1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Conquering is rewarding, and great people are fundamentally broken

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by redwings1340, Oct 25, 2016.

  1. redwings1340

    redwings1340 Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,408
    Location:
    Maryland
    So, I've played three games now, and I'm continuing to learn a lot. My third game has been a massive success by all measures, instead of expanding, I decided to conquer my early empire, completely taking over Spain and the Kongo to gain an entire major continent to myself, and eventually expanding to 13 cities before I stopped creating more. I currently have about 450 science per turn, when my closest competitor is at 150. Production times for districts are still pretty ridiculous despite a million industrial zones, but I have such a large lead anyway, maybe its justified?

    While warmongering penalties are high, I think conquering is more rewarding than it was in V. Ammenities are an issue, but war weariness only lasts when you're at war from my experience, or at least, peace can drop it down. Even if the AI doesn't place cities optimally, growing a city from 1 pop is substantially harder in VI because of a lack of food buildings, and population loss is less for taking a city. Conquering a suboptimal location is better than razing it, in my opinion.

    Going wide lets you get a lot of ammenities, and if you can conquer your own continent, some other benefits pop up. In my first two games I was struggling to compete with the AI for suzerin of city states, but with my own continent, I was suzerin of 4 with minimal effort. One of these let me get massive culture boosts for trade routes with city states, so all of my trade routes gave me +9 culture for a while, and as Norway, I was able to explore to the other continent immediately after I finished my conquering, giving me no warmonger penalty with the remaining civs, and a fairly large boost through trade.

    So, the warmongering penalty is high, but don't let that stop you. Armies are cheaper in VI than in V, and if you can pay for your army, you can conquer, and you can snowball. Conscription is a great policy.

    So, for my second point, the great person system doesn't work as its currently implemented. In my second game, I was spain, and way behind in technology. However, I had four encampments due to invasions, so I was getting a lot of great general points. I ended up getting the last two great generals, so I could... get a bonus towards atomic and information era units. Great... I had field cannons and conquistadors at the time...

    In my third game, I'm currently way ahead in technology, and I'm getting 40 great engineer points per turn, while England, the next best civ, is getting... 3. Well, I'm trying to go for the space race, but since nobody else is getting engineers, I'm kind of forced to get them all, including the ones that give +appeal. Ideally I'd want to skip these engineers, but it's actually just faster for me to burn through them, because I'm basically guaranteed of getting them all. Considering how useful the last great engineers are in the space race, I'm just focusing all of my cities on getting great engineer points right now or building spaceship parts, and I've gotten through two useless atomic engineers while waiting for the ones I want to come up. It's kind of stupid.

    The great person race works if the game is close, but doesn't work if there's a tech gap between civilizations, because their effects are so regional. If you're behind but ahead in one area, you get useless great people. If you're way ahead in one area you have no choice but to get useless great people. This system needs to be redesigned.

    Also, as a side note, since I had a continent to myself, I didn't need to get a military beyond my initial horseman rush. Therefore, I got the technology to upgrade my horsemen after I got the technology to create a martian colony. That's... kind of messed up.
     
  2. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    There is an option not to claim Great People - just choose that if the GP that becomes available is one you don't want, another civ will get that, and you'll still have the points for the next one. I made the mistake of not doing so and still have Darwin lazing around in a civ with no access to Natural Wonders. But Great Generals specifically have been basically useless after the first in both Civ IV and Civ V - those and admirals are an essentially flawed design. It's not a specific issue with Civ VI that they're not useful most of the time. Some GPs are very powerful - Great Engineers in particular seem broken in a sense you didn't intend.
     
  3. Sascha77

    Sascha77 Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    308
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    Like many other aspects of the game, the GP-race leaves me feeling weirdly uninvolved. And it should be just the other way around, since this time, I am competing with other players for GP, not just trying to produce them as quickly as I can.
    Perhaps it's the fact that GP are now unique and some of them will always be more useful to me than others (depending on my current situation). Perhaps it's the fact that the game went overboard with submenus instead of presenting me with all the important info either on the main screen or in the city-screens.

    I've been thinking about this (why Civ VI feels less engaging to me than IV and V) for a few days now and I can't quite put my finger on it. But I'm fairly certain that spreading less info than either Civ IV or V offered over way more info-screens and sub-menus is a big part of that problem.

    S.
     
    Roald Amundsen likes this.
  4. UWHabs

    UWHabs Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,067
    Location:
    Toronto
    I think what would make the most sense is that when it's time to get a new great person, you can basically choose any from the era you're in. Get the first great person of a new era, you get first choice. So then at least you'll be able to choose them in order. I do like the design of "do I want this guy or should I skip him?", but there's definitely flaws to it now.

    Also, does this mean that if you get the later GG or GAd whose secondary function is to kill them and get a free infantry or battleship, that you could do that without actually having the technology for them? That would be a weird mechanism.
     
  5. redwings1340

    redwings1340 Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,408
    Location:
    Maryland
    Yes, you can. I got a modern anti-tank gun from one of my great generals well before I had the technology for it in my spain game.
     
  6. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    I prefer the system to just min-maxing to spam as many GPs as possible; possibly the lack of involvement stems from the lack of real competition. The AI appears not to actively focus on GP specialisation, and if you're ahead in the race for a given type of GP you're basically always going to get that GP unless you've emptied your pool while an AI happens to be ahead.

    It took me a little while to get the Civ feel back from Civ VI; I think I'm about there now, but there's a fundamental difficulty with immersion that the AI appears not just poor, but to give the sense that it has no interest in competing with the player or indeed playing the game. I'm not subject to any wars however much AIs dislike me, however often they denounce me, and however much of a threat I am to the victory condition they appear to lead in, the AI doesn't involve me in diplomacy, it doesn't try getting GPs, they don't try gaining control of city states, and agendas or no agendas I've yet to get any sense of discernible personality from any of them. The Civ V 'AIs are programmed to try to win' approach was widely criticised - I felt it was a misjudged criticism at the time, but Civ VI's disinterested, unengaging AIs may be a salutory case of giving players what they wish for.

    For the time being Civ VI plays a better game of solitaire than Civ V, but the game's going to play much the same every time if this lack of interaction is typical.
     
  7. need my speed

    need my speed Rex Omnium Imperarium

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,067
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    European Union (Magna Batavia)
    Yes, I have also noticed this. I notice it with technologies - I don't particularly care what I research; usually whatever eureka I happen to have, and it's not as if I'd specifically need technologies - with tile improvements - Builders have limited charges, improvements are quite weak, I may want a district there at some point - with great people, as you say...
     
  8. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    Late in my session, staring at a lot of undeveloped land, I think I'm probably undervaluing improvements - they're an important source of housing in particular. It's tempting to hold land back for districts and Wonders, but I'm coming to think that's probably not correct. Few cities are going to have more than half a dozen tiles taken up by districts plus a Wonder or two in the more productive cities (and Harbours don't take a real slot as you can't develop sea tiles anyway).
     
  9. Esperr

    Esperr King

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    Messages:
    868
    Ive noticed that with both techs and civics there are really only fiveish that matter that I just beeline to every game, first go for the industrial districs and political philosophy and so on and so forth. I still couldn't even tell you what half the techs in the game are or where they even are on the tree, it all feels very dial and knob.
     
    need my speed likes this.

Share This Page