Difficulty Level of Civ6 GOTM's?

[leif erikson]

There seem to be some questions concerning Civ6 GotM difficulty levels. Please tell us what difficulty levels you would like to see.

In general, we try to provide a game of Emperor to Deity at the mid-month and a bit easier difficulty level at the start of the month. This is the opposite of Civ5 GotM so that players have an easier and a more difficult game running concurrently between the two series.

 

[Monthar]

Emperor again? GotM6 was also Emperor. Plus the odd numbered games are Emperor-Deity, so shouldn't the even numbered games be Warlord-King?

Edit: Also, the save name says 7.1 not 8 and doesn't include the VC.

 

[x2Madda]

Emperor again? GotM6 was also Emperor. Plus the odd numbered games are Emperor-Deity, so shouldn't the even numbered games be Warlord-King?

Edit: Also, the save name says 7.1 not 8 and doesn't include the VC.

I also share this concern. Not been a lot of King/Begineer games of Civ6 GotM

 

[Knowtalent]

Emperor again? GotM6 was also Emperor. Plus the odd numbered games are Emperor-Deity, so shouldn't the even numbered games be Warlord-King?

Edit: Also, the save name says 7.1 not 8 and doesn't include the VC.

We have used Emperor in both the easy and the hard version of GotM for about a year or so in CiV. Warlord games are simply too easy to be fun. Domination is still very easy in 6 so I chose the hardest level for the first one in the easy game.

 

[Khalid]

I also share this concern. Not been a lot of King/Begineer games of Civ6 GotM

GOTM6 was my first finished game of Civ6. Emperor is still fairly easy in my opinion.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Moved these posts out of the Announcement thread for 6otM08 to discuss as a separate issue.

 

[x2Madda]

GOTM6 was my first finished game of Civ6. Emperor is still fairly easy in my opinion.

I certainly agree that Emperor is easy but when we look at Civ 5 GotM some were on King or Prince difficulty in order to entice newer, less confident players to give them a try. We are after all, civfanatics and many of us regulars on the forum have beaten most civ games on Diety setting but not everyone shares our skill or passion for the game and GotM is a nice way to encourage less confident players to dip their toe in the water and learn from more experienced players.

 

[Monthar]

... Warlord games are simply too easy to be fun. ...

In your opinion perhaps. What's fun or not fun for you isn't necessarily what others find fun or not fun. I can beat deity, but I don't enjoy it. Instead I get very annoyed at the AI's which, to me , makes for a very frustrating game that I rarely bother finishing. With the bonuses the AI's get on immortal and emperor I find these levels almost as frustrating. It's not just the unit spam, it's the city spam and diplomacy that get more annoying as the difficulty level increases.

I tend to have more fun on the lower difficulty levels, including warlord and even settler, because the AI isn't as annoying, thus I don't get frustrated as easily. Part of my enjoyment comes from not being forced to spam units at these lower difficulty levels. I can focus more on building my empire instead of feeling like I'm playing the types of games I hate, such as Left 4 Dead.

 

[Khalid]

I certainly agree that Emperor is easy but when we look at Civ 5 GotM some were on King or Prince difficulty in order to entice newer, less confident players to give them a try. We are after all, civfanatics and many of us regulars on the forum have beaten most civ games on Diety setting but not everyone shares our skill or passion for the game and GotM is a nice way to encourage less confident players to dip their toe in the water and learn from more experienced players.

I completely agree that having GOTMs at lower difficulty is great for attracting newer players. I also share MOnthars view that I do enjoy also lower difficulties because i am more free what I can do in the game.

I was just surprised with the ease that I was able to win emperor as my first game. This would definitely not possible for the previous CIV series.

 

[x2Madda]

I completely agree that having GOTMs at lower difficulty is great for attracting newer players. I also share MOnthars view that I do enjoy also lower difficulties because i am more free what I can do in the game.

I was just surprised with the ease that I was able to win emperor as my first game. This would definitely not possible for the previous CIV series.

That will likely change in the future. At present the AI doesn't upgrade units, I imagine in the future Firaxis will just let the AI cheat to have up to date units. Surprised it wasn't the default to be honest.

 

[ShinigamiKenji]

According to GotM's announcement threads, its goal is to provide a means for people to learn their ropes, through discussion and experiments. In this regard, I agree that there should be games on Warlord-King level.

However, you don't learn much by staying on those levels. Many strategies only show their value after Emperor.

So, as a compromise, it's good to have lower-level GotM once in a while, but most of them should be at the current level. Maybe running a concurrent GotM: Beginner Edition?

 

[x2Madda]

According to GotM's announcement threads, its goal is to provide a means for people to learn their ropes, through discussion and experiments. In this regard, I agree that there should be games on Warlord-King level.

However, you don't learn much by staying on those levels. Many strategies only show their value after Emperor.

So, as a compromise, it's good to have lower-level GotM once in a while, but most of them should be at the current level. Maybe running a concurrent GotM: Beginner Edition?

Well during Civ5 GotM we had a expert game from the 1st to the 1st and a begineers game from the 15th to the 15th, was just odd that Civ6 GotM doesn't seem to have that same format (yet).

Every game on Emperor plays the same because the AI is hyper-aggressive so you have to build an army and then, well, you have an army so may as well use it. So its just kill everyone then check the box for the current GotM goal.

Only science offers any real variation because of timings to get a fast science victory.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

I think a weakness of the game is, and has been ever since civ2 (or 1 probably but never played that one) that it is hard in the beginning and gets too easy once you overtake the AIs.

I think it would be a worthy goal for GOTM to try and counter that as much as possible.

So i imagine that would mean a high difficulty level with an opponent AI that is designed to become runaway on the other side of the map (godly start position, weak neighbours, AI personality that likes to expand by conquest) , safely out of reach.

Meanwhile, the players direct neighbours could be moderately soft and/or the starting position very good. For example you could make the game on Deity level, have soft direct neighbours so that the start feels more like emperor-immortal level, while having that runaway AI on another continent so that the end game will also be challenging. Im sure your creative minds can think of many different variations making use of the different AI traits and personalities. (another fun examle could be 2 AIs that are designed to be significantly stronger than the player but in conflict with eachother where the player will need to use diplomacy and choose carefully whom to fight to keep them in balance and complete a victory condition without actually being the strongest on the map)
I remember in civ3 at least the SGOTMs were very well and creatively designed.

I also recall we had some system where players could choose to play with or without the given handicap. That way you can have 2 difficulty levels within 1 GOTM. You state a handicap that can range from things like 1CC, 5CC, not building certain units or buildings etc and design the game to be deity level-ish difficult with that handicap while it is actually an emperor or so level game. The player chooses to play with or without that handicap. I think that was a great way to make it interesting for both the strong and the more casual player.

I think too big a range of difficulty levels has always been another weakness of the game. I think the bottom half of difficulty levels are obsolete and the steps between them could be made smaller by making the lowest be like something now in the middle. (although that is based primarily on difficulty levels in previous civs as i dont yet have sufficient experience in civ6 to say much about it, but its unlikely to be much different)
I might be wrong, but i dont imagine anything below king to be of any use even for casual players. After spending 30 minutes watching a youtube vid about the game i think even my mom could beat king level. I would consider king level the "practice level" and emperor - deity the real difficulty levels that are to be beaten.

I think the GOTM should mostly be exploring the emperor-deity-range. As said, with the above factors; modifications to make it more challenging troughout the game and maybe a handicap that makes it be on the lower end of that range without and on the higher end of that range with the handicap. You can still have that difference between the mid and start month GOTM, maybe make the easy version play around king level without the handicap while the other plays emperor+ without handicap. That way the beginning player who is to learn has all the steps on the ladder available. He can start by simply playing the King level, can then play the next GOTM on emperor level and finally can try to play with handicap but still have the option to drop the handicap if it turns out too hard.

The thing with civ and difficulty levels though is that it is more of a choise rather than a skill. If you just click trough your turns and finish a game in 1 sitting vs if you double check everything before hitting the end-turn button and sit back to rethink your short, mid and long term goals every 10 turns makes at least a 2 difficulty level difference in what you can beat. If GOTM is about learning the game by discussion and seeing what others did and achieve, i would assume something more leaning towards the second style of play. And that is why i think the bottom half has no place in GOTMs and king is just a stepping stone for the new players.

 

[ShinigamiKenji]

The problem is that there's no map editor (as far as I know), so there's no guarantee that the AI will have good starting positions. Even with reveal all command, it can take quite a number of rerolls.

Also, I don't like artificially handicapping the player like that. I prefer to play my games to the fullest, without taking features out.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

No map editor ? O.o

Oh wow....

The handicapping would of course be optional, but ye without map editor, theres nothing to do...

 

[Knowtalent]

No map editor ? O.o

Oh wow....

The handicapping would of course be optional, but ye without map editor, theres nothing to do...

Yup no editor, and because of that we have to do a fair amount of play testing to see if the game is viable.

 

[CPWimmer]

It sounds like you all have the right idea (easy vs. hard every other game) - I think the question/concern is, "Does Emperor really qualify as easy for enough people?" From the sounds of it, you have enough of a mixed response that I would recommend erring on the side of caution and not include it. That would mean sticking with King as the hardest level for the easy games in the future.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

PS: ye, i would really like some 5cc variant for the GOTM. (or a no conquest variant, including no captured settlers)
I barely played civ6 and the focus on getting 30 cities with just a commercial and science district is getting boring already.
Lets make a game where we actually get to explore all that stuff with amenities and housing.

 

[Rain]

As an alternative idea you could try using some of the steam type achievements as game goals. E.g. getting all 16 luxuries as Aztecs. Or Building Cristo Redentor and Macarena in one City as Brazil. Not all of them are usable but it would be something more novel than the standard victories alone.

 

[ShinigamiKenji]

As an alternative idea you could try using some of the steam type achievements as game goals. E.g. getting all 16 luxuries as Aztecs. Or Building Cristo Redentor and Macarena in one City as Brazil. Not all of them are usable but it would be something more novel than the standard victories alone.

Only if those are optional goals. I'd hate it if it was the main goal.