• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

CIV VI how old are the "new" victory conditions?

Chuma

Warlord
Joined
Nov 18, 2002
Messages
117
Location
Australia
This video was 100% set up to be massively contrarian and get engagement but just how old are some of the "new" victory conditions he mentions? I remember there being new ones in 2002 when I first created my account on this forum.

Please feel free to move this post if off topic

As to him losing the games not sure if he knows you can turn off victory conditions and disable barbarians which it seems like he does not know you can do or it is not an option on the Switch version?
 
They mention going from 1 to 6 as the only ones they've played, so yeah, that would be a jump. Civ 3 is when they first added like culture and diplomacy victories, and since then, religion is the only other new ones, really.

I mean, civ is not exactly an easy game, and I can't imagine what it would be like to start new, or even take the jump from 1 to 6 as the only previous civ game to have played. As someone who's played every iteration and every version, yeah, sometimes it's hard to remember what it's like to not win at the game. Especially if the UI isn't setup to easily create custom games, I can imagine if you jump straight into a Prince level game, that would be pretty challenging for a new player.
 
I had not played for a while on got clobbered by barbarians. Went down a skill level and started a new game. I remember there being so much difference between CIV II and III that I ended up getting a strategy guide.

CIV V does feel different to CIV VI. I did not play enough of IV to judge the differences.
 
how old are some of the "new" victory conditions he mentions
I didn't play much Civ V but in Civ IV conquest used to be conquering everyone, domination was based on both population and land, time was going to 2050 and score was the higher the quicker you finished. This all got screwed about with for no great reason as far as I can see!
 
I played Civ II fairly extensively then didn't play any other until Civ V. First game I tried to approach it like I did Civ II and it didn't work. It took me a while to adjust to wonders, etc not doing what I was used to.

But by my third game I'd realised it was a different game. Some aspects felt better. Some didn't. But I learned to enjoy it. The guy in the video probably needs to stop comparing it to his memories of his childhood and accept that the game has evolved.
 
CIV V is pretty fun especially the combat. Also other civs having a nuclear war off the other side of the map and me not realising as I had not met them.
 
As to him losing the games not sure if he knows you can turn off victory conditions and disable barbarians which it seems like he does not know you can do or it is not an option on the Switch version?
Yes, you can disable Victories and/Barbs on the Switch.
 
I'm gonna go on a limb here (or whatever the phrase it) and say that he's sorta right.

The move from 4 to 5 has SIGNIFCANTLY changed the rules for all but two victory type.

Science, has, for the most part, remained unchanged, if anything, simpler. 3 and 4 required you to build Space ship parts, but 5 reduced that number to just 6 parts of Spaceship, compared to 10 in Civ 3, and many more in 4.

You then have a DIplomatic, which, infamously is nicknamed the Economic Victory, largely because 5 introduced the idea of City States. Pre 5, I'll be honest, not sure what the strategy for a Diplo Win was, but in 5 onwards, it's usually just whoever has the more gold to maintain control of alliances with City States.

Culture, was heavily overhauled, because it went from generating Culture in specific cities to generating enough Culture with a small Empire to get 5 policy trees completed (which was then overhauled again in BNW to be The Culture/Tourism that was fairly unique.

Domination was also completely changed, going from having a Percentage control over Population and Territory (which was completely removed since 5), and was "merged" with Conquest but the rules were also different, it related to Capitals, rather than just wiping out players in previous games, this allowed you to just conquer enough to have their Capital, and be the last one standing with your Capital.

So in essence, most of the victories we have in 5 and 6, are pretty new, they're just "old" in names.
 
I'm gonna go on a limb here (or whatever the phrase it) and say that he's sorta right.

You then have a DIplomatic, which, infamously is nicknamed the Economic Victory, largely because 5 introduced the idea of City States. Pre 5, I'll be honest, not sure what the strategy for a Diplo Win was, but in 5 onwards, it's usually just whoever has the more gold to maintain control of alliances with City States.

So in essence, most of the victories we have in 5 and 6, are pretty new, they're just "old" in names.
I need to watch the video.

In Civ3, the diplomatic victory was achieved by bribing other players to DOW the second place civ, so they would vote for you. Having a military alliance with leader A against leader B usually made leader A "Gracious" towards you, and willing to vote for you. The human player could also bribe with trading luxuries or trading techs.

In Civ4, your diplo relationships depended a lot on whether you shared a religion, as well as what the official religiion in the Apostolic Palace was. Early diplo victories (using the AP) are achieved by well-timed religious conversions. Later diplo victories (using the UN) involved both religion and economic bribing; IIRC, your vassals would vote for you also.

Agree with you -- diplo victories in 3, 4, 5 were not far from economic victories.
 
So here we have a random dude talking about a game he knows very little about. And someone thought that's good video content. Shoot me now.

I think it's time for me to talk about quantum entanglement on camera and complain that it's way more complex physics than boiling water. I'm sure physicists across the globe will appreciate my input.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom