Bad & good design decisions in civ 6

Too many good points, I guess splitting out districts because it make the game complex I consider great.
They need tio implement and emergency to remove emergencies in my mind, just stupid.

and my own favourite

Nerfing England to death is just stupid. Pretty much stopped playing now and certainly building hate quickly.
 
Too many good points, I guess splitting out districts because it make the game complex I consider great.
They need tio implement and emergency to remove emergencies in my mind, just stupid.

and my own favourite

Nerfing England to death is just stupid. Pretty much stopped playing now and certainly building hate quickly.

I've read this a few times. What nerfs have they had? Moving trade routes to markets and lighthouses. Melee units only on founded cities or something like that?
 
Moving trade routes to markets and lighthouses. Melee units only on founded cities or something like that?

All civs used to be able to build 2 trade routes in a city if it had both a harbour and a commercial hub, they removed this from all civs but kept it for England. They then removed it for England, sopme may not see this as an England specific nerf but if you want to make england build harbours you need it to have some advantage like this .. harbours are still useless compared to most things.

I was not fussed as I always said, the fun of England is Pax Brittanica, a unit in every city gained off continent.

Now they have changed this to be just ones you settled claiming a bug but moronically have left all the texts in saying thats the design.... fail, england used to be crap but fun with a mid game comeback... now its just rubbish.

They will sell you super cool OP wonder civs you have barely heard of in history as long as you pay more money and nerf the old ones if they just do not fit because it does not matter, no more money to be made there. I paid for them all because I was happy with England having hard opponents because she was fun and unique. I regret it now.
 
I've read this a few times. What nerfs have they had? Moving trade routes to markets and lighthouses. Melee units only on founded cities or something like that?

England has been changed around a lot since the game came out.
  • The RNDY, like all unique districts, used to be buildable without regard to number of districts you had. Removed in an early game patch (for all unique districts). During this period of the game's history the RNDY was basically just a 50% cheaper Harbor.
  • For a while the RNDY provided a free trade route even if you already had a Commercial Hub, which is now removed.
  • England used to get a free melee unit upon founding or conquering a city on another continent. Now just for founding. An entire new Requirement was added for this at the core game level, which is a deeper level of effort than a lot of previous "quick fixes" Firaxis has applied in the past.


I modded England so she gets a free melee unit if she drops a city on any coast (even on the starting continent) and the RNDY provides a free extra trade route if placed on another continent. Fairly small effort. I wish Firaxis would copy me on those changes.
 
England was my favorite civilization while they had bonus trade routes. I completely agree with Victoria and am disappointed at what happened to them. I have not played England since the expansion. :(
 
They will sell you super cool OP wonder civs you have barely heard of in history as long as you pay more money and nerf the old ones if they just do not fit because it does not matter, no more money to be made there. I paid for them all because I was happy with England having hard opponents because she was fun and unique. I regret it now.

Historically speaking, England should be some kind of industrial-steampower-enlightened super Korea. Something like a better university ("oxford university") + a ship of the line.
 
England should be
Sure but the abilities are not as unique as the extra unit. First and foremost I'm a gameplayer and it allowed victoria sometimes to get lucky and settle on a continent edge and in those games (which were like a nice present game for being good) you got to be as strong as some of the A grade civs. Sea is just bleugh in this game, you may get lucky and be ambushed and loose a unit but mostly its clearing away the fog for a foggy blue maybe taking some cities if you feel like being OP for a bit and finally parking your navy up because you are sick of moving them.
Practically everything for the sea is meh apart from in an islands game... that leaves an OK but lateish museum, a strong unit thats too expensive to build and pax. Pax is the fun different thing and its gone. The free unit with off continent settlers is just not a lot of difference and sending a settler to create a redcoat feels wrong. To me its like the redcoat is an elite unit formed off the unit that took the city... that feels right!
 
Sure but the abilities are not as unique as the extra unit. First and foremost I'm a gameplayer and it allowed victoria sometimes to get lucky and settle on a continent edge and in those games (which were like a nice present game for being good) you got to be as strong as some of the A grade civs. Sea is just bleugh in this game, you may get lucky and be ambushed and loose a unit but mostly its clearing away the fog for a foggy blue maybe taking some cities if you feel like being OP for a bit and finally parking your navy up because you are sick of moving them.
Practically everything for the sea is meh apart from in an islands game... that leaves an OK but lateish museum, a strong unit thats too expensive to build and pax. Pax is the fun different thing and its gone. The free unit with off continent settlers is just not a lot of difference and sending a settler to create a redcoat feels wrong. To me its like the redcoat is an elite unit formed off the unit that took the city... that feels right!

I remember the times where simply meeting lots of civs gave you a great advantage because you could trade techs with them.
 
I remember the times where simply meeting lots of civs gave you a great advantage because you could trade techs with them.
degraded to a single eureka and a smattering of small change era points
ah, the age of exploration... "No, I will no longer trade with you because your explorers are too good". Never once have I been praised for rounding the cape.
 
The funniest part is if you sign an alliance which gives you more visibility and then they get mad.
 
degraded to a single eureka and a smattering of small change era points
ah, the age of exploration... "No, I will no longer trade with you because your explorers are too good". Never once have I been praised for rounding the cape.
I miss also the days of trading maps!
 
... but... you have the same visibility, its gotta be 120% of theirs?

Oh sorry. I meant someone else (not the ally) gets mad that your vision suddenly expanded thus leading to the situation where you really didn't explore but you just borrowed your ally's map.
 
In my mind, there's a distinction between 'design' and 'implementation', although it's a fuzzy line to be sure.

I really struggle to find any problems with Civ 6's design. Most if not all of the design is awesome. Indeed, it's a major reason I can't bring myself to play other games. Most if not all of the other 4x or strategy games I see just don't have as good design.

Implementation - or perhaps I mean the real nitty-gritty of design - is where I have trouble. Lots of it is really good - e.g. Districts overall are good design, but so to is the real nitty-gritty of their adjacemcies and buildings etc. But where it's not it really drives me nuts.

On district scaling: I'm okay with the current system, but agree it's not quite right. Not sure what the better approach is - I haven't seen any suggestions I like better. It's also complicated by how district costs interact with chopping and overflow and other things.
  • I'd really like to see the value of chopping not increase so much over time. It should perhaps only increase when certain techs are researched and or by using certain policy cards.
  • I don't think harvesting food should give food. Currently you're better harvesting food resources to bump pop than farming, avoiding both the need to build farms and carefully grow your cities and the need to build housing. I think it would be better if harvesting food gave either gold, faith or production.
  • Overflow probably needs to be got rid of or nerfed. But at this point I assume it's here to stay.
On England: sigh ... I don't think I can write any more about Vicky. I've stopped playing Civ, and can't bring myself to buy R&F because I am so disappointed. I'm very worried that Vicky will be 'un-nerfed' in a later patch, but in a way that misses the point and leaves her soulless. It's all First World Problems I know, but Civ is a great escape from the daily grind, and I miss playing.

What really gets me down is that I think Vicky is indicative of a wider problem. Many of the Vanilla Civs, and a few of the new ones, need a full review or another deep pass / rework. Not so much for 'balance', but to ensure they are all a 'fun' or as 'interesting' as can be. The tweaking done to Vanilla Civs post R&F was too shallow and in many places not thought through.

A good bench mark is Rome - yup, Rome is 'powerful', but hardly OP. But it's design is excellent. It's bonuses all synergise well with each other and other general gameplay mechanics, and they have lots of great strategies. The changes to aqueducts a few patches back, and to loyalty / monuments, have just made things better. And overall they just feel like 'Rome' which is awesome. Aztechs are a great example of good design of a more 'gimmicky' civ (versus a more economy driven civ like Rome). I love how they start with their unique warriors. I love how their bonus to districts synergise with Ancestral Hall. I love how the changes to Colloseum and Entertainment Complexes have indirectly given their unique building a bit more life.

There's some links in my sig to the sorts of tweaks I'd like to see. But for example, and without wanting to stray into topics for the ideas forum, I think Norway would really benefit from a small boost like maybe +1 faith to fishing boats. Not a huge change. But it would give them a small buff which I think they need. But also: it would incentivise Norway to build coastal cities and tech shipbuilding; the extra faith would get them a pantheon faster, which feels very Viking to me; it would encourage fishing boats generally, which I think fits with Norway modern strong fishing industry; it would synergise well with the stave church; and the extra faith could be later used to purchase berserkers offsetting their extra cost.

...and sorry for the long post. The words 'England ' and 'Nerf' seem to rile me at the moment...
 
Last edited:
I suppose you can just make the units skip the turn for the first idea, although I agree that it annoys me sometimes. But it is offering an option to movement with remaining movement points. Well, except in the case that there is no possible movement but it still asks you to movement the units.

I would like to critize the graphic depiction of hills. When they are covered by jungles/woods, there is almost no way to distinguish them from plains with bare eyes. This makes me need to carefully check them again and again before moving a unit or planning districts/wonders. Can we just have clearer distinction among hill and plain terrains ?
 
I didn't follow the "Rise and Fall" of England since vanilla release in detail, but why don't you make a simple un-nerf-mod for Vicky?
 
Isn't playing a mod and having fun better than not playing the game?
For example Civ5 was unplayable for me due to the National Wonders Nonsense so I changed the rules.
 
I respect, but really don't understand the resistance to playing mods. The mentality behind it seems to be "This is what the developers wanted, therefore this is what the game should be," and obeying that out of purity. But once you've already decided in your mind that the developers have made a mistake, what's to be gained by playing with that mistake rather than correcting it?
 
Top Bottom