1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Civ V v Civ VI: how is this still a thing?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by acluewithout, Oct 18, 2019.

  1. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    10,394
    When you keep 30% of a game there will always be comparisons, especially if a game is loved.
    Then from comparisons and pressure they introduce old things again.
    What we have is just natural, people like to compare and some people will always like an old version over a new.

    For me personally, the two major differences in the game are
    Adjacency - the district change
    Choice - I got bored in V fairly quick with the lack of choice which I just do not get here in VI

    I preferred V combat and civics in many ways but VI’s choice is far more preferable despite the unpleasant graphics and GUI.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
    nzcamel and acluewithout like this.
  2. Deliverator

    Deliverator Graphical Hackificator

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,530
    Location:
    London, UK
    I think this was a especially poor and inaccurate article by Strategy Gamer's usual standards.

    "It finally happened. After several years of 'will they, won’t they,' Civilization V and Civilization VI have switched places on Steam’s top games list."

    This technically happened back in November 2018 and has remained the case ever since so this is presenting old news as new news.

    "Urban legend has it that Civ V had an unpopular reception, although major outlets actually gave it scores above 90%; essentially, because it was such a radical departure from Civ 4, it split the player base somewhat much like the split between Civ V & Civ VI, except everyone got over it much quicker."

    You can tell this person wasn't around when Civ V was released - they've just looked at Metacritic or something. Civ V was poor by most actual players reckoning on release, various big game magazines over rating it doesn't tell you what most players thought at the time. Looking backwards things are heavily skewed by the huge improvements to the base game that came with patches and expansions especially BNW. Read some Civfanatics posts from 2010 regarding the state of Civ V on release and you'll understand that this is more than an "urban myth".

    "Rumours suggest that a third expansion is on the way, which is one more than Civilization V ever got. It will once again focus on minor details instead of the global picture, with things like plagues and diseases joining the current loyalty and natural disaster mechanics added in the previous two expansions. Civ VI may have finally surpassed its predecessor in terms of playerbase, but in the eyes of the community, only an inevitable Civilization 7 will surpass the legacy of Civ 5."

    Stating speculation as fact is just bad journalism. Especially this "It will once again focus on minor details instead of the global picture" and "in the eyes of the community, only an inevitable Civilization 7 will surpass the legacy of Civ 5" is just provocative ill-informed nonsense.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    nzcamel, Meluhhan, cvb and 4 others like this.
  3. Deliverator

    Deliverator Graphical Hackificator

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,530
    Location:
    London, UK
    Graphically Civ VI is more moddable. Gameplay-wise Civ V is more moddable. Without full gameplay-moddability the greater graphical capabilities aren't worth as much.
     
    cvb and Elhoim like this.
  4. Jeppetto

    Jeppetto Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2018
    Messages:
    117
    Gender:
    Male
    As for Social Policies and Ideologies, a lot of people as I can see consider it feature lacking in Civ 6, but really, it's already there just so reworked one might not accept it as that. If the argument is one wants the exact iteration of Civ 5, argument must be made that they weren't changed for the sake of change but improved into more strategic version, so rolling back to inferior system makes no sense. And I say that as someone who finds charm in Civ 5 systems, but objectively, I cannot defend them against Civ 6's better iterations.

    Social Policies are still Policies. Once again, I love Talent Trees but I cannot ignore their inherent flaws, limitations, repetetivness, meta-sensitivity. There's lack of different pathing in achieveing goal in them, the goals hardly move from game to game and it's easy for certain ways to be effective under all circumstances, not giving space for different goal or path in different game If the events are different, too. Policies in Civ 6 in their reactive nature achieve much better a system where different policy is good in different situations and you may adjust them frequently enough that your policies aren't snowbally pack of bonuses you want whole game but set of contemporary bonuses you need to achieve given goal or mitigate served situation.

    Instead of getting +15% Prod towards Wonders and snowball off it, you may sacrifice Economic Slot for temporary advantage. Instead of getting +1 Prod to each city as freebie advantage, it's now early multi-purpose Prod boost, while decent Prod boosts are moved into what you want to focus on in the moment - Cavalry? Slow army? Naval army? Builders? Settlers?

    However, If someone would criticise this system, too, I could hardly stop them, giving that there are still a lot of permanently good Policies you want to stay on or Policies which don't feel like they fit temporary aspect. Policy that reduces upgrade cost sounds good on paper as another strategic layer, but I'd question whether it is worth constantly moving it out and in as you hardly upgrade all classes at once and hardly have gold to upgrade all units of class at once, which makes it better fit for something permanent, sabotaging its purpose. Adjacency multipliers, Gold from TR are another examples which feel like permanent benefits good to sit on, sabotaging system's purpose. But maybe it's just more complex than I realize and they want some permanent and some contemporary Policies.

    Civics are much more boring and limiting compared to Civ 5 Social Policies, yes, but I consider it an extra system and Policy Cards as the direct descendant of Civ 5 Social Policies.

    Ideologies then are mostly Governments. Ideologies in Civ 5 were mostly just Democracy, Fascism and Communism and they call it that outright in Civ 6 without pretense or generalization. Except now we have Ideologies from the start, they are more flexible (you may go for Oligarchy to defend yourself rather than investing into it as Domination goal until the end of the game) while still maintaining the Tall/Wide/War identity. And Tenents were merged with Policies, maintaining their flexible nature (less this leads into that compared to Social Policies) while adding the reactive nature of what's best now and now only.

    Once again, I find charm in both SP and Ideologies, Governments and Policies in Civ 6 might not always hit the mark in what they were intended for, and I enjoy some good snowball into godly state, but in Civ 6 they really tried to make the game with little snowball (even World Congress and City-States were changed that way) and Governments and Policies are really less snowbally and more strategic versions of SP and Ideologies. So, given that many people would want these back in Civ 6, what would be their added value and wouldn't they conflict with anti-snowball nature?

    Also, as for permanent choices, R&F tried to fix that as both Governors and Government Buildings are attempt for that. Government Buildings are basically Policy Adoption bonuses. The first three Government Buildings in the code are literally called Tall, Wide, Conquest, just like there's Tradition, Liberty and Honor Policy Trees early in game of Civ 5. Both of these give you permenent bonuses with more strategic twist to them (placment and removeability of Governors, mutual exclusivity of Governent Buildings etc).

    But that may be just how I look at things. Anyway, this post was just small theory-making on the mentoined topic of lack of SP and Ideologies in Civ 6 combined with some people's desire to re-entroduce them in 3rd EXP from other topics. I am not good at this game so many of this is just theoretical working.

    Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
     
  5. Hakan-i Cihan

    Hakan-i Cihan Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,278
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Data certainly implies that Civ V is still competing with civ 6 and in fact more than that. I am going to provide a video about most popular games on steam from 2012 - 2019:
    Spoiler :

    During 2012 till some time after launch of civ 6, civ V was always in top 11 (don't ask me why they did not make it top 10). If you look to civ 6 it is only in the top 11 for very brief periods. From these charts one can even say that civ 6 wasn't a succes like civ V was. Although I also like 6 more than 5, I suppose one should look to other possible explanations than which version is better. Things like moddability as already suggested could be a possible explanation, but also a shift in game preferences to other type of games or that some/most people only buy/play it when they are sure the content is complete (no additional content anymore). Especially if I look to steam charts of civ V the highest number of average players was after quite some time when all expansions were released and DLL source code was provided with peaks in July 2013 (~41.000), January/February 2016 ( ~42.000) and July 2016 (~43.000).

    I want to point out to a "top" comment in the video I linked: "Civilization VI came, killed itself and took Civ V down with it."
    Though I don't agree with this comment, I can understand it.
     
    Elhoim likes this.
  6. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    10,394
    Weirdly I just do not use them anymore while I used to religiously. Once I have enough gold to upgrade (which is worth better than 2:1 against production) it often gets spent on buildings which is a value of 4:1 so I now feel like it’s +1 prod per trade route for the better one at mercantilism. Science and culture on the other hand or faster movement within borders just seems to give the nice boost. Sure in MP gold is short but in SP it is not.
    But you are not alone in believing these little trade route benefits are the best treasures, the vast majority here seem to.
    It’s funny but @Lily_Lancer said a couple of months ago that +1 gold off maintenance was a rubbish card and I had already limited its use a lot. I have tried once a year in a thread to explain the 4:1 for extra gold but it’s lost on many, or maybe it is just me, but I do notice gold gets spent at 4:1 rates when I have a glut of it.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  7. Jeppetto

    Jeppetto Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2018
    Messages:
    117
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, I didn't really do math behind it much, I am simply used to use it frequently. I like Gold, it's rather flexible and instant so I appreciate it probably more than I should.
    I use -1 Gold on unit maitenance (If that's what you meant) as Oligarchy from Civ5, simply making Archers garrisoned in frontal cities free for defense, it feels nice to me when I don't focus on military - though I do know that there's certainly better alternatives when going to war. But AI seems to use Leveé en Masse a lot, I feel like 90% of gossip messages are about them switching to that policy, lol.
     
  8. Elhoim

    Elhoim Iron Tower Studio Dev

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,049
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Isidro, Argentina.
    I definitely think they should revamp the policy cards, merging the less useful ones, or buffing them up. Personally, I think the cards should be more about broad general directions, instead of having too many of them being extremely situational.
     
    Jeppetto likes this.
  9. KayAU

    KayAU King

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2014
    Messages:
    691
    I don't accept it as that. :) They may be called the same, but they work so differently, they are really completely different systems. Social Policies in Civ V are permanent bonuses you get to choose as you reach certain culture tresholds. This is not unique to Civ V, several strategy games have this, and most have more apt names for the systems: in Beyond Earth, it is called "Virtues", in Stellaris, it's "Traditions", and in Europa Universalis, it's "National Ideas". The concept should also be familiar for RPG players, as Social Policies in Civ V are very similar to what you would call "Perks". This is nothing at all like Social Policies in Civ VI, which are basically ways to customize your governement.

    I also don't agree that Civ V Ideologies are basically Civ VI Governments. Again, there is some overlap in the names, but Ideologies work completely differently. Ideologies in Civ V was a combination of another set of bonus trees, as with the "Social Policies" in that game, a set of prizes you competed for, and a way to compete for influence and power. It had a major impact on diplomatic relations, as each ideology was basically a team you got to pick for the late game. Consider this:
    • The first two civs to choose a certain ideology got two bonus tenets, rewarding those who got on the team first, but also incentivizing you to pick a different team from those who came before you
    • Each ideology gave access to a unique and powerful World Wonder
    • Choosing a certain ideology could turn friends into enemies, and enemies into friends
    • Each civ with an ideology would influence every other civ with an ideology, to a magnitude proportional to their cultural influence
    • The World Congress could also boost the influence of a certain ideology
    • The pressure from a competing ideology could create crippling unrest in a civ, to the point of forcing them to switching ideologies
    • Switching ideologies would cause you to lose all the tenets (bonuses) you had invested in for your old ideology
    I do really miss the Ideology system...it added some much needed spice to the late game.
     
    Equilin, acluewithout and kaspergm like this.
  10. kaspergm

    kaspergm Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,537
    Just out of curiosity: What are you thinking about when you talk of "choice" in Civ6 - are you meaning no single strategy is optimal, or something else?

    Like others have mentioned above, I think the comparison Civ5 to Civ6 is meaningful. I had expected Civ6 to come out as the clear winner after the 2nd expansion, but sadly, that is not how things have gone - in fact, the more I play Civ6, the less I feel it stands up to the previous iteration. Yes, it improves on some of 5's flaws, but it also has its own set of limitations, most importantly that there's much less variation between games in 6 than I felt there was in 5. In far the majority of my Civ6 games, I pick the same strategy, more or less the same tech path, the same governments, the same religious beliefs, and not least use the same policies. The latter is a real downer, because for all the lack of flexibility in Civ5's social policy trees, they offered a real variation between games (at least after being what I felt was balanced through some of the mods I used). I could pick a certain civ, and depending on whether I opened with Tradition, Liberty or Honor, and followed with Piety, Patronage, Aesthetics or Commerce, the game would evolve in radically different directions. 5's system was not perfect - for a starter, all policy trees could have had the "pick a subset" mechanism of the latter Ideologies to offer even more variation and customization between games - but it's better than Civ6, where I will find myself switching in an out of the same about dozen or so policies throughout the game in every single game, with quite little variation.

    To improve Civ6, I think they need to make the policies fewer and more general, and then make it so you can only switch on special occasions - like when entering a new era, and additionally when changing to a different government - to prevent the cheesy switch-in, switch-out strategies.
     
    Elhoim likes this.
  11. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,601
    Gender:
    Male
    That confuses me heavily. Are you just going into MR when you're putting out faith? Are you taken Crusade/Defender of the Faith if you're not at war. Are you picking Oligarchy when not at war? Are you archer rushing a nonexistent neighbor?

    In a game where nobody can agree on what to build first, I really don't think every game plays the same; rather people choose to play the same.

    I mean I agree that some things are really poorly balanced like religious beliefs as 80% of them are useless and pantheons sotta (but even pantheons can be a debate if the no-brainer Religious Settlements are taken)

    I also don't think I ever take the same set of cards every game either.
     
  12. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    10,394
    There is always an optimal strategy when you refine it down but when there is such contention purely about the opening moves there is clearly some choice involved.
    Civ VI is not perfect but I tend to find the opposite of what you are saying. In V there were certain things that seemed much more repetitive.
    In VI I feel more able to do what I want and there is more mechanics to keep me amused. Yes they often are just different flavours of the same thing but overall I find it richer, more diverse and more contentious. ever played with Conquistadors? RNDY, Sugaba? ... all make the civ play quite differently.
    Me neither
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  13. acluewithout

    acluewithout Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    2,712
    Is Civ 6 repetitive?

    No, not at all.

    Civ 5’s repetitive “four city tradition rush national college” sounds a little overblown to me. From what I’ve read and seen, that may have been nearly always the most optimal approach, but it sounds like other approaches were viable.

    Bit regardless, I completed agree with @Archon_Wing and @Victoria that Civ 6 games are much more situational. If you are playing well, maybe even efficiently, then you really are forced to adapt. I basically play the same Civ with the same map settings at the same difficulty every game (England, C&I, Immortal, D3), and I never have two games that play the same way.

    But there is some nuance to that. First, there are some beats that are the same in most games. I’m nearly always pushing for 8-10 Cities by turn 100; I’m nearly always rushing to feudalism, and it Recorded History etc. But the timing and the order varies, and that’s more about key goals and the real question is how you reach those goals.

    Second, yes, I do research the same techs and try to hit the same Eurekas every game, but it’s not really repetitive. I mean, I’ll research Masonary every game, and I’ll always try to build a quarry first. But I’m always going to want quarries, and why and when I research Masonary changes (sometimes I need walls early, sometimes I need rams, sometimes I need none of these and I get to it much later and sometimes I have no quarries and have to hard tech it). I certainly don’t have a set order or timing of doing things. It’s much more variable.

    (The Era system also maybe pushes towards some repetitive play. I basically always have to build a flipping galley for the +2. But even that’s not too bad. Most things that earn era score are things I would do anyway, so Era is really more about opportunity and timing. I mean, I’ll always want to clear this barb camp, but do I do it now and potentially waste Era Score, or delay until it’s optimal but risk the camp spawning out of control or someone else clearing it?)

    Third, because the challenge level is relatively low, you can get away with playing the same way every game. Added to that, if you get fixated on certain plays (I must always build colloseum) then, yeah, games will be similar. But if you play the same way every game you’re going to have a lot of games where you’re really grinding because your play isn’t at all efficient or optimal, and you may just get smashed by the AI or lag. Basically, to play well, you need to adapt, but the game doesn’t usually massively punish you for not playing well.

    Social Policies v Culture Tree

    I’ve said above that I think the lack of something like a Social Policies tree is a big difference between Civ 5 and 6. But I wanted to add one thing.

    I don’t think the Civ 6 culture tree really replaces Civ 5 Social Policies. Sure, SPs were made to run on culture and filled in the role of “governments” and “social institutions”, but really it was a mechanism for changing and specialising your empire (IMO). Indeed, I think that’s why it didn’t work as a stand in for government / institutions because “changing and specialising your empire” is very different and inherently inflexible.

    Basically, I think Civ 6 has a proper government and policy system - and Civ 5 basically didn’t. But Civ 5 had a system for changing and adapting your empire, and that’s something key that Civ 6 is missing.

    Really, every version of Civ other than Civ 5 (to a degree) has treated social institutions as a kind of technology (which they are). The only thing Civ 6 did was put this technology in its own separate tree. Social Policies just aren’t an equivalent to this, whatever there pros and cons.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  14. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,601
    Gender:
    Male
    Wonder if that's why people NOPE out when I post a nonstandard map where "playing the same way" will certainly fail. :lol:

    I'm actually very happy people took on the last map I posted though because they really could call the bluff. I learned a few things already.
     
    nzcamel and acluewithout like this.
  15. acluewithout

    acluewithout Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    2,712
    It’s on my to do list to play it. I think posting it was a great idea.

    Low food starts are as challenging as the low production starts.
     
  16. WackenOpenAir

    WackenOpenAir Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,196
    Location:
    Eindhoven, the Netherlands
    I think the whole civx vs civx+1 discussion is as old as the series and comes down to this:
    People are used to Civx, they learned to love the game, got good at it. A new civ comes, things are different, and they think the previous civ was better.
    Some are so stuck that they will still say civ2 was the best ever.
    I am slightly less stuck and will say civ3 was the best ever. I'll laugh at myself while saying it though.
     
    Equilin, King Rad, LMT and 2 others like this.
  17. acluewithout

    acluewithout Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    2,712
    Does Civ VI already have Social Policies?

    As I said above, I don’t think Civ 5 Social Policies and Civ 6’s Culture Tree, Policy Cards and Governments are the same thing. SP is a way to level up and specialise your empire, that FXS sort of shoehorned policy and government ideas on. Civ 6 returns social institutions to being a kind of technology (the only difference being it gets a different tech tree to more industrial technology rather than all being in the same tree) and has an actual policy and government systems. Civ 6, however, basically doesn’t have the equivalent of a upgrade and specialise your empire mechanic (except for founding a pantheon).

    That said, I think one could make the good argument that Governors sort of represent the Civ VI version of Social Policies.

    It’s not exactly one for one, but similar to Social Policies, Governors require permanent decisions about gameplay bonuses, those decisions are tiered, and you unlock the bonuses through culture.

    Indeed, you can sort of see some of the SP themes reflected in the Governor types - Moshka / Piety, Reyna / Commerce, Amani / Patronage. The rest of the Governors are a bit mixed - none of them are particularly focused on War, Tradition or Liberty etc type themes.

    The big difference with Governors is that they’re City focused, not empire wide, and thematically aren’t really linked to any big ideas or concepts.

    And, you know, they’re also immortal clones that move around the map and that can be temporarily assassinated by spies. So, a bit different to SPs, but you get the idea.

    Third Expansion

    If FXS have a third xp, that might change the whole conversation about Civ 5 v Civ 6. First, because it’ll be the first (or almost first?) civ game to get a third expansion. Second, because obviously one more expansion gives FXS a chance to add another one or two big concepts to the game, including potentially stuff from Civ 5 (inc BNW). It would almost certainly add smaller mechanics from Civ 5 too - I’m fairly resigned to getting corporations... Third, because that may be the point after which modders get the dll, and another big difference between Civ 5 and 6 falls away.

    Anyway. I’m not really trying to criticise anyone who prefers Civ 5 to 6. But it really does seem to me that the Civ 5 v 6 discussion actually doesn’t have much substance to it any more, and that maybe the only thing driving the discussion is that there are a bunch of people still playing Civ 5 (possibly just because of intertia and or price), and people and journalists enjoying the whole “version x c version x+1”. (In next weeks thread we’ll discuss Beatles v Rolling Stones; Oasis v Blur; and Nirvana v Foo Fighters.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
  18. kaspergm

    kaspergm Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,537
    As a matter of fact, yes I often find myself picking Oligarchy even if I'm not at war, because of the favorable card distribution and the XP bonus. I know people rave about Classical Republic, but it seems to offer me little bonus early game where I have no or only a few districts.

    And no, of course I don't use exactly the same policies every game, but there are a handful of policies I do use every game, and I think at least a quarter of the policies in the game I can honestly say I have never used, or only used once or twice in all the games I have played. Same goes for a large portion of the religious beliefs, like you say, often I find myself in a situation where I look at the list and none of them really seems to offer me anything significant, and I will just default to something like Divine Spark which I feel at least will offer me some reward later in game.
     
  19. Nefelia

    Nefelia Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    458
    If there is one thing I miss about Civ V, it is Fall From Heaven. Goddamn that was a good mod.

    Or was that Civ IV? Been a while so I honestly don't remember.
     
    KayAU likes this.
  20. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,601
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, I mean, you're basically picking a blank government for the sake of a bit of extra XP fighting barbarians? Which is capped anyways? CR at least has a amenity. Oligarchy has a terrible card spread; the diplo slot is virtually useless in the early game.

    And if you don't have districts then Autocracy is better.
     

Share This Page