As Civ V player, I just can't get into Civ VI.

[CivAddict2013]

I'm someone who's put hours into Civilization V. I've been able to get a cultural victory, a domination victory and a science victory in Civ V on Emperor. In Civ V, I consider myself a decent player.

But there's something about Civilization VI, where I just can't get into it. Maybe it's just that everything in Civ VI seems to take longer. For instance, I was going for a science victory with Rome and it took around 100 turns to build the spaceport. However, in Civilization V, if I played well enough I could build each spaceship part in 10 turns.

Everything just takes so long to build now. In Civilization V; I could easily build a musketman in 5 turns in my capital. But In Civilization VI, a musketman can take from 10 to 20 turns to build.

Maybe I just need to play more. But Civilization V to me; is just more fun.

 

[Starrynite120]

I agree with you, 5 is more fun. 5 has also been worked on more though. I'm sure 6 will get there. I think there are ways to manage production, I got fairly good values by the end of a game. I was better than what you're describing, but not as good as I think it should be. Some things did take annoyingly long.

What really kills it for me is uninteresting wonders, bare bones tech tree, and bad AI. Between the wonders infrequently being desirable, finding myself not caring which tech I choose, and the AI not providing any challenge I get bored quite easily. I haven't bothered finishing more than one game. Actually, I haven't played since the first game I finished. I think it will get better, but as it stands now I don't see any reason to play it.

 

[CivAddict2013]

I agree with you, 5 is more fun. 5 has also been worked on more though. I'm sure 6 will get there. I think there are ways to manage production, I got fairly good values by the end of a game. I was better than what you're describing, but not as good as I think it should be. Some things did take annoyingly long.

What really kills it for me is uninteresting wonders, bare bones tech tree, and bad AI. Between the wonders infrequently being desirable, finding myself not caring which tech I choose, and the AI not providing any challenge I get bored quite easily. I haven't bothered finishing more than one game. Actually, I haven't played since the first game I finished. I think it will get better, but as it stands now I don't see any reason to play it.

Yeah, I agree that the wonders are kind of uninteresting.

I also get the feeling that I don't care which tech I choose.

In Civilization V for science victory; there was a particular tech beeline. You would beeline Education, Scientific Theory, then Plastics. This would give you all your Science buildings. Then you would beeline the techs for all the spaceship parts. Even if you were going for a Cultural victory or a Diplomatic victory , there were certain techs you knew you had to beeline.

I also agree that the AI isn't as challenging. I played one game where I declared war on Japan and he literally had no units.

I think overall, Civilization V is just faster to me. There's just less stuff that you have to build. In Civilization V; you can just build a market in 10 turns. In Civilization VI you have to build a commercial district and a market. That's 20 turns just to get a market.

Winning a Civilization VI just seems to take much longer.

 

[Starrynite120]

I found building things took longer, but teching went way too fast. My first win I launched a spaceship in the 1950's. And I didn't realize you could have multiple spaceports haha. This was also me figuring out how to play the game. If I did it again I'm sure I could do it much faster. These are things they just need to balance out. They're already started with the winter patch, but there's still a ways to go.

 

[xcrissxcrossx]

I'm one of those people who was obsessed with Civ 4 but didn't get into Civ 5, and I think Civ 6 is much better. I guess 5 and 6 are more different than people assumed they would be.

 

[Zaarin]

I'm one of those people who was obsessed with Civ 4 but didn't get into Civ 5, and I think Civ 6 is much better. I guess 5 and 6 are more different than people assumed they would be.

My first game of Civ6 crashed and burned because I approached it like a Civ5 game. Superficially Civ6 looks a lot like Civ5, but I find in practice that that resemblance really is merely superficial.

 

[Starrynite120]

I dunno, I approached it kinda like a Civ 5 game and it worked pretty well. There are some good differences, like districts, government, wonders on the map. I think there's a good base to the game, and some fun differences, but it doesnt seem all that different. I could play 5 and I played this my first time just fine. Maybe that's bad AI though haha.

 

[Zaarin]

I dunno, I approached it kinda like a Civ 5 game and it worked pretty well. There are some good differences, like districts, government, wonders on the map. I think there's a good base to the game, and some fun differences, but it doesnt seem all that different. I could play 5 and I played this my first time just fine. Maybe that's bad AI though haha.

My problem was I was used to three cities being just fine in Civ5. In my first game of Civ6 I founded three cities as usual and then simply couldn't compete in the Great Person game because I lacked the districts. The AI had completely boxed me in, so I had nowhere to expand by the time I realized.

 

[ColtSeavers]

I agree, Civ 6, despite all it's current flaws, i already find much more interesting than its predecessor - and i'm a huge Civ 4 fan as well!

 

[TomKQT]

Yeah, I agree that the wonders are kind of uninteresting.

And each wonder takes one tile. Tiles can be precious sometimes, so I'm personaly noticing that I'm building less and less wonders. They are simply not worth it, especially if you consider that when somebody builds it faster, you get nothing back.
Plus the sometimes very complicated requirements on the tile and surrounding tiles...

 

[ShinigamiKenji]

About the OP problem with production - Here, production is (almost) king. Food isn't as powerful because growth is limited by housing and amenities, and even growth isn't as important because you don't need to work districts to get their benefits (apart from some minor yields from buildings).

So, after your city has grown a bit, you need to prioritize production for the spaceport. Use internal trade routes for more production, food and gold. City-State effects and policy cards also go a long way in helping you. Learn to harvest too - Not every woods needs a lumbermill. Lumbermills are inferior to mines; thus, only those besides a river (since those get a +1 production bonus from the river) or without tiles to place a mine are worth keeping.

Also, I didn't test if the spaceport cost rises with techs (as does other districts), but I think it does. In any case, it's better to beeline it and place it as soon as possible.

 

[Eliminator_Sr]

And each wonder takes one tile. Tiles can be precious sometimes, so I'm personaly noticing that I'm building less and less wonders. They are simply not worth it, especially if you consider that when somebody builds it faster, you get nothing back.
Plus the sometimes very complicated requirements on the tile and surrounding tiles...

Yeah I totally agree - there have been many times where I went to place a wonder and then decided not to build it because it would demolish one of my high yield tiles. The wonders are so underwhelming that I am usually more concerned with getting a normal district down instead. I only ever build them in the late game when I have much better production and am usually waiting around for my space projects to complete.

 

[chazzycat]

spaceports should take 15-20 turns max on normal settings. 100 turns means you just aren't prioritizing production at all. build some mines and whatnot.

 

[darkace77450]

Maybe I just need to play more.

I'd say this is certainly the case. It sounds like you're frustrated because the winning formula you utilizes in Civ5 isn't working in Civ6. For all their similarities, this game isn't a Civ5 expansion. You will need to adapt to this new game if you want to find success. Even after learning how to play this game well you may still find yourself liking Civ5 better, but at least you'll be making a properly informed decision at that point.

 

[juanpavo]

I also get the feeling that I don't care which tech I choose.

In Civilization V for science victory; there was a particular tech beeline. You would beeline Education, Scientific Theory, then Plastics. This would give you all your Science buildings. Then you would beeline the techs for all the spaceship parts. Even if you were going for a Cultural victory or a Diplomatic victory , there were certain techs you knew you had to beeline.

I agree. With Civ6, I frequently choose whatever I have a eureka boost for. These diversions usually don't matter (but I wish they did). Still easy to beat on Deity.

 

[Acken]

Most players I know agree but Civ games usually take time to mature (with the help of good mod support (please ?)).

So far its therefore nothing new and we'll have to see if it's another game by Firaxis that needs at least an expansion to become addictive or the second episode of the series I stop playing pretty early (second after BE).

 

[Pythakoreas]

Everything just takes so long to build now. In Civilization V; I could easily build a musketman in 5 turns in my capital. But In Civilization VI, a musketman can take from 10 to 20 turns to build.

I found building things took longer, but teching went way too fast. .

My enemy seems to pump out a new horseman unit every turn (as I see 3 new horsemen every 3 turns) to attack my crossbowmen. It used to take me a turn or two to recruit spearmen, but as soon as I got the tech for pikemen it takes me 10 turns to get one. I lost a war that way.

.

 

[rezaf]

spaceports should take 15-20 turns max on normal settings. 100 turns means you just aren't prioritizing production at all. build some mines and whatnot.

Or maybe the game does a bit of a poor job of guiding the player? Many people like the district system (I did so, too - at least initially), but in earlier Civs it was easier to see what's going on and to decide what to focus on than in this iteration.
I realize these are game features and thus it isn't cheating or anything, but even when I realized I had to do this, making use of things like the factory district bonus overlaps (pre-patch) or abusing internal traderoutes to max out production bonuses doesn't feel natural at all to me - and the UI does a pretty bad job of showcasing cause and effect.
Especially the trade route juggling, arguably pretty mandatory to fully utilize the potential of your civilization as a whole, reeks to me of the same mindset that drives microtransactions in F2P games. You need to pay a constant premium to stay on top of your game - here not in money, but in a much more precious commodity - your very lifetime. Whether or not he or she is willing to pay that premium every player must decide for himself - I know it's the prime reason I stopped playing Civ6.

My enemy seems to pump out a new horseman unit every turn (as I see 3 new horsemen every 3 turns) to attack my crossbowmen. It used to take me a turn or two to recruit spearmen, but as soon as I got the tech for pikemen it takes me 10 turns to get one. I lost a war that way.

As playing everything up to and including prince is considered the territory for the mentally challenged these days, I reckon you are playing on a higher difficulty - and then you mustn't forget all the free stuff the AI gets. Maybe money can't buy love (even that might be disputed), but it sure can rush-buy three horsemen every turn.

 

[Ashbery76]

People don't like change.I am sure by the time Civ6 has been out a few years Civ5 will be dead just like Civ4 before it.

 

[rezaf]

People don't like change.I am sure by the time Civ6 has been out a few years Civ5 will be dead just like Civ4 before it.

What makes you think Civ4 is dead? Take a look at the modding scene as an indication...