[GS] Civilization VI: Gathering Storm - Antarctic Late Summer Game Update (April 2019)

[CivLuvah]

The love for "desertification" would make more sense if global COOLING was happening.

Honestly, I am still waiting for a more dynamic climate change system, with fluctuations across eras, but warming only starting to increase once a player/AI reaches the industrial era. It has happened before.

 

[Pietato]

The problem with Pantheons is more that most of them suck.

 

[Krajzen]

So, to sum up, India's UA is now

- Gets all belief bonuses from all religions in its cities
- Trade routes pressure religion twice as strong
- Missionaries have 5 charges instead of 3

?

 

[criZp]

Yes?

 

[Infixo]

It would be perfectly competitive if Goddess of the Harvest gave 20 faith per chop, but getting 100 or more is way too strong and even more broken with Monumentality.

It doesn't give a fixed amount of faith but "Harvesting a resource or removing a feature receives Faith equal to the other yield's quantity."

My biggest anticipated complaint is the Firaxis seems to be dead set against fixing Goddess of the Harvest,

Here, fixed.

UPDATE ModifierArguments SET Value = 50 WHERE ModifierId = 'GODDESS_OF_THE_HARVEST_HARVEST_MODIFIER' AND Name = 'Amount';

 

[Victoria]

He's a climate change denier who's mad that his favorite leader (Victoria) isn't very powerful in this game.

Incorrect on both counts. I have 14kw of solar panels installed and 5 bins for separate recycling bits ignoring the battery bin. I do my bit but if you looked at my initial post in another thread I was enjoying plodding along at T100 when wham, 3 districts and all buildings destroyed, 5 fisheries gone.... it was not even climate change it was bad luck at a critical time in my development that was far worse than being swarmed by barbs. Nothing I could do about it and occasionally I see other coastal players getting hit and mentioning just how crippling it is.
I never asked for a strong Victoria, I just did not want a wrong Victoria and Pax Brittanica is nothing to do with peace and WOTW s more suited to Germany who were far more efficient than England who was early. The issue I had was nothing to do with Victoria but coastal civilisations.
It is an addictive game and I have continued to play even though AI have not been enjoying it because of the new toys and great forum. My last straw was starting a new game next to 6 coastal lowlands and think why the hell am I bothering with this luck ridden game. Environmental damage comes along and messes up a great start after 100 turns of effort? Why bother.
Female leaders fine, I am all with the feminist side of things and am first to support the cause and it does not affect the game but climate change is stupidly moronically bad when the game removes the strength of the tiles I chose to settle on. And just to make it worse, as a amateur volcanologist I would point out that people do not settle at volcanoes to dig mines into its side. If the type of volcanoes is right for good crops then the soil can be rich but it also can suffer serious deficiencies (tongariro national park) The whole concept of rushing to settle next to volcanoes and avoiding the coast is just stupid.
Regardless of why, I do not enjoy the game, just the forum so I gracefully bow out saying good luck and I am glad I could help people, some of us like doing that.

 

[Gorbles]

Historically, volcanic soil was praised for it's agricultural benefits. The game has to draw a line in the sand somewhere with its mechanics; it can't offer infinite permutations. I mean, ideally, that'd be nice, but development doesn't work on idealism. That's why we have mods!

The game's design, for better or worse (I'd argue better) is that things tend to scale positively as technology progresses. There may be additional challenges to consider, but generally yields increase. Certain things are invalidated after a certain tech level (Gunpowder knocks off a few things for example), but nothing more serious than that (and there are generally better equivalents by that stage in the game to use regardless). So to have volcanic activity offer positive yields is a completely fair implementation considering the overall design of the game.

This leads to a general "snowballing" situation which the game has repeatedly been criticised for in the past. Hence some of the new events in GS. Getting the balance right is of course difficult, but it's the same for anything. See the endless threads about Barbarians, or resource acquisition (lack of Iron locking out the early tech tree, mainly), bad mapgen, etc. It just so happens this particular thing impacts, or has impacted, you more @Victoria.

I mean, this isn't me saying "put up with it", or me saying "here's a fix". It's a careful balance, and we haven't even had a patch for this expansion yet. If you need to take a break? I personally wouldn't rib you for it, if you're not posting as positively, whatever. Think it's a bit weird needling you for that. But I also have faith that (especially considering this is an unpatched expansion) it'll get far better as time goes on. And I believe it's a very strong starting point to build on (which you'd hope for, two expansions in, but I honestly believe the launch quality of this expansion has been solid also).

 

[jozef57]

i cannot wait for the patch to come. 6 gs is already super but it needed tweeks and the anounced patch seems to hit the spot, great work
on a PERSONAL NOTE THE DEV DUDE THAT PRESENTED WAS MORE THAN OK BUT WHERE THE FORNICATION IS SARAH?

 

[Tomice]

Incorrect on both counts. I have 14kw of solar panels installed and 5 bins for separate recycling bits ignoring the battery bin. I do my bit but if you looked at my initial post in another thread I was enjoying plodding along at T100 when wham, 3 districts and all buildings destroyed, 5 fisheries gone.... it was not even climate change it was bad luck at a critical time in my development that was far worse than being swarmed by barbs. Nothing I could do about it and occasionally I see other coastal players getting hit and mentioning just how crippling it is.
I never asked for a strong Victoria, I just did not want a wrong Victoria and Pax Brittanica is nothing to do with peace and WOTW s more suited to Germany who were far more efficient than England who was early. The issue I had was nothing to do with Victoria but coastal civilisations.
It is an addictive game and I have continued to play even though AI have not been enjoying it because of the new toys and great forum. My last straw was starting a new game next to 6 coastal lowlands and think why the hell am I bothering with this luck ridden game. Environmental damage comes along and messes up a great start after 100 turns of effort? Why bother.
Female leaders fine, I am all with the feminist side of things and am first to support the cause and it does not affect the game but climate change is stupidly moronically bad when the game removes the strength of the tiles I chose to settle on. And just to make it worse, as a amateur volcanologist I would point out that people do not settle at volcanoes to dig mines into its side. If the type of volcanoes is right for good crops then the soil can be rich but it also can suffer serious deficiencies (tongariro national park) The whole concept of rushing to settle next to volcanoes and avoiding the coast is just stupid.
Regardless of why, I do not enjoy the game, just the forum so I gracefully bow out saying good luck and I am glad I could help people, some of us like doing that.

In case you're frustrated, I spend quite a bit of time on this forum myself and consider you to be one the top 5 most helpful and constructive people around, since even before release.
And I fully support your ongoing quest for better naval gameplay.

 

[Tomice]

i cannot wait for the patch to come. 6 gs is already super but it needed tweeks and the anounced patch seems to hit the spot, great work
on a PERSONAL NOTE THE DEV DUDE THAT PRESENTED WAS MORE THAN OK BUT WHERE THE FORNICATION IS SARAH?

She changed her job within the team and moved behind the scenes.

 

[_ViKinG_]

Did they mention any improvements to get better AI at war? If not i still will play civ 5 instead

 

[Stilgar08]

Incorrect on both counts. I have 14kw of solar panels installed and 5 bins for separate recycling bits ignoring the battery bin. I do my bit but if you looked at my initial post in another thread I was enjoying plodding along at T100 when wham, 3 districts and all buildings destroyed, 5 fisheries gone.... it was not even climate change it was bad luck at a critical time in my development that was far worse than being swarmed by barbs. Nothing I could do about it and occasionally I see other coastal players getting hit and mentioning just how crippling it is.
I never asked for a strong Victoria, I just did not want a wrong Victoria and Pax Brittanica is nothing to do with peace and WOTW s more suited to Germany who were far more efficient than England who was early. The issue I had was nothing to do with Victoria but coastal civilisations.
It is an addictive game and I have continued to play even though AI have not been enjoying it because of the new toys and great forum. My last straw was starting a new game next to 6 coastal lowlands and think why the hell am I bothering with this luck ridden game. Environmental damage comes along and messes up a great start after 100 turns of effort? Why bother.
Female leaders fine, I am all with the feminist side of things and am first to support the cause and it does not affect the game but climate change is stupidly moronically bad when the game removes the strength of the tiles I chose to settle on. And just to make it worse, as a amateur volcanologist I would point out that people do not settle at volcanoes to dig mines into its side. If the type of volcanoes is right for good crops then the soil can be rich but it also can suffer serious deficiencies (tongariro national park) The whole concept of rushing to settle next to volcanoes and avoiding the coast is just stupid.
Regardless of why, I do not enjoy the game, just the forum so I gracefully bow out saying good luck and I am glad I could help people, some of us like doing that.

No, I am not trying to be a smarta&€ but if GS just is not your cup of tea, why are you not going back to R&F ruleset?

 

[Krajzen]

Did they mention any improvements to get better AI at war? If not i still will play civ 5 instead

Does civ5 really have better AI? I doubt it

And I am not a fan of vox populi, 5 years of development and I see idiotic suicidal wars all the time and 5 crossbows shooting city at 0 health for 5 turns before retreating

 

[Gregolution]

I keep watching the video, seeing something about continued support for Civ 6 , but hearing *another expansion* is in the works .

 

[Council 13]

Does civ5 really have better AI? I doubt it

And I am not a fan of vox populi, 5 years of development and I see idiotic suicidal wars all the time and 5 crossbows shooting city at 0 health for 5 turns before retreating

Presently, Civ5 absolutely has better AI. It understands how to take cities, it is a real threat when it decides to go to war with you (especially with a warmongering civ), it understands how to use airpower and defend against it. It upgraded its units for crying out loud. It does a lot of things better which quite honestly, should be pretty basic but yet Civ6 AI still can't do. One of the things I miss most is City State allies that actually helped you in war and were a threat. Sometimes you would get a special treat where one of your city states would conquer another and become a dual city city state. Yes i realize that mechanic has changed now, but it was still so cool when it happened. Or sometimes the AI would decide to go all defense and hunker down while going for a cultural or science victory, and I just couldn't crack their shell as the game was winding down to the last turns. Those were all great moments, and none of which I have experienced yet in Civ6.

 

[Bosque]

Historically, volcanic soil was praised for it's agricultural benefits.

As Maori, I built a late game city near Eyjafjallajokull, which had several catastrophic eruptions previously in the game. In the tile on the north side, adjacent to both hexes of the volcano, I got 12 food! (Along with production, culture and science).

 

[Abaxial]

One of the things I miss most is City State allies that actually helped you in war and were a threat. Sometimes you would get a special treat where one of your city states would conquer another and become a dual city city state.

In Civ V I have also seen two city states go to war with each other entirely on their own initiative, which was rather interesting!

 

[iammaxhailme]

Does civ5 really have better AI? I doubt it

And I am not a fan of vox populi, 5 years of development and I see idiotic suicidal wars all the time and 5 crossbows shooting city at 0 health for 5 turns before retreating

I also don't really like VP. If I play civ 5 I usually go with light modding, or if I want a balance overhaul, nqmod

 

[Uncle_Joe]

But this has pretty much always been a problem in Civ, though. It's not like VI is the first game to make coastal cities less productive than their inland counterparts. All of this hyperbolic "slap in the face" talk is nonsense. If hurricanes are too destructive, then they can be rebalanced. If inland cities have it too easy, then floods, etc. can be rebalanced. There's no anti-coast, anti-England, or whatever agenda.

I don't think there is any 'agenda' or bias. I think it's combination of ignorance and a likely desire to downplay a weak part of the game mechanics. The AI is probably even worse at naval mechanics than land mechanics so making coastal cities more desirable will make the AIs perform even worse.

Having worked in the PC game development world, I also noticed a trend among game developers/designers/coders to not really even play their own game at any competitive level. Some of that is completely understandable...you're working on this thing every day and often putting in long hours so it's not a surprise that you might not want to play it in your free time lol. But that can lead to a situation where you can be somewhat ignorant about the state of your own game. And I think some of that might be the case here.

As many of the suggestion here and elsewhere have indicated, making tweaks to improve historical/realistic benefits of a coastal city wouldn't be terribly difficult. It would mostly just be tweaking a few values here there on various improvements or terrain tiles. So not doing it clearly doesn't stem from an inability or lack of time/assets to do so. If you rule out some secret agenda or bias (which I don't think exist) then it points to some other reason. It's also just possible that they don't agree that coastal cities are a handicap. If that be the case then I think the above would definitely apply lol.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It appears that IOS (mobile devices, not Mac) is getting the vanilla patch that came with GS.