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

The religion is so annoying in Civ VI. I don't care if 2 other civs are fighting over the religion of my cities, especially if neither one even lets me build a building with faith. I have to watch the fights EVERY turn and it's both boring and exhausting. One of the major flaws of VI I forgot to mention.

The religion layer is annoying in vi. Can't se anything. The whole religion system is boring anyway

Check this out: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/disable-religion-holy-site.643978/
 
VI could be better but it is still missing very significant things from V that still make me love that previous game more:

civilizations with obvious strengths that are useful for most games, instead of very situational ones trying to cater all of VI's new features. The article brings this up and I agree 100 percent with it.
more interesting world congress choices,
religion being a less-than-major element and simply being one component of an overall cultural victory,
UI and graphics a bit more catchy and simplified, a minor gripe,
government policies that incentivize sticking with them (although I think IV's civics did it a little better: any civic switch was a major one),
and ideology becoming a large divider later in the game that really throws a wrench in your play style up until then

I never got into IV. I liked everything up until the dice-roll combat.
 
Just lately I have been seeing a lot more intelligence from the AI. Sure silly mistakes can be made but the AI is now starting to point out that I make them too.
AI targeting has become less simplistic and even the barbs can be quite wily.

Ok i wasnt crazy then...i got some problems lately with barbs in some mp games. More than usual. Humans havent changed tho :)
 
Also, Civ V has some elements that irritate me, such as the global happiness mechanic (thank god THAT was done away with)...

The thing is, Global Happiness does exist in Civ6, it's just not as noticeable as it was in V. I think the difference is, because of the way VI is designed, happiness/amenities don't end up making much impact. This is because having another 3-7 pop city is always a better investment (of global happiness) than growing cities larger. I don't like how civ6 shoehorns you down this road, and that is the biggest downfall of a game that otherwise has some of the best ideas and innovation in the civ series.
 
The thing is, Global Happiness does exist in Civ6, it's just not as noticeable as it was in V. I think the difference is, because of the way VI is designed, happiness/amenities don't end up making much impact. This is because having another 3-7 pop city is always a better investment (of global happiness) than growing cities larger. I don't like how civ6 shoehorns you down this road, and that is the biggest downfall of a game that otherwise has some of the best ideas and innovation in the civ series.
Civ5 also had local happiness. Civ6’s system only differs in that:
There is a distribution algorithm to convert global happiness stock to local numbers.
That’s mechanically the only real difference. We still have per pop happiness cost (1/2 instead of 1 per) and per city happiness cost (we now gain 1 amenity per city instead of lose 4.)
It’s just the balancing that changed. It’s not a terrible system by any means, it has a lot of potential. But some of the balancing is could be better to reach the middle ground, like taking away that free amenity per city.
 
Civ5 also had local happiness. Civ6’s system only differs in that:
There is a distribution algorithm to convert global happiness stock to local numbers.
That’s mechanically the only real difference. We still have per pop happiness cost (1/2 instead of 1 per) and per city happiness cost (we now gain 1 amenity per city instead of lose 4.)
It’s just the balancing that changed. It’s not a terrible system by any means, it has a lot of potential. But some of the balancing is could be better to reach the middle ground, like taking away that free amenity per city.

It's a quandary. On the one hand, I think Civ 6 does need something like global happiness so there is some actual empire management required. On the other hand, that's the exact thing that everyone mostly ended hating about Civ 5.

I suspect the only way it could ever work is if FXS very carefully balanced some sort of empire mechanic like that ... and then made it optional or, like disasters, scalable. That way, the haters could just avoid it.

(Which reminds me, while I like the disaster and climate change mechanics, it's a pity they can't actually be switched off. I could imagine some people would really like to just dispense with those mechanics some or all of the time.)
 
mostly ended hating about Civ 5.
They were quite restrictive but could be got around to a degree. It's all about Goldilocks, Civ 5 was too restrictive and civ VI is too free. You want something that starts punishing your empire once it gets over about 15 cities, that can be managed but only with expense.
Era points are also based on civ size but come too late and also a larger sized civ gets other era points that counter these
If you added another rule like Loyalty gets a -1 for every 8 tiles away from your capital it may add some interest but maybe just make Eleanor even happier.
some people would really like to just dispense with those
Not only that but it has wrecked early flood plains benefit.
 
It's especially awkward since the lowest Disaster Setting is 0. Probably because it was easier to display as such from programming point of view, but I would think common sense would dictate 1 being the lowest and 0 being Disabled. I had to mod it that way leaving only Ocean Rising, Nuclear Accidents and one more thing I believe I forgot, in cases where it would be just annoyance. The Disasters would be more tolerable If they weren't RNG ball of RNG upon RNG with RNG sauce and RNG as a sidedish, on RNG table...
 
The series changed after IV, so this topic would make sense with "which do you prefer, IV and earlier or V&VI).

V vs. VI seems very narrow minded, and only considering new games.
 
One thing for me is that V has a better sequence of units (no jump from muskets to modern infantry) and much better unit graphics. In VI: Scout is a man with a dog? That's a military unit? Really? And the little victory twirl that ships do after a battle is plain silly.

Also, SV is much better in V - in VI it is much to long and arduous.
 
Last edited:
i don't like the mobile phone look of civ 6

plus with vox populii civ 5 has AI that can actually play the game where civ 6 doesn't along with all the other mods, civ 5 just plays the way i like a civ game to play and civ 6 won't and never will.

so i'll be sticking with civ 5 and giving 6 a miss for a long time yet if i ever buy it at all which i probably won't.

but to each their own, everyone has their preferences.

mind you didn't a firaxis dev release a mod that gave civ 6 proper graphics? if vox populii ever came out on civ 6 along with global warming mod, civic & reform mod and all the other cool stuff i may plunge in but that'll never happen so.
 
Civ6 is better in perhaps every single way. Even the 'cartoony' graphics can be changed to a Civ5 style through a single mod in the workshop if that's your only qualm.

But perhaps the answer to why this debate is still relevant: moddability
 
Civ6 is better in perhaps every single way. Even the 'cartoony' graphics can be changed to a Civ5 style through a single mod in the workshop if that's your only qualm.

But perhaps the answer to why this debate is still relevant: moddability

That is the whole problem. By right previous Civ games should have now gone into history like other series from other producers (Paradox is a good example). The fact they haven't says all you need to know about Civ 6. All have great mods that have kept the games going, whilst CIv 6 hasn't & never well until the modders have been given access to the same moddability as the previous games. There is talk about Civ 7, but what is the point if the present version is still so lacklustre.
 
For me the main thing that still is a bit off with civ VI is the leaders abilities. They don't seem important enough in VI compared to V, IMO. It's leading to a bit of a same strategy with any leader you choose in VI. I also miss building large cities instead of endless spam of settlers.

OH! And the great person mechanics.. I must say I that's where the main problem is for me. Since civ 4 I loved to build huge food cities for GP "production" and maintain them. Something that you can't do in VI.
 
Last edited:
CIV 5 with Vox Populi is the better choice for me. The only thing that CIV 5(Vox populi) needs is a conversion to 64 bit.
 
Excluding specific Civs/leaders, there are really only two things I still miss about Civ V:
- The beautiful, immersive leader screens. The leaders in Civ VI have better animations overall, and some of the more recent ones especially have bags of personality. But I do prefer the less cartoony versions in a fully-realised environment instead of the panels behind them. You really felt as if you were in that leader's presence. Theodora's boudoir! Enrico's starlit Venice! I know they must have taken an obscene amount of work but damn, they were worth it.
- THE MUSIC. Now I don't mean to suggest that the Civ VI music isn't good; much of it is wonderful. But I really miss the way each Civ had a peace theme and a war theme (added drama when you went to war with someone!), the cleverness of each composition (the war themes often mirroring the peace themes), how so many of the themes weren't simply 'a famous tune associated with that Civ' so much as reinterpretations. I find myself actually quite disappointed by the majority of the Civ VI themes' era progressions. Some of them are just 'same again, BUT NOW WITH BRASS!', and some just don't work as well as others. To me it really sounds like they devised the concept with the American theme in mind and hoped it would work as well applied universally; there isn't a single other theme in the game where the era progression works as well as it does with that one.

Sigh. I'll stop ranting now. But give me England's Civ V War theme over Scarborough Fair any day, in any era.
 
I am thinking right now about getting Civ 6 platinium , so i got to this thread , but somehow peoples post are not helping.

Do you people compare modded (heavily) Civ 5 with modded Civ 6 ?
or do you compare the games without MODS ?

I have over 50 mods in my Civ5 , changing/altering/balancing races , tech tree (like EE and Future Worlds), social policy , ideology .
I adjusted gamefiles to that HUGE map is really huge 140x110 (128x80 original) , going WIDE is viable strategy (penalties for new cities are 1% per city)

can someone answer me following question : Can CIV 6 be modded / adjusted / altered like CIV 5 ? (ideally in easy way through XML files like in Civ5)
 
Top Bottom