Fall 2017 Update Info

[Kyro]

Not only do I agree with you I would go further and say this is a deep rooted issue in ALL civ games! Without warfare they offer very little and despite things like world congress being well recieved they just throw that out the window for civ 6 and give us military units under the guise of "religious units" instead.

Civ games are wargames, always have been always will be. The fact you can win without war is more a freak accident than a well thought out design idea.
Changes have been made to enhance other victory types over the past games but make no mistake, you are always expected to be at war with someone.

I appreciate your agreememt on the facade of religious victories.

I will however, completely disprove your definition on what Civ 6 is about, based on Civilization's own definition of what it is about: "Can you BUILD a CIVILIZATION that will stand the test of time?"

Notice they didn't say "Can you conquer the world" or "Can you destroy your enemies and forge an empire" or "Can you dominate the civilizations of the world?". If Civilization is a game like you said it is, any of the definitions here would have made a much better headline.

Also, the very fact that Peace is an option in the game defies what you've just claimed. Unlike Starcraft, Age of Empires or Command and Conquer, the objective in Civilization is not to eliminate your opponents but to build a glorious Civilization that Survives. The economical structure of the game is simply not built for war alone.

Yes war is a significant feature of the game, but so is building, economy, culture, research, wonders, politics, diplomacy, religion. They're all significant which makes it not a war game because it is not Supposed to revolve around war alone.

That said I will give it to you that the game has taken a bad twist towards war emphasis precisely because there are players like you that want it to be that way and unfortunately I will have to say this: Civ 6, if it is treated as a war game is a total failure and I already have most of the best RTS games out there to supplant Civ 6's incompetence.

You with your desire to see it as a war game; perhaps you shall have that which you desire, but unto you it will be as bile, bitter and revolting.

 

[Scaramanga]

The stark reality as Will Durant puts it:

So wars determine theology and philosophy, and the ability to kill and destroy is a prerequisite for permission to live and build. (Age of Reason Begins)

Some war in moderation is good unless you're going for Domination.

 

[Haig]

I wondwr what the part about making Great people looke more great means. New icons?

 

[Rosty K]

I wondwr what the part about making Great people looke more great means. New icons?

Hope they'll bring Elvis back

 

[Siptah]

I wondwr what the part about making Great people looke more great means. New icons?

I hope we get personalized icons (maybe even colored). Elvis should stay in his civ grave, sorry. Except civ II Elvis of course. He would be great.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Maybe they feel religion shouldnt be fully optional?

In this case they did it wrong, because on high levels getting religion is close to impossible, unless you're playing Saladin.

 

[Victoria]

on high levels getting religion is close to impossible

People were saying this last xmas so people charged in and proved that you could, yes you cripple yourself and leave yourself open to death but I just did 3 random deity starts ignoring Saladin and I managed to get one and survive.
Same as was done at xmas, get that site up ASAP and project it to death.

 

[craney1987]

yes you cripple yourself and leave yourself open to death but.

Should religion be such a handicap though?

 

[Victoria]

Should religion be such a handicap though?

Well it is deity and you do not need a zillion cities to win an RV. It is certainly still a do-able victory and more challenging.
Pangea also makes the game a lot easier. After they fix the religion lens so I do not get 10 second blindness every time I open it I may spend some time finding god again.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

Civ games are wargames, always have been always will be. The fact you can win without war is more a freak accident than a well thought out design idea.
Changes have been made to enhance other victory types over the past games but make no mistake, you are always expected to be at war with someone.

Even if you are expected to always be at war with someone it would not make Civ a war game. War is part of the game sure, it is a tool to help or hurt your progress but that does not make the game a war game.

(Further, you are NOT expected to always be at war with someone, the game encourages border tension to keep the flow, but that does not necessitate war unless you want to)

Well, denouncement are pretty common, even the AI is not fussed about them.
If closed borders stops religious units, now do you win religious wars?
The V attrition was good and while I did espouse earlier to perhaps close borders I think it would dramatically alter the religious game.
Politics needs to be stronger to make city conversion a thing to be considered rather than just done

I don't know how it would work from a UI standpoint (may require too many lens switching actions) but it might be interesting to have 2 borders, the cultural borders which denote the lands for military units and then a religious border for religious units. Would require some heavy changes but would likely make religion more interesting as a defensive tool even if not engaged in the spreading itself.

 

[Sherlock]

I sure hope this patch doesn't suck. I just got an email this morning from Microsloth saying the 'Age of Empires: Definitive Edition' which I pre-ordered has had the release date changed from this Thursday to next year sometime.

This a week after taking payments on pre-orders. You stay classy, Microsoft.

 

[Victoria]

@Sherlock so you would say A of E is worth a punt if things are still bad?
I've never played it, not due to cash but just due to fixation issues I have but this diplomacy better be fixed or I will be fixating on a new fixation.

 

[Katakanja]

I don't know how it would work from a UI standpoint (may require too many lens switching actions) but it might be interesting to have 2 borders, the cultural borders which denote the lands for military units and then a religious border for religious units. Would require some heavy changes but would likely make religion more interesting as a defensive tool even if not engaged in the spreading itself.

Way back when Beyond Earth came out, I actually had a pet theory that the Orbital Layer was a prototype concept for how they might implement religious units and spread in the next main series games. Rather than launching satellites, you'd just toggle onto the second layer to order your missionaries etc where to station themselves to preach and convert.

I guess Firaxis didn't consider anything like that

 

[Victoria]

you are always expected to be at war with someone.

Well considering war weariness increases with era and declaration type as does the less important warmonger points you sure must concede that the game designers are not encouraging you to be at war all the time.

 

[Archon_Wing]

@Sherlock so you would say A of E is worth a punt if things are still bad?
I've never played it, not due to cash but just due to fixation issues I have but this diplomacy better be fixed or I will be fixating on a new fixation.

There is no diplomacy (practically) in the AoE series; it's largely a war game. Though it was influenced by Civ and has the general idea of going from a dark age and advancement. Also the obsession with horse units.

They have done an impressive job with that franchise though. The AOE 2 HD remake, was treated with a lot of care and lots of balance changes over the years. We're talking a game that is 18 years of age still getting design and balance changes from the developers! Who even does that?

So I think it is in good hands.

 

[craney1987]

It's hard to compare real time with turn based. The pacing is completely different.
Civ and aoe are the first two games I ever played on PC. I had to travel to my grandparents to play civ and aoe was treat at school for the kiss arses like me who did everything on time.
As such I have a special spot in my heart for both. Civ as a series has always pulled me back though, and kept my attention for longer.

Aoe is what you would see if you could zoom right in and watch your cities farms or lumber mills or armies marching in civ. Like a microcosm of the wider civ world.

 

[Disgustipated]

any estimated time when this patch comes out?

As for the war discussion, it should be noted at lower levels like Prince you can win the game without ever going to war. It can be done. If anything, the past 2 games make it easier to win through peaceful means.

 

[Tech Osen]

any estimated time when this patch comes out?

As for the war discussion, it should be noted at lower levels like Prince you can win the game without ever going to war. It can be done. If anything, the past 2 games make it easier to win through peaceful means.

Whether or not you're going to war is largely dependant on your starting position. If you start next to the Aztecs or Alexander or in a place with very little room to expand, war is pretty much inevitable.

 

[Victoria]

If you start next to the Aztecs

I have had quite a few Emperor starts next to Aztecs with a peaceful victory.
Just do not use any luxuries until he decides you have a lot in common, when he uses a lux it's likely you have the same one for you to start using it.

This fostering provides +12, +3 for a delegation, +3 for a trade route so you can work out their secondary agenda and before you know it you are best buddies guaranteed. You just need to be careful about forward settling him. Quite a few civs have only +6 on primary agenda, the likes of Monty and Fred are early game friends that get harder as life progresses. Others are later game friends like Trajan.

For Alex I will archer rush him as soon as I can, changing all my plans to do so, his more expensive units make him vulnerable really early.

It's so annoying alliances are broken at the moment, makes me war much more often because there is no benefit in not doing so.

 

[Scaramanga]

People were saying this last xmas so people charged in and proved that you could, yes you cripple yourself and leave yourself open to death but I just did 3 random deity starts ignoring Saladin and I managed to get one and survive.

How much did your starts rely on getting defender of the faith or crusade? I'm wondering if the AI should be tweaked to prioritise one of them based on how much they like the human player. If getting a religion leaves them too vulnerable they should at least be smart about it.