Civ6 unpopular opinions thread

[Krajzen]

Title: post your opinions of the game which you think may be controversial or unpopular. But they still jave to be nice and civil

Of course nobody fully knows 'how unpopular this opinion of mine is' but gambling and then arguing is part of fun in such threads

Mine:
- Rise and Fall expansion has completely failed its general theme and task of making the game more dynamic, making runaways fall and underdogs rise, and the next game should take some dramatically different approach to solve those great issues.
- Gathering Storm's climate and disasters stuff were nice and cool but still toys and gimmicks which didn't fundamentally change the game or solve its great issues (especially aforementioned ones), unlike BNW expansion for civ5 which targeted specific holes of that game and filled them.
- 1UPT got really old and exhausted me really much with its tedious micro and inability to design AI for it, please change it to whatever different combat system in the future game.

 

[Haig]

I think everybody hates 1UPT so it's not that unpopular?

- Cleopatra and Victoria were good leader choices for the game

- Best thing to build first in your first city is scout

- Tech quotes are mostly fine, tongue in cheek is ok

 

[tiamats4esgares]

-You shouldn't build wonders on high difficulties.

-You shouldn't chop.

-Magnus sucks.

 

[SaboteurINT]

We shall compare CIV 1,2,3,4 with CIV 6.

Sun Wu Kong is not overpowered.

Science is the king.

1UPT is not a good set up. (personally I think this is the best change Civilizations` games from 1 to 6 have had, before Civ 5 I did not play wars)

 

[Scrum Lord]

Civ 6 single player is more fun with regular barbarians turned off and replaced with wild animals (using the Wildlife mod).

Civ 6 single player is more fun when you aim for how soon/easily you can win at King instead of whether you can win at Deity.

Ice can be interesting as long as it's not just solid sheets at the north/south edges of the map.

 

[Alaindor]

Very unpopular, I guess... 1 UPT is great, it makes combat more strategic (just as in Chess) and avoids the stacks of doom (unfortunate AI can't play it properly)

 

[Leucarum]

Civ has acquired a bunch of 'vestigial' features over the series' evolution, many of which could just be removed. Most prominent are builders now that we already let cities build infrastructure on the map anyway.

I like 1UPT! I'm gonna stand up and say it!

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Mine is in the fields of modding. And First the reason I entered Modding Wulin.
- Civ6 has not only faulty unit list arrangements, but also 'fixed' unit class system
When it comes to modding. Yes complicated but there's one thing i've discovered with mod testings i've done yesterday.
- Barbarians didn't seems to accept new unit class even with I've made a valid Barbarians updating XML files. On Terra map there are no 'new tribes made for new classes of units' AT ALL!!

 

[HorseHead]

I also agree with the idea that 1UPT is a good system. It makes it a little more possible to rise up if you make good decisions and are slightly behind which honestly should be how it works in a strategy game.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I think everybody hates 1UPT so it's not that unpopular?

1UPT is a concept borrowed from games like Panzer General and Panzercorps. It had also been adapted to more strategic Commander: The Great War. where 'Technical Upgrades' which was proposed by @Boris Gudenuf is extensively implemented.

 

[Kotofei]

1UPT is fine, plenty of wargames have made it work.

My unpopular opinion: The problem (but not the only one) is expensive, fragile units, and slow movement. A minor tactical error or bad luck can have catastrophic battlefield consequences. Imagine a WWII game where Patton's entire 3rd Army can go *poof* in a single ill-considered mouse click. (or von Paulus' 6th Army at Stalingrad lol) tl;dr frustration and hilarity ensue.

Unpopular opinion 2: Walls are fine. The problem is above: Fragile units blunder into withering city fire and can't retreat before they're dead.

Edit: Hm, if I think tougher units are a panacea I bet that's something I can change in XML somewhere....brb,Notepad.

 

[topsecret]

I don't know if this is unpopular or not.

Districts should not give yields but instead give specialist yields. So a +3 adjacency campus increases scientist specialist yields by +3.

Right now Specialists are kind of garbage.

 

[HorseHead]

A minor tactical error or bad luck can have catastrophic battlefield consequences.

I feel like this is in someways the point of a strategy game. I sorta like the fact that every choice must be considered carefully. Though I can see what you are saying that there are times when you do not want it.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think everybody hates 1UPT so it's not that unpopular?

Does that mean me not minding that 1UPT is in the game, makes it an unpopular opinion?

I've never liked the Jersey System. I'd rather a civ/leader have one color scheme. Because of the Jersey system they got rid of some interesting colors like Poland, Aztec and Nubia.

Never was a fan of implementing units such as Trebuchets, Man-at-Arms, or Line Infantry because of the narrow window of usage. I don't necessarily hate their inclusion though but I considered them things that weren't necessary before the April Patch.

 

[Victoria]

Having played a lot of HK lately I am 100% happy to say I far prefer 1UPT. To me it is a compromise to keep the game flowing. In HK you are forced to manually play every battle or trust your moves to a non-optimal AI and so fighting just takes way too long. If I wanted to play a war game there are plenty of better choices out there, 4x games are just that, not 1x (as in exterminate).

The thing I hate about civ is the easy ability to exterminate everything which is quite ironic considering what I just said and I know a lot of people love 1x’ing. HK tries to stop you but once you know how, it’s not that hard because the AI just cannot help throwing itself at you.

SV, just wipe out all but the best science civ, RV, just wipe them out. A 4x game should be about vassal using really. Big empires crumble, why don’t they in this game?

 

[Jeppetto]

Sumeria led by Gilgamesh is perfect in every aspect
*Proceeds to run away from Zaarin*

 

[Bactrian]

1.) Separate victory conditions do more harm than good and should be removed in future iterations of Civ.

2.) Conquering the world should not be a viable goal for anyone except the absolutely most skilled and/or lucky players. Civ should be balanced around survival rather than domination.

3.) Diplomacy and inter-state relationships are possibly the most important, and possibly most neglected, aspect of the franchise.

 

[PiR]

@Zaarin you need to step in now.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Sumeria led by Gilgamesh is perfect in every aspect
*Proceeds to run away from Zaarin*

At least you didn't say Babylon.

Speaking of that can I say that I love that Australia and Macedon are in the game.

 

[Bactrian]

One more:

4.) Civ overweights the early modern and modern periods. Much more of the game should be spent in the ancient era.