Are People already drifting away from Civ VI?

[pokiehl]

Wrong, giant death robots and vampires both have in common that neither will ever exist.

Oh ok. I like that stuff in the game. Spices it up. And the vampires are optional, you can just turn off the mode.

 

[Zegangani]

Vampires are just Fantasy Beings with no evidence that they exist(ed), GDRs on the other hand are Science fiction Robots that can be justified with Technological advancments, with many examples from IRL, and honestly they aren't just fiction anymore.

My Issue with GDRs in the Game is just that they are the only thing that justify the existence of the Future era in the Game (those Improvements are not enough for a FE). There should be at least some more Sci-fi Units in the Game, maybe having a Hacking Project that brings GDRs of other Civs under your Control, a way to improve the productivity of your Cities with Virtual AI Workers who would take the Place of your Citizen Workers which leads to unhappiness, making it challenging for the Player to manage its Cities and keeping the Citizens under control...etc. there are many ways to improve the Future Era and justify its existens, but I guess whoever had the Idea of a Future Era back then for some reason didn't finish what they started, because It's most likely that they just included it as a build up for more things to come. but didn't.

 

[PiR]

Wrong, giant death robots and vampires both have in common that neither will ever exist.

Why not? The GDR could be the next generation of drone. Or is there a Civ lore saying it has be AI?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

My Issue with GDRs in the Game is just that they are the only thing that justify the existence of the Future era in the Game (those Improvements are not enough for a FE). There should be at least some more Sci-fi Units in the Game, maybe having a Hacking Project that brings GDRs of other Civs under your Control, a way to improve the productivity of your Cities with Virtual AI Workers who would take the Place of your Citizens which leads to unhappiness, making it challenging for the Player to manage its Cities and keeping the Citizens under control...etc. there are many ways to improve the Future Era and justify its existens, but I guess whoever had the Idea of a Future Era back then for some reason didn't finish what they started, because It's most likely that they just included it as a build up for more things to come. but didn't.

I might be one of the few people who really didn't want to see too many futuristic units in the game and thought only including the GDR, and have it upgrade with techs, was a good compromise. I think there are other ways the Future Era could be improved on but I don't think adding more units would be it.

 

[Zegangani]

I might be one of the few people who really didn't want to see too many futuristic units in the game and thought only including the GDR, and have it upgrade with techs, was a good compromise. I think there are other ways the Future Era could be improved on but I don't think adding more units would be it.

I don't want to have many futuristic Units either. I was thinking of having 2 Land Mili Units, one that is fast but weaker and one that's strong but slower, and same thing for 2 Naval Units. It would add some strategy to Combat in Future Era. having GDRs fighting GDRs is uninteresting.

I just suggested that as an example for Domination/Conquest, other Systems should also have something in the Future Era. Maybe a Sci-fi Amusement Park District for Culture Victory, and Science Victory if there are some Project for genetic Scientists that clone Dinosaur DNA to bring the back to life and place them in the Theme/Amusement Park District. if the Park gets pillaged by an Enemy or got destroyed by lack of maintenance then the Dinosaurs will go havock in that City...

 

[criZp]

Why not? The GDR could be the next generation of drone. Or is there a Civ lore saying it has be AI?

drones are cheap, that's their point. GDR is the opposite and does not accomplish anything that nuclear missiles cannot

 

[vorlon_mi]

Hover tanks have been a sci-fi / future weapon since the original Call to Power (CtP). They have been one of my favorite weapons in Beyond Earth. Orbital weapons are also fun in BERT, but implementing the orbital layer would require way way way too much reworking of Civ 6.
MCU style helicarriers could travel over land or sea, deploying both fighter and bomber aircraft. They could be only engaged by aircraft or missles, if we stipulate that they fly higher than most artillery.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The problem with 'future weapons' in games is that gamers want to play with Big Fancy Things: Giant Death Robots, Flying Battleships, Death Stars, the German Maus Super-Colossal Heavy Tank.

Unfortunately, Bigger is not better, it's just a bigger target. Development of bigger and badder tanks, with auto-loading 140mm cannon and a massive suite of electronic, missile, laser and other systems has been researched, but nobody has built any of them or made any plans to produce any: there are simply too many things out there, from top-attack 120mm mortars to drones to heavy long-range fire-and-forget missiles carried by a host of platforms that can attack big, fancy tanks - or ships, or aircraft, for that matter. A single manned strike aircraft these days is accompanied by a swarm of other aircraft flying top cover, ECM, recon, and AWACS support for it.

The trend in the cutting edge military technology today is towards smaller, stealthy, more capable forces - 'ordinary' infantry with UAVs of its own, satellite and stealth systems, augmented exo-skeletons, enhanced vision, etc. Vehicles are smaller and faster -multi-wheeled and weighing a fraction of what a main battle tank weighs, but mounting heavy missiles, hard to detect and easy to deploy both tactically and strategically. The US Navy is struggling to keep its massive aircraft carriers justified when a 600 ton Stealth Corvette or a single hypersonic land--or ship-based missile can take out a 90,000 ton carrier, and the missile has a longer range than the aircraft on the carrier!

Trouble is, a graphic of a stealthy infantryman operating with satellites, drones, micro-UAVs at night isn't much of a graphic: almost by definition and design, he's invisible. That means we are probably going to keep being presented with Giant Death Targets for Future Era units . . .

 

[vorlon_mi]

So if we want "future weapons" based on what might actually be deployed in 2030, we should have deadlier and longer range missiles; deadlier and longer range strike aircraft; updated versions of the Civ3 and Civ4 TOW Infantry with UAV instead of the "bazookas" that they were shown using. Does Civ6 have nuclear missile submarines, a.k.a. "boomers"?

Or perhaps Davy Crockett recoilless rifles units? Packing a really big punch?

It's a game. I'm fine with sci-fi style energy beam weapons, wielded by "Starship Troopers" style Mobile Infantry (the book, not the movie), by future gen combat ships; by future gen strike aircraft. By the time we're getting to the future, I have less interest in accuracy.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

So if we want "future weapons" based on what might actually be deployed in 2030, we should have deadlier and longer range missiles; deadlier and longer range strike aircraft; updated versions of the Civ3 and Civ4 TOW Infantry with UAV instead of the "bazookas" that they were shown using. Does Civ6 have nuclear missile submarines, a.k.a. "boomers"?

Or perhaps Davy Crockett recoilless rifles units? Packing a really big punch?

It's a game. I'm fine with sci-fi style energy beam weapons, wielded by "Starship Troopers" style Mobile Infantry (the book, not the movie), by future gen combat ships; by future gen strike aircraft. By the time we're getting to the future, I have less interest in accuracy.

The Near Future Military is pretty easy to get right, if you've been paying attention.
Beam Weapons are already being tested, and some anti-missile systems are already being fielded - that's Very Near Future
Mobile Infantry in the sense of exo-skeleton augments and armor equipped 'infantry' with massive firepower have already been tested, but still have some problems: call them Not Quite So Near Future.
The big 'singularity' in weapons is Autonomous Weapons: ships, aircraft, combat vehicles that can act without crews and independently of outside human control. Everybody is developing them, but whether they admit it officially or not (Russia does not, China ain't saying) everybody is Scared To Death of these, because potentially you can lose control of them if the computers decide to go to war on their own - cue Autonomous Weapons with bad Austrian accents . . .

 

[criZp]

It's a game

based on human history

 

[Pistol90]

I would't have problem with future weapons if they have sense ....

GDR will never be future weapon in real world because it is stupid idea .. future of weapons will be drones, more advanced missiles, cyber-warfare, maybe laser weapons mounted on existing ships, tank etc ... no giant robots.

 

[pokiehl]

GDR is a series tradition at this point. I really like them and I’d be sad to see them go.

The devs should be allowed to take more creative liberties for the future era. This series is history based but it’s never been a history simulator.

There have always been silly, tongue in cheek elements.

 

[MrRadar]

I don't have any problem with the fact of GDRs and the like being in a Civ game. One of the many 'what ifs' upon which the game rests. But I do have a problem with carpets of them running around aimlessly and harmlessly, and always low on uranium. Behaviour like this ruins immersion and story telling aspect the most. If they added resource consumption to the game, why haven't they told the AI about it? Amongst other million things...

 

[Socrates99]

The 30th birthday stuff drew me back to the forums. That's the thing I've actually drifted away from. The game still grabs me off and on although I flit from game to game a lot lately. The forum was just getting too pessimistic and down to make me interested in visiting very frequently. I imagine between that and the creation of the humankind and old world forums this forum has seen major attrition. Civs VI on the other hand seems to be doing fine according to steam.

 

[Linklite]

Maybe having a bunch of T-800s as Future Era units...or the H/K Drones.

The forum was just getting too pessimistic and down to make me interested in visiting very frequently. I imagine between that and the creation of the humankind and old world forums this forum has seen major attrition. Civs VI on the other hand seems to be doing fine according to steam.

I feel you. I've dropped the number of times that I check on the forum. It would be nice if we could get a few threads like the recent discussion here on Future Tech going. I'd be more active if there were.

 

[PiR]

I think actually HK and OW are good for the Civ VI forums, as dreams of a perfect game are now confronted to reality I saw a decline in the pessimistic mood around that time.

 

[vorlon_mi]

I wrote, "It's a game"

based on human history

True enough. But the ending techs always involve a bit of suspension of disbelief.
Several games in the series have "Nuclear Fusion" as an unlockable tech. Civ3 had a great wonder called "Cure for Cancer", and Civ4 allowed you to build the Space Elevator. Building a space ship to reach Alpha Centauri has been part of the franchise since Civ1, and we don't know how to do that; we're not close to knowing how to do that.

Only Civ6 re-cast the Science Victory condition as a mission to Mars (in Vanilla), which we could do in the near future. In Gathering Storm Civ6 moved the player back into "science fiction" technology, going for an exoplanet light years away. Given that we already have our imaginations involved in pursuing victory, I enjoy engaging my imagination for weapons.
Yes, I've seen many physics arguments that "Pacific Rim" style jaegers could not exist. Or Autobots or Decpticons. They're still fun to watch, to imagine deploying them.

As I wrote in an earlier answer, I would be interested in using (in-game) longer-range, deadlier missiles and aircraft. Cyber warfare could be abstracted in one of several ways:

1. A building called something like "Cyber Defense", built in one of the districts, that provides some resistance to cyber attacks.
2. A unit called something like a "Cyber Warrior" or "Hacker" that could have charges to launch attacks on another civ that you have a connection to
3. An espionage mission would also work, but I worry that would take too long in game turns to implement

The impact of a successful cyber attack on a city might be reductions in production and commerce for N turns; reductions in amenities or happiness; military units near that city fight less effectively.

Whether the weapons are extrapolations of our current weapons or pure sci-fi, the future era should be fun.

 

[SirWill90]

W/out reading the entire thread let me answer the OP by saying, yes I'm definitely drifting away from Civ 6.

Never been a Deity player, or the type to put too much effort into optimizing district placement beyond taking advantage of obvious yields. But after all the content that has been released and all the updates, playing GS vanilla now everything just seems unbalanced. Barbarians are too powerful, but play without them and things aren't right. Build and research times have always seemed too long on my preferred speed Epic. Overall I can't say I dislike it, but it just feels disjointed and again, unbalanced.

Just kinda over it. Hoping for a last update to maybe fix some of the glaring issues (I know there are plenty of others but I'm not going there right now.) I play more if that was done I think.

Hoping for a Civ VII announcement and for a more coherent game. One where barbs are a challenge without being ridiculously OP every other game, producing units far more powerful and advanced than I can. Where unit production costs/times are lower, even if there is a higher maintenance cost. One where my nomadic people decide to settle down (i.e. to spawn) in an area that provides some advantages, not in a resource free floodplain or desert surrounded by barren mountains or a fetid jungle so that I have to restart ten times during my very limited few hours of play a week in order to have a decent game.

Eh that's enough I guess. I suppose it's just not fun anymore for me. Hope that answers the question. And I am still hoping for a better Civ in the future. Cheers.

 

[Aristos]

One where barbs are a challenge without being ridiculously OP every other game, producing units far more powerful and advanced than I can. Where unit production costs/times are lower, even if there is a higher maintenance cost. One where my nomadic people decide to settle down (i.e. to spawn) in an area that provides some advantages, not in a resource free floodplain or desert surrounded by barren mountains or a fetid jungle so that I have to restart ten times during my very limited few hours of play a week in order to have a decent game.

Interestingly enough, I found all that and more in that other game that cannot be named. Just in case you did not try it, or look into it.