bonuses lock the player out from many gameplay aspects (no chance to get early wonders or unlock a religion!). They also make peaceful play frustrating (as good city spots will be gone due to the free AI settlers).
Higher difficulties basically mean watching the AI build Petra very early, but in a city that has no other desert tile...

Suggested solutions:

• Fewer upfront bonuses for the AI early on
• The percent-based bonuses to basic yields should increase per era
• Optional: A free builder when they found a city (the AI tends to lack proper infrastructure)
• Optional: A discount on districts (The AI often doesn't build enough of them)

This should help the AI to stay competitive even if you caught up to them once.
It would hopefully also increase the fun on higher difficulties due to a more distributed challenge and more viable early game strategies.
The optional suggestions are mostly intended to make the AI look smarter than it is.

Note:
Of course a better AI would be the best solution, but considering past experiences, we should be happy if they improve the AI enough to at least use air units and know how to build a canal or tunnel

I firmly believe that a different approach in this regard would be a major step towards a more challenging late game.

Also, the announced fix for chopping overflow will probably make super early victories a bit harder.

Finally, they very often emphasized the amount of actual playtesting they did and still do at this stage. I can't imagine the problem of too early player dominance completely eluded Carl and his team.

 

[KayAU]

This is one of the problems with Civilization in general. The late game is usually far less interesting than the early game. This is in part due to the exploration phase being over, in part due to the game usually having been already decided, in part due to each action you do being less important, and in part due to having lots and lots of micromanagement to do. In Civ 5 this was mitigated somewhat by being able to play tall, which reduced micromanagement, and gettings some other things to do in the late game, such as pushing ideologies, controlling the World Congress and doing cooperative projects. I am hoping Gathering Storm will improve things similarly, with production queues hopefully reducing micromanagement a bit, and having something interesting to deal with in the late game, such as dealing with climate change and the World Congress. What I would also have wished for, is for tall cities to be more powerful, so that I could have managed with fewer, more highly developed cities.

 

[mitsho]

They want the early game to be interesting, because that is what most people will play most of the time. Hey, I want to play like a Mongolian horde, so lets set up a flat pangea with few forests. Hey, I want to play a culture game, so let‘s chose the Mapuche. And so on. As soon as the point metioned above has been reached, where you have acquired equivalency with the AI, OR your time for a playing session has run out (typically an evening), you abandon that game. You do a save and never look back.

So that early game needs to be interesting for players to have enjoyment. Never mind the latter game. That is because it is too hard to get back into a game as you need to recall all that information from a previous playing session first (Where did I place Cologne again? Why have I set up the research path this way again?) AND because what is a meaningful decision in the early game may become a tedious task later on (filling up the culture district).

A better AI would just prolong that and while I do agree that it is needed, it won‘t solve the core problem. Ideally, civ would need to be split up into 2 or 3 games, but many players do want that micromanagement. So what is truly needed is a good User Interface, competent city governors while you take empire-wide decisions in the later eras.

The number of decisions you are taking per turn shoudl stay roughly the same during the whole game!

(And yes, while I do see that GS will not help that problem at all but increase it with addig more things to do & it will not improve the AI because ... ? , I will still buy the expansion, because I am weak...)

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

The number of decisions you are taking per turn shoudl stay roughly the same during the whole game!

This is a big structural issue in the current Civ ruleset. Meaningful early game decisions become late game tedium.

My personal preference would be a core command & control system where you're directing your scout and choosing buildings in the early game, and then as the efficiency of your government grows you're directing armies and setting city-level decisions, and so on, with not only the number of decisions, but also the weight of those decisions in terms of game impact staying relatively constant over time.

A less radical solution is just to allow players to automate decisions at their preference, tagging on to the existing AI functionality to let parts of your empire be run by the AI while you focus on the things you're still interested in. There's some of that in the game, but also big gaps. I can't appoint a foreign minister, for example, to handle incoming AI trade offers so I don't need to listen to them, nor can I say "sell this Iron to whoever makes the best offer" and call it a day.

 

[Leathaface]

The Industrial Era is probably my favourite in the entire game, I love playing then. As for later eras, maybe Firaxis have spiced up the later eras by altering the victory conditions? They said they will do that.

Plus I think global warming, hurricanes and other events could make the late game more exciting.

 

[krokobone]

Personally I love playing the later eras. One of the most entertaining features in Civ 6 for me at least is seeing my civilization grow from a small tribal settlement to a global power wielding nuclear weapons, ready to launch the first spaceship to colonize Mars. Winning the game this way is much more satisfying for me than rushing a win at turn 150. Therefore I have to say I welcome any additions to the later eras of the game, especially the global warming feature of the expansion, that will make the later eras even more exciting.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

The Industrial Era is probably my favourite in the entire game, I love playing then. As for later eras, maybe Firaxis have spiced up the later eras by altering the victory conditions? They said they will do that.

Plus I think global warming, hurricanes and other events could make the late game more exciting.

I used to love the Industrial era in Civs 1 & 2. Once you could start laying railroads, your army could move from one side of the map to the other in a single turn, your production skyrocketed so what was expensive suddenly became cheap, and pollution started to choke up your terrain killing your people until you got workers over there to clean it up. It was a really big game play change.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Personally I love playing the later eras. One of the most entertaining features in Civ 6 for me at least is seeing my civilization grow from a small tribal settlement to a global power wielding nuclear weapons, ready to launch the first spaceship to colonize Mars. Winning the game this way is much more satisfying for me than rushing a win at turn 150. Therefore I have to say I welcome any additions to the later eras of the game, especially the global warming feature of the expansion, that will make the later eras even more exciting.

You know you do get to see that with T200 science victories too, right? you still grow from a small tribal settlement to a global powerhouse, and hit all the game play steps along the way, from Ancient Era to Information Age.

 

[krokobone]

You know you do get to see that with T200 science victories too, right? you still grow from a small tribal settlement to a global powerhouse, and hit all the game play steps along the way, from Ancient Era to Information Age.

You're right, of course. I'm just not really the minmaxing type of a player, so I tend to reach victory at turn 350 or later.

 

[Disgustipated]

Moving archaeologists across the map
Moving anything across the map

It's spotting the archeological sites which can be a strain on the eyes sometimes

So the good part is according to the Canada stream is that archaeology sites will now be highlighted. I'm very happy about this. I hear you about the limited movement. It can be a pain sometimes. I think that's why they don't have a turn limit on moving artifacts around. And Rock bands will have limited movement as well it appears.

 

[Archon_Wing]

We have the diplomatic victory, so there will be more stuff to do.

Of course, they still need to fix up the UI, as well as AI. If the AI doesn't know how to play the late game or even survive to it, then all is vain. I do hope the AI provides to be more of an obstacle so games end up longer. Obviously when <t200 wins are common you don't have much of a game.

 

[Cuneiform]

How about trying to get the promotion buff on a fleet with 70 battleships while also trying not to get a move units request from england or norway?

Good luck building and maintaining 70 Battleships with the new Strategic Resource system.

 

[Cagarustus]

There is an indirect way: if they do not improve the AI by a multiple of 25, I will be 99.8% confident that the changes will not improve the game.

Given the track record, what are the chances that they improve the AI, let alone by a huge amount?

Yeap.

You’re certainly welcome to get a group of people together, create a company and develop a civilisation-esque game that far exceeds the civilisation series.

I’d definitely buy your game.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

You’re certainly welcome to get a group of people together, create a company and develop a civilisation-esque game that far exceeds the civilisation series.

I’d definitely buy your game.

In fact multiplayer games doesn't change anything. They lasts too long and many people quit in the middle.I used to experience one MP game that everyone plays well and no one quit when his Civ was still lively to grow, but in T124 (standard speed) when I begin to attack my neighbor with anti-tanks , they just surrounder instantly.

 

[cvb]

Multiplayer games are an illusion. 1 winner & several losers.

Who wants to play out patiently / painstakingly a game that was lost (vanished possibility to win self) many hours ago?

Even more so, if the biggest own mistake was eg. just to start exploring in the "wrong" direction ... meeting a CS first (or not), meeting the neighbors in that sequence and not the other way around ...

To avoid such situations I play chess - but also not truly MULTIplayer.

 

[acluewithout]

Who wants to play out patiently / painstakingly a game that was lost (vanished possibility to win self) many hours ago?.

Anyone that’s ever played Monopoly.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Anyone that’s ever played Monopoly.

Board games have come a long way since Monopoly was state of the art.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Anyone that’s ever played Monopoly.

The original AH "Civilisation" boardgame. 2 hours in and A and B are neck and neck, C might be a dark horse contender, D, E, and F have another 6+ hours of play left without a chance of winning. I still loved it.

 

[acluewithout]

Board games have come a long way since Monopoly was state of the art.

I’m not even sure Monopoly was state of the art at the time it was made!

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

The original AH "Civilisation" boardgame. 2 hours in and A and B are neck and neck, C might be a dark horse contender, D, E, and F have another 6+ hours of play left without a chance of winning. I still loved it.

If you ever played, Advanced Civilization, the expansion to the base game released by Avalon Hill, it solved the problem with the original game where once you fell behind you had no realistic chance to catch up, without changing the feel of the game at all. I'm not a fan of most board game expansions, but that one kept all the good things from the original Civilization and fixed a few of it's problems, without adding any additional complexity to the game.