Deity

I would be interested in what the civfanatics think about deity play.

So far I've beaten it with strong civs in the usual science/domination way. I did won a religious one with Poland which was surprisingly easy.

It feels a bit easy but only because of two mechanics/cheats I shamefully use: cheap cultural objects trades and city trade once you destroy the enemy army.


Early war seems a must for me. Unlike civ5 I havent been able to win a single game in a
pacific way.

Religion, early wonders, most great people are out of the question.

As well as civ5, tactic skills of the AI mades war profitable. Once my empire is set up I can outpace the AIs with clever district placement, eureka hunting and efficient cultural policies. It is a bit sad the AI is still doing things like not improving their terrain or settling crazy cities. In a day where an AI has been able to beat the best DOTA players it is a pity we are left with this pale scripted intelligence.

I play at normal speed medium continents usually. It feels research is a bit fast and I jump between eras too fast.

I rush the closest civ with archers and then wait until range 3 (balloons). Even with early slotting of the 2points general I only seem able to get modern generals

I go wide but dont plant cities with only a few available tiles due to luxuries spreading, settlers scaling and defensive needs. Now the factory bonus only extends to one city I spread a bit more. Depending of terrain but tipically around 5 tiles between cities.

Typically build 1-2 encampments, 0 holy sites, 2 commercial, 2 harbors, entertainment only late in the game, and then as many industrial or campus depending on terrain bonuses. I try to complete the districs.

I only beeline/rush wonders for specific strategies e.g petra for desert/nubia, religious wonders for religious victory. The AI seems to not build some wonders. I often can snatch a forbidden city or zimbabwe (great money)

I find spies underwhelming. Even after gaining sources they always seem to fail and get caught even if walking.

All in all experience is enjoyable. Looking forward to play with weakest civs to force me to improve my game.

 

I have won numerous Science victories on Deity without warring... it is easy.

 

Theres a reason we measure Deity wins in turn times and not whether you can do it or not.

 

I don't playing Emperor, not because it's difficult, but because it effectively removes a few parts of the game for me, religion and wonders. At Emperor, I can still compete for a religion and for many of the wonders. By Deity, I'm basically just throwing the game if I waste time with either of those. Above Emperor also crosses the line (for me) in having to be ruthlessly efficient. For instance, at Deity, building N+1 of a particular District can effectively cost me the game. It reminds me of playing a PvP RTS. I used to play Company of Heroes, for example, and in that game, building a 3rd Rifle Squad instead of a Mortar can mean the ballgame for you. It's thrilling and nailbiting, and I really enjoyed it for a while, but a game of Company of Heroes takes 30 minutes, not 2 weeks.

 

Have you tried Deity? Its no that hard, its just like any other difficulty, once you survive to t50 and have at least 6 or 8 citys by 100ish your golden. It might "feel" harder because your behind in science for longer, but its not much harder then emperor.

 

Exactly. Every once in awhile, you get a runaway Civ that is off on their own and you can't stop them, but that is rare.

 

Sorry, I kind of butchered my last post typing too fast. I meant to say that the reason I don't play Immortal or Deity isn't that they're too hard, it's that the gameplay changes in ways I don't care for.

 

Yeah, I agree very much with this. I can't say I can consistently beat Diety (because I haven't tried enough times), and I know for sure in Civ5 I could *not* consistently beat Diety, but that's not the reason why I don't find it fun. Like you say, I want the liberty to take a sub-optimal strategy just for the fun of it, so I don't have to play the same way every single game.

 

Deity always feels stupid to play because the A.I just has a bunch of cheaty bonuses. Like they have an I.Q of 5 but they get to play soccer with power armor while your stuck with plastic cleates and those dumb shin pads that always fall down your leg.

Emperor feels about right, you can still do whatever but the A.I actually builds citys and stuff. You can even argue that its as hard as Deity because on Deity they have more citys in the early game for you to steal, which negates some of there bonuss(bonusi?) in a way.

 

Seconded or thirded or whatever. I only play Immortal if I feel like warring a lot. Usually I play on Emperor, it suits my preferred style better.

Of course you can make Civilizations harder and harder by giving the AI greater and greater bonuses. Introduce a new difficulty level beyond Deity where the AI wins a science victory in 50 turns. Wow, so hard. But it's not fun. I tried Deity a couple of times and didn't find it fun. The AI bonuses bend the game too much. Basically, you cannot compensate the AI's hopelessness with its units by just giving it bigger and bigger boosts to yields and outputs.

 

To be fair this problem has appeared in every civ game although I find it worse in civ6.

I find deity challenge is only hard at the start/early midgame. Then because the AI has horrible city management skills it is significantly easier later. Also because they start with with something like 4settlers and 4 warriors while you have 1.

I am resigned to accept the game is challenging because the AI cheats but I would hope for it to be more consistent. In the other hand if we were losing against a fair AI..would it be embarrasing for us humans?

I think everyone should be able to start a religion and half completes wonders should give gold.

 

I so completely agree with both these opinions ! Limiting the number of religion seems a little like a no-no to me, but I can live with that one I guess...
I almost always stop at getting pantheon beliefs, unless I specifically decide to play a religious game. What it means, in the end, is that a game
aspect on which a lot of effort was spent has become totally irrelevant to me and my games... seems like a major waste !

But I almost never ever work on wonders anymore, because of this second point, and because it's close to impossible to monitor the stupid intel you get on other civs
at each turn, there's just too many message, so many totally useless, and no way to get back to them if you missed some. Theres always something
better to do with my cogs than spending it on a wonder that I have no way to correctly and relatively easily monitor if I have a chance of winning the race
or not...

I would even prefer, instead of handing out gold when missing out on a wonder, getting to keep a certain amount of the cogs spent on it for the next item
you chose to build... i dunno, like maybe 50%... something high enough that I will feel it might be worth the risk, but low enough so that it won't be something
interesting to exploit...

 

I wish religion was just worth it, it was my second or third game ever that i kinda figured out that religion just isnt worth dedicating early production to. Maybe if the bonuses were stronger.

 

Tell me about it, it's awful. I don't care if another civ "stumbles upon a natural wonder", let them fall into one for all I care. Or someone's constructed this or that district. The messages in between turns are just another example of how Firaxis have not bothered to properly test the game. At the very least these messaged should be somewhere down the side of the screen, not blocking my view of anything interesting happening. It's just a cluster-fork of half-baked ideas, this game.

 

At the very least, you should be able to refer BACK to them... instead of "get them as they come, or you forever lose them"