youngsteve
Prince
This is the first day I have ever seen more people playing the older game than its successor on Steam. Pretty amazing stuff, & also pretty damning for Civ 6.
Civ 5 more popular than Civ 6
- Thread starter youngsteve
- Start date
Darth Tribble
Friendly Neighborhood Conqueror
The appearance does not appeal to me even though I prefer Civ IV's more cartoonish style over the super realistic Civ V style.
iammaxhailme
Emperor
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2015
- Messages
- 1,999
look at the sale prices
Deliverator
Graphical Hackificator
Then you haven't been watching. Civ V has had more players for the majority of the time since Civ VI released:
https://steamcharts.com/cmp/289070,8930#All
It's not really damning for Civ VI - it just that it doesn't have the range of modding capabilities that Civ V has yet. I'd expect Civ VI to pull ahead eventually once the DLL source code is released, together with price reductions and a possible 3rd expansion.
MarauderCH
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2012
- Messages
- 282
I have on older video card that cannot play Civ 6 even though I bought it. While I haven't played 5 since late last year, I had a ridiculous love for that game and played the [naughty] out of it. I modded the [naughty] out of it also which increased the enjoyment and long term playability of the game. Even though I haven't played it, I don't like the look of 6. The leaders look weird, like I am playing a game on Facebook. Like it was designed more for kids then for history lovers like myself.
King Phaedron
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2017
- Messages
- 164
I do like the new leaders and I do plan on checking it out eventually, because the expansion added weather effects, but I just got into using the map editor, so I'm definitely going to be here for quite a bit longer. I don't care for the way it looks otherwise. Except for the leader scenes, the graphics are a step down.
With districts, envoys, governers, I can see it's going to be a very different experience, with a big learning curve.
Instead of improving the AI's naval abilities, being able to make ships without having to have coastal cities seems to have made naval focus worthless.
What's the point, if you can't attack cities?
There's a lot of little things in Civ 6 that are just going to irk me. They put the minimap on the other side of the screen. I'm used to it being on the lower right.
I hate that it doesn't tell you how many turns until your next land tile, and which one it will be. I don't like it when things, like the minimap, are changed unnecesarily.
I mainly play Civ 5 and sometimes Civ 2. Doing away with the Luxury, Tax, Science focus and city based happiness feels like a mistake.
The revolts in cities do get annoying, but never having civil unrest is not realistic. The AI is also too tame. I wish there was still a possibility of sneak attacks, maybe a Skirmish mode where units in specific range would go to war for a small number of turns.
I feel like Civ 5 gives you too much control when you know what you're doing you can play everyone like a fiddle,
but Civ 6 seeks to limit your control in bad ways, like taking away the ability to know how your cities are expanding.
I wish they would've made an alternate version of Civ 5 that mostly uses the rules from civ 2, with all the other features, like embarking, city expansion within 3 tiles, better graphics etc. I would've been much more excited to see a Civ 2 reboot then what they did with Civ 6, but it does have it's charm.
With districts, envoys, governers, I can see it's going to be a very different experience, with a big learning curve.
Instead of improving the AI's naval abilities, being able to make ships without having to have coastal cities seems to have made naval focus worthless.
What's the point, if you can't attack cities?
There's a lot of little things in Civ 6 that are just going to irk me. They put the minimap on the other side of the screen. I'm used to it being on the lower right.
I hate that it doesn't tell you how many turns until your next land tile, and which one it will be. I don't like it when things, like the minimap, are changed unnecesarily.
I mainly play Civ 5 and sometimes Civ 2. Doing away with the Luxury, Tax, Science focus and city based happiness feels like a mistake.
The revolts in cities do get annoying, but never having civil unrest is not realistic. The AI is also too tame. I wish there was still a possibility of sneak attacks, maybe a Skirmish mode where units in specific range would go to war for a small number of turns.
I feel like Civ 5 gives you too much control when you know what you're doing you can play everyone like a fiddle,
but Civ 6 seeks to limit your control in bad ways, like taking away the ability to know how your cities are expanding.
I wish they would've made an alternate version of Civ 5 that mostly uses the rules from civ 2, with all the other features, like embarking, city expansion within 3 tiles, better graphics etc. I would've been much more excited to see a Civ 2 reboot then what they did with Civ 6, but it does have it's charm.
Cicerosaurus
Emperor
Civ 6 never grabbed me, much the same as Beyond Earth.
Hmmm, I bet the same was with Civ5 released, I am pretty sure more people stayed with civIV, but not possible to confirm, as 99+% copies of civIV are boxes, not steam.
And the reason civ5 is more popular than civVI now is that civVI offers no challange at all, even though most concepts are better than in civV
And the reason civ5 is more popular than civVI now is that civVI offers no challange at all, even though most concepts are better than in civV
Spokane
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2019
- Messages
- 5
I only bought Civ V and played it for the first time in May. I had just been sticking with IV and the very first Civ (both IBM and SNES versions). But I decided it was finally time and I have put about 800 hours into Civ V. I am not in a huge rush to try IV, and I do like V more than I like IV. But I still like IV. I also just played III pretty much for the first time, only like 3 bucks on Steam when I got it. I like it too but I don't quite like it as much as IV. I will check out II soon too. Even Civ Rev is something I may want to try.
Keep in mind I only played Civ for the first time in like 2008 or 2009. It was the very first one's SNES version. And then I bought IV in like 2010 or 2011 and got hooked on that. Its not the only series this has happened to with me. I often wait around too long really for a decent price lol. I only played Age of Empires for the first time a few years ago...... and thankfully I found out I hadn't personally missed much all these years. It just confirmed I don't like Real Time Strategy which I had already known pretty much, I get overwhelmed. Civ's turn based method has spoiled me I guess. The funny thing is I didn't even know AoE was RTS, I just knew about how it was one of the more popular games in the same vein of history as Civ.
And I am not super young, I am 29, so I just didn't get into Civ until I came about "adult" age.
So the moral of my story is, I am always a game behind anyway. So when 7 comes out I will buy 6. lol
Keep in mind I only played Civ for the first time in like 2008 or 2009. It was the very first one's SNES version. And then I bought IV in like 2010 or 2011 and got hooked on that. Its not the only series this has happened to with me. I often wait around too long really for a decent price lol. I only played Age of Empires for the first time a few years ago...... and thankfully I found out I hadn't personally missed much all these years. It just confirmed I don't like Real Time Strategy which I had already known pretty much, I get overwhelmed. Civ's turn based method has spoiled me I guess. The funny thing is I didn't even know AoE was RTS, I just knew about how it was one of the more popular games in the same vein of history as Civ.
And I am not super young, I am 29, so I just didn't get into Civ until I came about "adult" age.
So the moral of my story is, I am always a game behind anyway. So when 7 comes out I will buy 6. lol
Deliverator
Graphical Hackificator
Just to say that this thread's title is no longer true. Civ VI has pretty much been more popular than Civ V since November 2018 to a lesser or greater extent:
https://steamcharts.com/cmp/289070,8930#1y
https://steamcharts.com/cmp/289070,8930#1y
Spokane
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2019
- Messages
- 5
Analyzing that chart points to something interesting I have heard many people say though. The chart for VI skyrockets in January and February. This coincides with what......?!?! The release of Gathering Storm. By the time the end of April rolls around the concurrent players are more even, being about on average only 1 to 2,000 players off from one another. The thing I speak of I have heard many say is they are not a fan of the latest expansion or patches. So you can see people trying it out when it comes out and either decide they don't like it or get bored with it after the initial month. And many of those same people also don't seem to flock back to V either. The people who like it keep on playing consistently as is the same for V. And they both seem to have about the same amount of consistent players. Fluctuating between a few thousand apart from each other on average. 2-5 thousand more players when we say 30,000 to 35,000 really isn't that big of gap when you look at the numbers. So its true technically its now more popular, but the fact its still not far from being 50% of the player base still says something.
Long time V player here, just starting with VI, and on a Switch at that! Stats probably do not include all the tablet and mobile players, which is actually why I gave VI/Switch a try.
First impressions, and just one game played through. I think VI is okay. It is not really a successor to V though. It is a huge upgrade from Revolutions though. It is a license to print money for Firaxis I bet, so I expect VII to be even more mobile friendly. Civ is dead. Long live Civ!
First impressions, and just one game played through. I think VI is okay. It is not really a successor to V though. It is a huge upgrade from Revolutions though. It is a license to print money for Firaxis I bet, so I expect VII to be even more mobile friendly. Civ is dead. Long live Civ!
King Phaedron
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2017
- Messages
- 164
I finally got Gathering Storm, and let me just say, for anyone still playing Civ 5, it has it's pros and cons, but mostly it is very good. At the very least it's a huge step in the right direction. I didn't like Civ 6 at first, it looked way too cartoonish compared to Civ 5. I still like the menus, graphics, and units better overall from Civ 5, but Civ 6 is way more realistic. There are minor details here and there I don't like, but the good far out weighs those things.
Brave New World was intended to be super casual so that it would sell all over the world, be translated into all languages, etc. But when you've played it enough and really know what you're doing, there is a LOT in Civ 5 that is easy to exploit on your path to victory in ANY game. It's just become too easy for me, on anything other then Multiplayer. The AI in particular and the warmongering system is easy to manipulate. Heck all you need to do is add Genghis Khan to a game to be sure you have city states to liberate and you'll be able to get away with genocide and everyone will still respect you. If I split my army and take someones last city, and also liberate a city state in the same turn, I incur no penalty whatsoever.
CIVILIZATION 6 is largely a RETURN to the original systems in Civilization 1 and 2, along with being mixed with the features from 5, and some newer stuff. For this reason, maybe Civ 6 having more cartoonish graphics then Civ 5 makes sense. After years of playing Civ 5 I miss having an actual government and city specific happiness, but rather then go back to playing Civ 2, there is a whole new experience waiting.
CIV 6 VS CIV 5
Happiness - is once again city specific. The problem with the original Happiness system from Civ 1 and 2 was that every turn you'd have to scroll through a message saying XXX city is revolting, and wait through an animation screen of the revolt. When 10+ cities are doing this every turn, it gets annoying very quickly. If they had just put the cities into Riot without the messages and animation screens it would've been fine. Having that one city that's rioting where everyone is going mad in an otherwise happy empire is way more realistic.
Happiness in Civ 5 is setup in such a way that you almost NEVER have a happiness problem. If you EVER go into unhappiness it's because you haven't managed things properly, and because of the severe pentalty to growth and esp production, going into unhappiness is something you should almost never do. I mean it's fine at the end of the game, I've had games where I was over -100 unhappiness, dealing with rebels, and still capturing cities left and right and every with all the combat penalties of -20 unhappiness, I was unstoppable. Happiness is honestly a joke in Civ 5.
-
Reasons for War - This is a HUGE part of making the Civ experience better. Wars do not happen without reason. I really like that I am able to state what the issue actually is instead of having the AI second guess and judge me falsely. It would even better if I was able to threaten war. Whats the point of making demands without ultimatums? I would like to be able to say to the AI, we demand this, and if you don't give us what we want, we are going to war. Making a demand in Civ 5 NEVER WORKS, at least not for me, even when I am vastly superior to the AI, I have never seen them give in to a demand. Instead, you go to war, and make your demands when the AI wants to sue for peace.
In Civ 5 you don't have to denounce someone first before going to war with them. In the early game, if you do something like start a war to steal a great prophet or a settler or something, the AI will often ask you for friendship if you make peace with them without capturing their cities and doing a lot of damage, esp if you ask for gold instead of the city they are willing to give you in peace. This is one mistake I feel that CIv 6 has made with having to denounce someone first. Maybe my reason for war is just territorial expansion, in which case I have no reason to tell world leaders so in so is bad. In this case I am admitting they did nothing wrong, nor am I asking anyone to take my side against them.
-
Emergencies - This was also an excellent idea. Increasing the movement of units and forcing the AI to focus on actually accomplishing something lest they incur permanent penalties, like a high stacks game of poker where the bet has been maximized. Alliances are often pitiful in other Civ games, because the AI may declare war on your enemies, but most of the time they won't actually help you on the battlefield. Wars in Civ 5 are mostly to get the AI hating each other, or if AI are next to other, getting them at war helps to destabilize the region, esp if you are planning an invasion of your own. But since Emergencies are done through the world congress, assuming thats only for late in the game, by which time you are either way ahead of the AI or on a path to losing anyway.
-
Actual forms of government - Governments in Civ 5 are nothing more then social polities. You can have both monarchy and republic active at the same time, for instance, and then go ahead and fill out Piety to make a Theocracy on top of it. There are no real governments in CIv 5, it's always the same. But one thing I hated about Civ 6 and the Early Civ 1 and 2, was the Anarchy system. Anarchy lasts for too many turns, it is unreasonable. Ok, I shouldn't have to wait 200 years to go from dictator to monarchy or whatever. Because of how many years a Turn in Civ may actually represent, esp in the beginning, Anarchy just is not reasonable, it was even more of a pain in the butt in the early Civs.
What you can do is, save before changing governments, and do it a time when you can easily forward a few turns. Then if it doesn't take you out of anarchy within a reasonable number of turns, reload, and try chagnign the government next time. This is the same way for Ruins / Huts / Tribal Villages, you can still get around the new random seed option they let you do in Civ 5. If you didn't get anything from the hut, or encampment (playing Sumeria here) just reload and wait another turn. You may need to also engage in combat, but after a combat the seed will definitely change.
-
Loyalty - another excellent feature in Civ 6, where it is possible for cities to shift allegiances. Again, loyalty and natural disasters did exist in Civ 1 and 2, well not loyalty, there was instead a mechanic called Corruption, and if you let your cities become corrupt and don't build courthouse, there was a danger they could turn over to somehow else. In Civ 6 they can become free cities, and then eventually join another empire.
-
City States: I do not like the Menu screens in Civ 6 as much as I did in Civ 5, this includes the city states screens, and I liked how each CS would have it's own little tune that plays for a couple seconds. But the Envoy system seems to be better then the way CS were handled in Civ 5, where you are mostly paying gold to CS to gain influence. You may get influence through quests, but actually paying gold to CS in Civ 5 is something you really don't do in the first third of the game, until you've really built up your economy it isn't worth it. Taking control of a CS military is more useful then spending 1000 gold to ally with that CS right next to your enemies, and they sit there doing nothing.
-
Civ 6 doesn't seem to penalize you for having too many cities the way Civ 5 does. At least I don't think it does. But with districts and having to construct wonders on actual tiles, it seems like the world as a whole has become smaller, so I doubt that anyone is going to be building 30-50 cities in Civ 6, there just isn't any room for it. Granted I've only just started the game, I'm on like turn 40 or something, and I almost always build wide empires, so we'll see.
-
Another thing that may put people off is that it seems like Civ 6 has a MASSIVE Learning curve compared to Civ 5, but then I had a lot to learn when I starting playing Civ 5 too, since in the past I only played Civ 1 and 2. There is a lot to learn, and it seems like Civ 6 has been designed in such a way to prevent you from having any kind of real advantage. I know I complained at the beginning about Civ 5 being easy to exploit, but still is a lot I don't like about Civ 6.
Things I hate such as worker charges. So now you really have to keep pumping out workers, and you can't even build the pyramids except on desert. To hell with that. The Pyramids in Egypt were not built by the Egyptians, they go back to at least 10,000 BC and at that time the Nile Valley was lush and green. There are pyramids all over the world built in all types of terrain. Turning the Pyramids into Petra was a VERY BAD IDEA. I suspect worker charges are going to drive me insane, but I can see why this is being done. As the player, it is easy to reload your game. You can almost always avoid having to lose units. Worker charges force you to lose units, and force you to keep building workers, but in Civ 5 I always reach a point where there is nothing left to build. Maybe it won't annoy me as much as I think it will.
-
Last but not least, the AI is so utterly broken and bugged in Civ 5, it honestly ruins the game. Even though the AI players are AI, the whole point is to make them SEEM HUMAN. Flags, Variables, and Text take up barely any memory or disk space. There is no excuse, aside from lazy programming and lack of funds, to not adding a lot more text and contingencies to the AI programming. I mean hell, the old Chessmaster games are better AI then Civ 5. You know I'm talking about here? Like an old NES RPG should have a lot less talking, dialogue, towns, characters, etc then a new RPG, but in most cases they don't. I mean they could program enough text and questions in NPCs that have some lengthly conversations if they wanted to, and it wouldn't take up barely any memory to do so.
The Broken AI in Civ 5, where to even start? Things like, making you promise to not settle near them, and then you settle a town an island on the other side of the world, WAY far away from, and the game says you broke you promise, because they are saying thats their territory when it's nowhere near them. A lot of stuff is off and bugged, like maybe your vote crushed someone's proposal, but they won't give you a message about until you've done something else, like buy a tile of land near them. The AI tend to complain about things. Also, when you complete CS quests that you didn't even ask for and they are angry at you. Like I'm just going about my business, I never asked for City state X to be impressed because I found a new natural wonder or whatever. Or when they are angry because you are allied with a City state IN YOUR TERRITORY that you have been major allies with all throughout the game.
Um no, that City State is NOT within your zone of influence. In most diplo screens in Civ 5 you can apologize or tell them to piss off and it doesn't affect anything either way. The whole choice of how you respond to AI, unless it's like whether to move your troops or not, is just an illusion for the player. Whether you say very well, or you'll pay for that makes no difference at all.
I don't know if it's the same in Civ 6, but the way the AI will denounce and antagonize you in Civ 5 is often just ridiculous and annoying. It isn't in their interest to keep insulting a superior player who could easily wipe them out. Like I wish the AI had even the most remote understanding of their situation.
What is amusing is that I have stick with 1 city for like 100 turns in Civ 5, usually a game I began and wanted to scout and then reset, the AI will expand more and act very differently. Then why I go back to turn 0 and actually try, it's like the AI all chooses Tradition and doesn't even bother, and barely expands at all. Well there is a lot more to be said about the broken AI in Civ 5, I can only hope its better in Civ 6.
Brave New World was intended to be super casual so that it would sell all over the world, be translated into all languages, etc. But when you've played it enough and really know what you're doing, there is a LOT in Civ 5 that is easy to exploit on your path to victory in ANY game. It's just become too easy for me, on anything other then Multiplayer. The AI in particular and the warmongering system is easy to manipulate. Heck all you need to do is add Genghis Khan to a game to be sure you have city states to liberate and you'll be able to get away with genocide and everyone will still respect you. If I split my army and take someones last city, and also liberate a city state in the same turn, I incur no penalty whatsoever.
CIVILIZATION 6 is largely a RETURN to the original systems in Civilization 1 and 2, along with being mixed with the features from 5, and some newer stuff. For this reason, maybe Civ 6 having more cartoonish graphics then Civ 5 makes sense. After years of playing Civ 5 I miss having an actual government and city specific happiness, but rather then go back to playing Civ 2, there is a whole new experience waiting.
CIV 6 VS CIV 5
Happiness - is once again city specific. The problem with the original Happiness system from Civ 1 and 2 was that every turn you'd have to scroll through a message saying XXX city is revolting, and wait through an animation screen of the revolt. When 10+ cities are doing this every turn, it gets annoying very quickly. If they had just put the cities into Riot without the messages and animation screens it would've been fine. Having that one city that's rioting where everyone is going mad in an otherwise happy empire is way more realistic.
Happiness in Civ 5 is setup in such a way that you almost NEVER have a happiness problem. If you EVER go into unhappiness it's because you haven't managed things properly, and because of the severe pentalty to growth and esp production, going into unhappiness is something you should almost never do. I mean it's fine at the end of the game, I've had games where I was over -100 unhappiness, dealing with rebels, and still capturing cities left and right and every with all the combat penalties of -20 unhappiness, I was unstoppable. Happiness is honestly a joke in Civ 5.
-
Reasons for War - This is a HUGE part of making the Civ experience better. Wars do not happen without reason. I really like that I am able to state what the issue actually is instead of having the AI second guess and judge me falsely. It would even better if I was able to threaten war. Whats the point of making demands without ultimatums? I would like to be able to say to the AI, we demand this, and if you don't give us what we want, we are going to war. Making a demand in Civ 5 NEVER WORKS, at least not for me, even when I am vastly superior to the AI, I have never seen them give in to a demand. Instead, you go to war, and make your demands when the AI wants to sue for peace.
In Civ 5 you don't have to denounce someone first before going to war with them. In the early game, if you do something like start a war to steal a great prophet or a settler or something, the AI will often ask you for friendship if you make peace with them without capturing their cities and doing a lot of damage, esp if you ask for gold instead of the city they are willing to give you in peace. This is one mistake I feel that CIv 6 has made with having to denounce someone first. Maybe my reason for war is just territorial expansion, in which case I have no reason to tell world leaders so in so is bad. In this case I am admitting they did nothing wrong, nor am I asking anyone to take my side against them.
-
Emergencies - This was also an excellent idea. Increasing the movement of units and forcing the AI to focus on actually accomplishing something lest they incur permanent penalties, like a high stacks game of poker where the bet has been maximized. Alliances are often pitiful in other Civ games, because the AI may declare war on your enemies, but most of the time they won't actually help you on the battlefield. Wars in Civ 5 are mostly to get the AI hating each other, or if AI are next to other, getting them at war helps to destabilize the region, esp if you are planning an invasion of your own. But since Emergencies are done through the world congress, assuming thats only for late in the game, by which time you are either way ahead of the AI or on a path to losing anyway.
-
Actual forms of government - Governments in Civ 5 are nothing more then social polities. You can have both monarchy and republic active at the same time, for instance, and then go ahead and fill out Piety to make a Theocracy on top of it. There are no real governments in CIv 5, it's always the same. But one thing I hated about Civ 6 and the Early Civ 1 and 2, was the Anarchy system. Anarchy lasts for too many turns, it is unreasonable. Ok, I shouldn't have to wait 200 years to go from dictator to monarchy or whatever. Because of how many years a Turn in Civ may actually represent, esp in the beginning, Anarchy just is not reasonable, it was even more of a pain in the butt in the early Civs.
What you can do is, save before changing governments, and do it a time when you can easily forward a few turns. Then if it doesn't take you out of anarchy within a reasonable number of turns, reload, and try chagnign the government next time. This is the same way for Ruins / Huts / Tribal Villages, you can still get around the new random seed option they let you do in Civ 5. If you didn't get anything from the hut, or encampment (playing Sumeria here) just reload and wait another turn. You may need to also engage in combat, but after a combat the seed will definitely change.
-
Loyalty - another excellent feature in Civ 6, where it is possible for cities to shift allegiances. Again, loyalty and natural disasters did exist in Civ 1 and 2, well not loyalty, there was instead a mechanic called Corruption, and if you let your cities become corrupt and don't build courthouse, there was a danger they could turn over to somehow else. In Civ 6 they can become free cities, and then eventually join another empire.
-
City States: I do not like the Menu screens in Civ 6 as much as I did in Civ 5, this includes the city states screens, and I liked how each CS would have it's own little tune that plays for a couple seconds. But the Envoy system seems to be better then the way CS were handled in Civ 5, where you are mostly paying gold to CS to gain influence. You may get influence through quests, but actually paying gold to CS in Civ 5 is something you really don't do in the first third of the game, until you've really built up your economy it isn't worth it. Taking control of a CS military is more useful then spending 1000 gold to ally with that CS right next to your enemies, and they sit there doing nothing.
-
Civ 6 doesn't seem to penalize you for having too many cities the way Civ 5 does. At least I don't think it does. But with districts and having to construct wonders on actual tiles, it seems like the world as a whole has become smaller, so I doubt that anyone is going to be building 30-50 cities in Civ 6, there just isn't any room for it. Granted I've only just started the game, I'm on like turn 40 or something, and I almost always build wide empires, so we'll see.
-
Another thing that may put people off is that it seems like Civ 6 has a MASSIVE Learning curve compared to Civ 5, but then I had a lot to learn when I starting playing Civ 5 too, since in the past I only played Civ 1 and 2. There is a lot to learn, and it seems like Civ 6 has been designed in such a way to prevent you from having any kind of real advantage. I know I complained at the beginning about Civ 5 being easy to exploit, but still is a lot I don't like about Civ 6.
Things I hate such as worker charges. So now you really have to keep pumping out workers, and you can't even build the pyramids except on desert. To hell with that. The Pyramids in Egypt were not built by the Egyptians, they go back to at least 10,000 BC and at that time the Nile Valley was lush and green. There are pyramids all over the world built in all types of terrain. Turning the Pyramids into Petra was a VERY BAD IDEA. I suspect worker charges are going to drive me insane, but I can see why this is being done. As the player, it is easy to reload your game. You can almost always avoid having to lose units. Worker charges force you to lose units, and force you to keep building workers, but in Civ 5 I always reach a point where there is nothing left to build. Maybe it won't annoy me as much as I think it will.
-
Last but not least, the AI is so utterly broken and bugged in Civ 5, it honestly ruins the game. Even though the AI players are AI, the whole point is to make them SEEM HUMAN. Flags, Variables, and Text take up barely any memory or disk space. There is no excuse, aside from lazy programming and lack of funds, to not adding a lot more text and contingencies to the AI programming. I mean hell, the old Chessmaster games are better AI then Civ 5. You know I'm talking about here? Like an old NES RPG should have a lot less talking, dialogue, towns, characters, etc then a new RPG, but in most cases they don't. I mean they could program enough text and questions in NPCs that have some lengthly conversations if they wanted to, and it wouldn't take up barely any memory to do so.
The Broken AI in Civ 5, where to even start? Things like, making you promise to not settle near them, and then you settle a town an island on the other side of the world, WAY far away from, and the game says you broke you promise, because they are saying thats their territory when it's nowhere near them. A lot of stuff is off and bugged, like maybe your vote crushed someone's proposal, but they won't give you a message about until you've done something else, like buy a tile of land near them. The AI tend to complain about things. Also, when you complete CS quests that you didn't even ask for and they are angry at you. Like I'm just going about my business, I never asked for City state X to be impressed because I found a new natural wonder or whatever. Or when they are angry because you are allied with a City state IN YOUR TERRITORY that you have been major allies with all throughout the game.
Um no, that City State is NOT within your zone of influence. In most diplo screens in Civ 5 you can apologize or tell them to piss off and it doesn't affect anything either way. The whole choice of how you respond to AI, unless it's like whether to move your troops or not, is just an illusion for the player. Whether you say very well, or you'll pay for that makes no difference at all.
I don't know if it's the same in Civ 6, but the way the AI will denounce and antagonize you in Civ 5 is often just ridiculous and annoying. It isn't in their interest to keep insulting a superior player who could easily wipe them out. Like I wish the AI had even the most remote understanding of their situation.
What is amusing is that I have stick with 1 city for like 100 turns in Civ 5, usually a game I began and wanted to scout and then reset, the AI will expand more and act very differently. Then why I go back to turn 0 and actually try, it's like the AI all chooses Tradition and doesn't even bother, and barely expands at all. Well there is a lot more to be said about the broken AI in Civ 5, I can only hope its better in Civ 6.
The IA are the weaker point in the Civ, in the paradox games(Europa universalis 4) the diplomacy are very deeper if Civ 6 or Civ 7 have a sistem like Europauniversalis(with points if you have +1 they accept,attitude friendly/hostile,threathened,protective etc...) i think become a perfect game. The revolt in Eu4 have a reason, the revolt in Civ VI, no. If i Crash a revolte they rebel after 50 years again in Eu4(if have not reselved the problem) on Civ 6, I crash a revolte, max 5 turn the city revolt again! Again, and again!
I just have a few 6 games under my belt. I started at the default difficulty level, 3/Prince I think that is. Worked my way up to 5/King not really getting all the mechanics, but DOM VC seemed to be straightforward. And I did loose my first King game to an AI SV, but it felt like that was because I was thrashing around. 2nd King game won by DOM VC. 3rd King DOM game was very easy, so I tried the next level, 6/Emperor. I was so far behind at the end! 2nd Emperor game, I just tried to be a builder. Again, I am barely in the Modern Era and multiple AIs launching space race projects. No fun at all!
Sid made this the same fatal mistake with Civ III and IV. It is ridiculous they can not scale the difficulty levels well! Civ II and SMAC paced well as one learned the game. CivV did a decent job with the level difficulty. I think Firaxis is chasing people off PCs to play mobile. Probably that makes business sense. I just bought a Switch Lite to play VI on my long (2hr each way) daily commute. It is okay, but not great. If V was available on a tablet, I would probably being that instead. Clearly, it is time for me to look for a new game series!
Sid made this the same fatal mistake with Civ III and IV. It is ridiculous they can not scale the difficulty levels well! Civ II and SMAC paced well as one learned the game. CivV did a decent job with the level difficulty. I think Firaxis is chasing people off PCs to play mobile. Probably that makes business sense. I just bought a Switch Lite to play VI on my long (2hr each way) daily commute. It is okay, but not great. If V was available on a tablet, I would probably being that instead. Clearly, it is time for me to look for a new game series!
MrRadar
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2014
- Messages
- 2,215
Vanilla AI, which you play on Switch, used to beeline space a lot. With further expansions there were some changes in the tech tree, and what with various bugs and such until June update this year, GS barbarians were bugged and scarce and AI a weakling even on Deity. June update fixed the barbs, September update tweaked some numbers and now AI became scarier again. So I suggest you wait until end of November and get R&F+GS. You will play a very different game, much more interesting and polished. There are still plenty of rough points to keep them busy for another 3 years at this rate of improvement, but still, the game is much shinier than vanilla.
Otherwise, Humankind by Amplidude announced for next year seems to generate some interest. Have a look, if you hadn't already.
Similar threads
