Anyone else quit playing?

[Bhoy]

I quit after about 5 hours and haven't went back - its too similar to Civ 5 in terms of nothing interesting happening, and I absolutely hated Civ 5. It's just click 'next turn' constantly. I loaded up an old Civ 4 save the other day to demo 'how much better it was' to a friend, and it must have took me about 10 minutes to finish each turn (in late game) because I had so many interesting things to do with all my units.

 

[PhilBowles]

Just over 200 hours here. Keep thinking I'll quit ...but one more turn has become one more game
I keep it fresh by restricting what I research (and upgrade), also CFF often offers new viewpoints on the game that I experiment with.
Currently I am practicing founding religions on small map, deity with France, lessons learnt here are useful on my more usual difficulty level.

My first post-2nd patch playthrough was the only one that had me playing continuously and interested in starting another game - but it turned out to be an atypically good one. I've started a few since, though a newly aggressive AI has caught me unawares when it shouldn't have. But gameplay is too similar across playthroughs from what I've found - I want to give Civ games long enough to get a sense of whether the AIs have distinct characters, but after nearly 100 hours they don't appear to have.

I've gone back to Civ IV (I feel Civ V, as good as it is, has pretty much mined itself out and it's been years since I played Civ IV for more than a few hours at a stretch), learning all over again the joys of spending several eras trying to break through a city defended by gigantic stacks at a choke point, as well as trying the new Age of Empires expansion.

 

[isau]

I will say that my "Combined Tweaks" mod in the new "hardcore" gameplay option + AI+ mod is starting to push the edge of difficulty for me on Emperor mode. The AI is still often pretty dumb, and will not press the attack when it has huge advantages. But the combo of the stuff in those two mods makes cities much more fragile and the AI has taken cities from me. Leaves me optimistic to what we will be able to do with an actual SDK.

 

[LDiCesare]

got to wonder why people upset over the ai aren't trying AI+ and smoother difficulty.

the game can be very hard, very challenging with these 2 mods.

ive logged over 100 hours already and look to beat my total played hours i had with civ V

AI+ would benefit from having a visible thread here. Right now it's just a resouce, and if you downloaded it once, you know it's been updated, but that's about it.
The last release says that the ai may take cities with walls, but I'm not betting hours of my time on a maybe. There's a bunch of changes affecting this behavior (which is honestly the only ai fix I'm interested in, everything else is irrelevant wrt this issue), and "can sometimes take lategame cities." still has a sometimes inside that I don't like. Add to this the fact that AI+ often reverts changes/bugs, it doesn't feel playtested enough for me to invest time in it.
And, also, it's up to Firaxis to fix their games. I've got no idea whether a patch would break the mod, for instance, and don't want to depend on a volunteer in order to be able to keep playing after some patch.

 

[reee]

me quit AI is so pure in war and no see any wey to fix this

 

[liv]

civ 5 and civ 6 are both among the top 10 steam games right now.
Some people like it

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

Been really enjoying the two new scenarios myself. Both quite fun.

 

[God of Kings]

Been really enjoying the two new scenarios myself. Both quite fun.

I'm unable to find videos for either scenario at the Deity difficulty.

Speaking of Deity difficulty, there aren't any new Deity-difficulty Let's Plays of Poland (except by Francis Xavier: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/lets-play-poland-on-deity-its-a-cold-wet-world.608029/ and even then, I requested it).

 

[Freesmog]

civ 5 and civ 6 are both among the top 10 steam games right now.
Some people like it

Last night I decided to check out the Steam reviews and was quite surprised how positive the score ranking was for the game, until I started reading all the negative reviews (and they were all negative at the bottom of the screen). I've noticed from Steam and online reviews in general, is that they can be very skewed one way or the other. It seems many people are either very accepting or more critical. Overall, however, I trust the players who have spent the time & posted thoughtful reviews, instead of feeling like a pawn in some grand scheme of profiteering (what a surprise?).

 

[God of Kings]

Last night I decided to check out the Steam reviews and was quite surprised how positive the score ranking was for the game, until I started reading all the negative reviews (and they were all negative at the bottom of the screen). I've noticed from Steam and online reviews in general, is that they can be very skewed one way or the other. It seems many people are either very accepting or more critical. Overall, however, I trust the players who have spent the time & posted thoughtful reviews, instead of feeling like a pawn in some grand scheme of profiteering (what a surprise?).

Planet Coaster even got silver in Steam's Top 100 Best Sellers of 2016 list, despite it being out for six weeks when the list was complied: https://www.reddit.com/r/PlanetCoas...et_coaster_got_silver_in_steams_top_100_best/

Meanwhile, Civ VI is in the top 12 in the same list: https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/5lgaji/valve_has_revealed_the_bestselling_steam_games_of/

 

[Hian the Frog]

Hi All,

I'm old enough to have played all the Civ. The third was the first real major update. The fourth is still the best: the AI is dangerous, there's a real feeling of urgency, you're under pressure, etc. And most of all: you can mod it very easily.

What about Civ VI ? The worker system is interesting, two tech trees is also a good thing and above of all it's a beautiful game.
OTOH, there's too many major flaws:

1. AI is really crappy (unable to win a war, sometimes unable to expand, easy to destroy, etc.).
   
2. Production is too slow (either you cut the costs by two, either you boost production thanks to buildings, either you give bonus to ressources and/or improvements)
   
3. Tech progress is going too fast (I suspect bonus of 50% are too high and should be reduced to 20%)
4. Diplomacy is incoherent.
5. Military system is incoherent too (upgrade too costly, not enough unit types, etc.)
6. Coastal cities are worst than inland cities. IRL the greatest "empires" were often built by maritime powers.

This game needs major updates. I don't want a kind of Simcity, I want a game where there's a real feeling of beeing the Head of State, where your choices in military, science, religion, etc. are important.

With Civ V, they were close to bury the civ serie. If they don't quickly improve Civ VI, they will go on digging. The grave will simply be deeper...

Cheers,
Hian the Frog (Civ IV Realism Invictus modder)

 

[Futumch]

I'm still enjoying it. 170+ hours according to Steam. I am looking forward to a decent map editor though. I used to love mucking around in Civ V with the IGE mod, that was great fun.

 

[LDiCesare]

civ 5 and civ 6 are both among the top 10 steam games right now.
Some people like it

Yes, but the fact that VI scores below V doesn't bode well for it.
Civ V has around 9M owners. Civ VI has around 1.5M.
If Firaxis hopes to sell more, they'll have to make the game better. Right now, the game won't last more than, say, 200 hours before losing its edge, which is already a lot more than most games, but also a lot less than what one would expect from a civ game.

 

[Zuizgond]

civ 5 and civ 6 are both among the top 10 steam games right now.
Some people like it

Clicker heroes was in the top10 for a long time as well.

 

[Jabulani]

I will say that my "Combined Tweaks" mod in the new "hardcore" gameplay option + AI+ mod is starting to push the edge of difficulty for me on Emperor mode. The AI is still often pretty dumb, and will not press the attack when it has huge advantages. But the combo of the stuff in those two mods makes cities much more fragile and the AI has taken cities from me. Leaves me optimistic to what we will be able to do with an actual SDK.

If 2 combined amateur mods have bettered the situation, how comes that a dozen of " pro " devs have failed in that for months ?

To me there is one explanation only

 

[Jabulani]

Yes, but the fact that VI scores below V doesn't bode well for it.
Civ V has around 9M owners. Civ VI has around 1.5M.
If Firaxis hopes to sell more, they'll have to make the game better. Right now, the game won't last more than, say, 200 hours before losing its edge, which is already a lot more than most games, but also a lot less than what one would expect from a civ game.

Nailed it

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

Of course CiV has more owners than CiVI. Its been out years and VI has only been out months. Its kind of crazy to compare it like that.

 

[PhilBowles]

Hi All,

I'm old enough to have played all the Civ. The third was the first real major update. The fourth is still the best: the AI is dangerous, there's a real feeling of urgency, you're under pressure, etc. And most of all: you can mod it very easily.

What about Civ VI ? The worker system is interesting, two tech trees is also a good thing and above of all it's a beautiful game.
OTOH, there's too many major flaws:

1. AI is really crappy (unable to win a war, sometimes unable to expand, easy to destroy, etc.).
   
2. Production is too slow (either you cut the costs by two, either you boost production thanks to buildings, either you give bonus to ressources and/or improvements)
   
3. Tech progress is going too fast (I suspect bonus of 50% are too high and should be reduced to 20%)
4. Diplomacy is incoherent.
5. Military system is incoherent too (upgrade too costly, not enough unit types, etc.)
6. Coastal cities are worst than inland cities. IRL the greatest "empires" were often built by maritime powers.

This game needs major updates. I don't want a kind of Simcity, I want a game where there's a real feeling of beeing the Head of State, where your choices in military, science, religion, etc. are important.

2 and 3 have been addressed mostly to my satisfaction as of the last patch. 5 is an expansion issue (at least in terms of unit variety - it could be better, but Civ games often start off light in this regard). 1 and 4 are the persistent issues.

As for 6, to reflect this the game needs a better early- to medieval trade system and to make it more difficult to cross open water earlier or launch naval invasions (the latter is unlikely to happen with transport ships removed - I've criticised that mechanic many times and generally favoured embarkation as per Civ V, but going back to Civ IV it's marked how important that change was for exploration and expansion). Civ VI isn't wrong to show actual resource output from maritime cities as being poor - that's not why maritime empires succeeded.

Overall this is something I'm sad Civ has moved away from in recent iterations - in favour of trying to make as many game options as possible viable it loses a lot of the ability to model the way real civilisations developed even in an abstract sense. For instance, it's been a truism of most Civ games that Monarchy is the go-to system of government for much of the game, and this happens to correspond fairly well to one of the longest-lived and widespread governmental systems in history. Even when Civ IV moved away from specific government types, the Hereditary Rule civic remained one of the best options for a long period. In Civ VI you mostly seem to move onto whichever government you researched last without specific reasons not to and you'll only be a monarch for any length of time if you're pursuing an aggressive strategy (and likely not then as there's actually very little value to having multiple military policy slots). The game mechanic is rather divorced from the concept it represents.

 

[topresch]

I'm not the type to hate on the game or quit strategy games early (have gone 142 hrs on Civ 6), but for some reason I just got enough yesterday, and have now uninstalled Civ 6. There are several reasons which combined just fatigued me, incl. the moronic AI on the map and their diplomacy, the tiring UI (spies, trade, and particularly the horribly annoying messaging down the middle of the screen). I guess I will be back in some time, when more patches have been released and the modders have a proper tool.

Oh, something else that had bugged me: Why the flying fudge do we get Norway as a playable Civ and not Persia, perhaps the oldest continuous civilization on the planet? I mean, as a Norwegian I was at first a bit flattered, but the more I think about it, the sillier it gets. Terrible choice, particularly with such a obvious omission as Persia. To see Skedsmo (a tiny municipality without much history as any kind of centre - trust me I am an archaeologist) as a Civ city is just laughable.

 

[liv]

Many important viking burial sites around Skedsmo. Not sure what is happening with the archeology study in Norway - sounds just laughable.
They wanted to make a scenario around the Battle of Stamford bridge hence Harald. Persia may come. They just started with the civs. Don't you at least like the new Norwegian wonder?