[R&F] Does anyone dislike the culture system in civ 6?

[Question]

In civ 5/BE, having high culture gave you access to empire wide bonuses which you coldnt get any other way and could be very game changing. There was no way you were going to get enough culture to max out all the policies so you had to pick and choose which to focus on. In particular, polciies that gave you health/happiness were critical to make sure your empire kept growing.

In civ 6, the civics tree is just another tech tree and most of the policies are meh or very situational. You dont have anywhere near enough policy slots either so you have to keep switcing cards out, whereas in civ 5/BE the bonuses you got were permanent. Cards also become obsolete...which is another problem, because it means that you SHOULDNT focus on culture. If your culture outpaces your techs, you get disadvantaged.

The entire system is setup to encourage that your culture stays at roughly the same pace as your tech, or slower than your techs, because while you get inspirations for researching certain techs, you dont get eurekas from researching civics. Cards can get obsolete from progressing in culture too fast, but with techs, you always get a better upgrade, which is not true for civics (having a +15% production bonus for industrial and later wonders does nothing if tech wise, you are still in the renaissance age).

In particular, being able to build archealogical muesuems is pointless unless you have the tech to build archaelogists.

Just off the top of my head, in BE, you got bonuses like extra health, extra production, etc...none of those get obsolete except for the ones that offer bonuses vs aliens (since aliens cease to be relevant mid-late game like barbarians). Having high culture helped to boost food, hammers, science, etc...having high culture in civ 6 doesnt really do that. The +1 production per city card you get at the start doesnt get upgraded as you go through the civics tree (e-commerce does not really count).

 

[acluewithout]

Good points, but no, I really like the culture system. I like it even more now the civics tree gives you Governors, which I think captures a little bit of Civ 5's more 'permanent choices' approach. I find most of the policy cards pretty useful, and culture fairly powerful overall as a result.

I also actually like the idea you can go through the cultural tree to far - it's like your society spent to much time looking at their navals and now everything is going to pot!

I think it's actually the Governments, Government Buildings and Legacy cards which need a bit more work. I think that would do more to improve the cultural part of the game. The game could also maybe use a few more civics (and techs), but what there is seems pretty good to me.

 

[Archon_Wing]

In civ 6, the civics tree is just another tech tree and most of the policies are meh or very situational. You dont have anywhere near enough policy slots either so you have to keep switcing cards out, whereas in civ 5/BE the bonuses you got were permanent.

I don't see a problem. Sure some of the cards are too weak, but that's a balance issue, rather than a design issue. As for having to switch cards out, well, that's the point. They don't want you to have everything. There are also governments that provide somewhat unique bonuses as well.

Cards also become obsolete...which is another problem, because it means that you SHOULDNT focus on culture. If your culture outpaces your techs, you get disadvantaged.

It's annoying that some cards obsolete, but I don't see anything wrong with requiring a balance between culture and science. If you focused on all science and no culture, you'd also have the same issue with cards; say you're in the industrial era in science but don't have civil engineering. Honestly, I've never had an issue even when I go all theater squares and have like twice my science in culture because there are plenty of other ways to get advantages, such as forming corps and spies. I just don't think this is true at all.

 

[Question]

In civ 5/BE you had a more flexible approach. You could focus on culture and get rewarded, but in Civ 6 the optimum route is either to rush tech or balance the two. Rushing culture has very little benefit and is inefficient due to the way inspiration and policy cards becoming obsolete works.

Its also the only victory condition which isnt benefited by producing more culture, and oddly enough, cultural victory is by far the hardest victory condition. When you need 200 tourism points for 1 tourist, and you might generate 500 tourism per turn with tons of great works/wonders/etc, it takes way too long to win via culture. Even in my super late game when i have nearly all great works in the game and am maxing out as many tourism bonuses as possible...ive hit about 3.5k tourism per turn....thats still only attracting 7 tourists a turn when you need a few hundred tourists to win...at that point i may as well just build spaceports and get a science victory in a fraction of the time.

 

[stealth_nsk]

In Civ5 you were forced to specialize right away, without any flexibility. In Civ6 you have very reasonable level of flexibility.

I also really like the legacy bonuses in R&F through buildings. These are like Civ5 policy tree choice, but you could delay having those buildings.

 

[acluewithout]

...Rushing culture has very little benefit and is inefficient ...

I don’t agree. There is an entire ‘fastest science victory’ strategy based around rushing culture.

Civ 6 lets you rush culture or science, and bee-line techs, and doing so gives you different benefits. Those benefits, however, come with trade-offs which include certain inefficiencies (even if it rushing / bee-lining makes other things more efficient).

I think the current approach works really well. You can develop science and culture equally if you want, and that does have advantages. But I rarely do myself, because I like the trade offs and strategy you get from having lop-sided development.

[Culture is] ... also the only victory condition which isnt benefited by producing more culture, and oddly enough, cultural victory is by far the hardest victory condition.

Sorry, but I also disagree about this. The relationship between culture and tourism is not 1:1, but that’s a feature not a big.

The culture you generate helps with defending against culture (tourism) victories. But it also helps actually win victories by giving you access to governments, buildings, and cards which enable you to win a culture victory. What’s really fun is that the tech tree also helps win culture victories, but in a very different way.

I always go for culture victories, because you can use so many aspects of the game - culture, science, religion, war, spies, gold - to get there.

I also really like the legacy bonuses in R&F through buildings. These are like Civ5 policy tree choice, but you could delay having those buildings.

There’s lot to like about the legacy card system, but I think the legacy system is a little undercooked overall.

I think your governments (or maybe just tier 1 govs) should probably give two not one legacy cards, each one emphasising a slightly different aspect of that type of government. I also think government buildings (or at least, tier 1) should give you a unique legacy card, eg honour, tradition, liberty. The bonuses from those buildings would then be rolled into those cards.

I also think you should be able to build an actual ‘government’ building, sort of like a palace upgrade. My God - I would just love to build a Parliament if I played England or a Senate if I played Rome.

I think this building would go in your city centre and would maybe have a unique name for each Civ or leader (eg Rome gets a senate; America gets a congress). Or you could choose the name or look. They would each have maybe the same bonus though to keep things simple, eg +1 wild card slot or something . Maybe you could only build one once you’d built a government plaza and run some project.

 

[Art Morte]

I'm fine with it.

The only major thing I'd like to change is having a later-game city center building that gives culture. Like a modern age monument.
Also, some way to boost border expansion without committing to a theater district might be nice.

 

[Victoria]

you dont get eurekas from researching civics

Of course you do, scientific theory, banking and stirrups come to mind.

being able to build archealogical muesuems is pointless unless you have the tech to build archaelogists.

Is Natural History a tech?....no it’s the civic required to build archaeologists.

Not being able to correctly state these indicates not enough experience to truly state however I do know where you are coming from. The civ V method was more unique as opposed to having dual trees which I find a bit dull. I like the card system though. The main limiting tech is computers and this one tech makes it far easier for a CV to push science rather than culture.

A CV is not harder than an SV, it’s the other way around. Play a few GOTM amd you will see CV’s can be nearer the 100 turn mark than SV.

Bottom line is despite all of that I prefer the V way and the difference in musicians is huge. A culture bomb to speed up CV versus fog busting because I CBA building a broadcast centre unless America.

 

[Eliminator_Sr]

In civ 5/BE you had a more flexible approach. You could focus on culture and get rewarded, but in Civ 6 the optimum route is either to rush tech or balance the two. Rushing culture has very little benefit and is inefficient due to the way inspiration and policy cards becoming obsolete works.

Of course it does if you are going for a cultural victory. You can't ignore science completely but the same applies to culture when attempting a SV. I personally enjoy culture games much more than SV but to each their own. I think the main issue with CV is the lack of clarity surrounding how tourism works. I have far more issues with RV.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Its also the only victory condition which isnt benefited by producing more culture, and oddly enough, cultural victory is by far the hardest victory condition. When you need 200 tourism points for 1 tourist, and you might generate 500 tourism per turn with tons of great works/wonders/etc, it takes way too long to win via culture. Even in my super late game when i have nearly all great works in the game and am maxing out as many tourism bonuses as possible...ive hit about 3.5k tourism per turn....thats still only attracting 7 tourists a turn when you need a few hundred tourists to win...at that point i may as well just build spaceports and get a science victory in a fraction of the time.

You need culture to reach Natural History and Cultural Heritage in a timely fashion. Most culture wonders require civics and hitting t2/t3 governments help.

How much tourism is not the only factor, but also how fast you get it. I've never gone over 2000 tourism myself.

I'm fine with it.


The only major thing I'd like to change is having a later-game city center building that gives culture. Like a modern age monument.

Also, some way to boost border expansion without committing to a theater district might be nice.

I think they should make the broadcast center a city center building and put something else as the last theater square building.

 

[criZp]

I like the civic tree, except for the military policies, they are generally stupid.

 

[magha77]

One of the easier victory types, particularly with Greece and Persia. Religious victory is more difficult (and tedious when the AI stops trying to fight it).

 

[Victoria]

I've never gone over 2000 tourism myself.

I got 2k just in seaside resorts once, thank god Kongo was in the game

 

[RealHuhn]

To be honest, all your arguments against culture work against science as well. If you only rush science, you miss a lot of eurekas from civics and on top of that, you won't have the infrastructure to produce anything you've unlocked via science.
Also, where do you get the idea that culture doesn't unlock empire wide bonuses like more science, hammers, gold etc.like in CIV5? Literally all those boosts come from policies like Rationalism, Natural Philosophy etc. An early +100% adjacency boost to campuses is like having 2-3 libraries for free.
And you won't get to size 10 cities without builders with additional charges or more housing via policies and advanced governments.
Another advantage of high culture output is the existence of governors who again can have a massive impact on developing your infrastructure which in return, boosts all yields again.

In CIV6, science and culture are connected but you can still focus on one or the other and make it work. You just have to take advantage of it by going for the right strategy.
I think it's a lot more interesting than in CIV5. Every round in CIV5 was essentially the same. Go tall, rush National College, stay small or get punished by underlying mechanics. If anything, I'd say that CIV6 is the first game in the series that nerfed science to a point where it's not necessary to focus on it every round.

 

[Victoria]

it's not necessary to focus on it every round.

... but still the best strategy

 

[RealHuhn]

... but still the best strategy

I'd say that's entirely the case because of the broken overflow mechanic. It makes superior infrastructure via culture/faith almost obsolete ... if you decide to abuse it. Which many people here do not.

 

[mitsho]

I agree: it's too complicated. Maximizing your output means switching the cards every few turns and being able to estimate how many yields they will give you. It means adapting your build units strategy to your civ AND your tech pace. It's just a hassle and I still don't have the whole overview. You can't also easily see from the civic tree which card you'll unlock since they all look the same. So my approach to improving the Civ 6 system would be to radically simplify the cards and have two types: Stronger ones that let you micromanage (+100% production for x) and weaker but more stable ones (+1 production in all cities). And of course, totally redo the User Interface.

If I could re-imagine the culture system, I would dissolve it. Expanding Borders now would be dependent on all yields in the city, and the civic tree would be changed into a wheel. Beyond Earth's Tech Tree was confusing, this one wouldn't be since the wheel would have spokes corresponding to the different things you get from a tree: Policy Cards (x3 types) & Governments, Governor Titles, Delegates and 'Culture District' with wonders, units, effects interspersed. A lot cleaner and allowing you to specialize and beeline more easily.

I guess what I am saying it that civ6's culture is just too complicated for me.

 

[Victoria]

I guess what I am saying it that civ6's culture is just too complicated for me.

Not really. It varies on speed and size but if we take standard everything

Every civ accumulates culture and every 100 culture becomes 1 domestic tourist.

Various things give tourism and this total is multiplied by trade route, government, open borders, civics/techs and to a degree religion to give an amount of tourism applied to each civ which is accumulated and every 1200 tourism with each civ = 1 foreign tourist.

You just need more foreign tourists than domestic tourists with each civ.

if you decide to abuse it. Which many people here do not.

I disagree, if you perform no abuse you can still do best with svience

 

[mitsho]

I wasn't talking about culture VICTORY, just culture, but I thank you for proving my point .

It just doesn't seem intuitive to me.

 

[Arent11]

In civ 5/BE, having high culture gave you access to empire wide bonuses which you coldnt get any other way and could be very game changing. There was no way you were going to get enough culture to max out all the policies so you had to pick and choose which to focus on. In particular, polciies that gave you health/happiness were critical to make sure your empire kept growing.

In civ 6, the civics tree is just another tech tree and most of the policies are meh or very situational. You dont have anywhere near enough policy slots either so you have to keep switcing cards out, whereas in civ 5/BE the bonuses you got were permanent. Cards also become obsolete...which is another problem, because it means that you SHOULDNT focus on culture. If your culture outpaces your techs, you get disadvantaged.

Exactly. If you want to have different areas of science, just do so (weapons, infrastructure, social science), but leave it as one bucket to fill, no need to create additional buckets for exactly the same mechanic.
Culture could be soo much more: It could represent the influence you have on people: Spreading borders, being "payment" for changing governments and policies, recruiting governors & great people, flipping cities. Instead they made culture a second science & then introduced a third mechanic (loyalty) to allow for culture flips.