I am aware that some people have asked this same question here already, but the threads I found were outdated, mostly to 2016 or early 2017 i.e. before the expansion. And we all know that comparing a vanilla version of a game isn't a fair metric for comparison. My aim here is NOT to start a war of 1UPT versus SoDs. That is a pointless discussion, to each his own. My question here is targetted specifically to people who prefer civ4 over civ5, dislike 1UPT (as it was in civ5 at least), including those who still play 4. Personally, I liked civ5 as a game, played for many months infact, but I ended up coming back to 4 because I found it to contain way more strategic depth, and it was much more of a challenge for me than civ5. I'm sure there others here who might share this opinion. Do you think civ6 is better than civ5 in that regard for people like us? Does civ6 add strategic depth, and is the AI able to use the interesting new concepts that were introduced? And what about the expansion (which seems vaguely similar to RFC or revolutions from civ4)? Or am I stuck with playing civ4 for the rest of my life?