Do barb camps spawn invasion forces anymore?

Seriously? The only "tacAI" that was somewhat challenging and you wanted it gone? :rolleyes:

Yep. Being forced into the same build order every game isn't fun. Plus the barbs often hamstrung other civs and CSes more often than they took me down.

It's definitely too passive now, but I'll take too passive over too aggressive any day, since one allows more freedom than the other.

The great divide in civ … or at least one of them.

Do you want to play a game where you're forced to worry, right out of the gate, about whether your neighbours will burn down your cities?

Or do you want to play a game where you're free to ignore building an early army so you can spend your initial turns on other things?

I'm not sure there's a happy medium. Civ 6 tilts heavily towards "win your way", so it might as well focus on that and eliminate the potential for early barbarian overruns. Having the early game offer a challenge when the rest of the game doesn't just detracts from the sim civ fun, without providing a satisfying experience for those who want a more dangerous game environment.
 
I don't like the current situation where barbarians pose almost no threat. But, I didn't really like the previous situation, either. The starting game was much too variable because of barbarians. I'd have some games with 1-2 camps spawning Warriors and other games with 3-4 camps spawning Horsemen everywhere. The difference is quite large. The AI often had trouble with starts like that, too, which actually made some games easier.

Some variety is good, but there's a limit.

(And no, I'm not talking about the pre-patch GS situation where barbarians only spawned on some continents. This is more pre-GS.)
 
I have seen warriors and horseman spawn and head towards my city, but I haven't seen the mass spawns we used to have.
 
The great divide in civ … or at least one of them.

Do you want to play a game where you're forced to worry, right out of the gate, about whether your neighbours will burn down your cities?

Or do you want to play a game where you're free to ignore building an early army so you can spend your initial turns on other things?

I'm not sure there's a happy medium. Civ 6 tilts heavily towards "win your way", so it might as well focus on that and eliminate the potential for early barbarian overruns. Having the early game offer a challenge when the rest of the game doesn't just detracts from the sim civ fun, without providing a satisfying experience for those who want a more dangerous game environment.

The solution to lack of challenge later in the game is to make the late game more challenging, not to make the early game easier...
 
This was a tricky one, but we think we found the problem. Thanks for the report! I'll bring up the topic of setting aggressiveness level with the design team and see what they think.

Awesome!

I'm not sure there's a happy medium. Civ 6 tilts heavily towards "win your way", so it might as well focus on that and eliminate the potential for early barbarian overruns. Having the early game offer a challenge when the rest of the game doesn't just detracts from the sim civ fun, without providing a satisfying experience for those who want a more dangerous game environment.

I think the solution is making the game tougher later and easier at the start. The people that a pro barbarian just want some form of challenge. I personally want more challenge as well, but not at the expense of trying new strategies.

I think both parties would be happy if the actual civs could pose a similar threat once they got established. That way your situation is wildly different by the time things hit the fan and so are your options for getting through it.
 
Last edited:
I agree. It was a bit of a gamble in the original version where “greedy” starts with for example Builder instead of a Slinger could result in being overrun right away. BUT barbs were really the only thing to actually make the player worry about losing the game since they were much better at attacking than the AI Civs and cant be bribed. It would be great if they were a little less devastating at the very start but the AI in turn provided more challenge so that winning or losing would determined near the end instead of near the beginning.
 
This was a tricky one, but we think we found the problem. Thanks for the report! I'll bring up the topic of setting aggressiveness level with the design team and see what they think.
Developer feedback like this is incredible. Even if results are not immediate it is really nice knowing that this information is getting to the right folks.
 
This was a tricky one, but we think we found the problem. Thanks for the report! I'll bring up the topic of setting aggressiveness level with the design team and see what they think.

And the problem was...?
 
Developer feedback like this is incredible. Even if results are not immediate it is really nice knowing that this information is getting to the right folks.

There seems to be a new approach to communication with the community since the latest patch was released.

I think it's a hugely positive change!
 
Let me add that barbs are not eager to be clubbed to death (by throwing scouts at your slingers) and have their camps taken (by moving out their pikemen, leaving empty camps).
 
You know, without the barbarian rushes it's been a lot easier to get a Classical golden age. Barbara camps are just so easy to clear.
 
Top Bottom