Hills...otherwise known as wrinkles in Civ 6

[kaspergm]

While I do sometimes have trouble seeing hills, it has never become enough of a problem for me to get upset about it.

I'm kind of in this boat, but it's enough of a nuisance for me that I'll definitely try out that mod.

 

[Gorbles]

Like someone else mentioned; 70% of the time you can pick them (if they're not covered by woods/rain forest/district) but around 30% of them are so insignificant that even uncovered you won't. Of course all of this in a game where the map was a feature to be easily read! Where units were increased in size again to be easily seen how much strength they have. Etc.

As to the tool tip my personal preference is to have it not pop up immediately. I have it pop up after as long a time as the game allows. And I'm not changing that just cos they screwed up hills.

If you have a problem, and there is something in the game that accounts for that, but you don't want to use it due to personal preference . . . then that's on you.

Maybe there's a better solution for hills, in another game. But like you said, the engine in this one has to account for building art. That's a large caveat however much you want to call it a "screw up".

I'm certainly not going to say "because I don't have a problem, you shouldn't". However if you refuse to use contextual ingame information, then maybe don't complain if one thing isn't always immediately obvious? Or at least recognise that this is also partly on you, vs. partly on how Firaxis chose to implement hills with all the other things they had to consider at the same time.

Who knows. Maybe they'll bump up the art in a patch and this will all be moot

 

[Janskey]

Graphics settings make a difference (max vs. min):

Spoiler :

(the donkey and the guy on the right switch garments, but that's not what I mean)
Still difficult to tell when there's trees, but I usually play with yields on.

 

[nzcamel]

Yeah...even harder when there are trees as well.

On a related note: why are hills superior to flat land in every way?

I think that's part of the meta of VI isn't it? With production being so valuable... Food is easier to get (and always has been too easy to get in Civ if you want to compare to history) but in VI this is even more obvious.

If you have a problem, and there is something in the game that accounts for that, but you don't want to use it due to personal preference . . . then that's on you.

I take it you're talking the tool tip? Funny that you'd see a text box as something that accounts for poor graphics.

Maybe there's a better solution for hills, in another game. But like you said, the engine in this one has to account for building art. That's a large caveat however much you want to call it a "screw up".

There is a very obvious better solution staring you in the face in the OP. Actually with another 2-3 years presumably before VII, I think they can and should do something about the hills. Yes, it'll take some effort; but it should have been done in the first place.

I'm certainly not going to say "because I don't have a problem, you shouldn't". However if you refuse to use contextual ingame information, then maybe don't complain if one thing isn't always immediately obvious? Or at least recognise that this is also partly on you, vs. partly on how Firaxis chose to implement hills with all the other things they had to consider at the same time.

Who knows. Maybe they'll bump up the art in a patch and this will all be moot

The graphics on screen are a part of the UI. For that reason alone making hills easy to distinguish regardless of what is sitting on top of them is a no brainer. Add in their statements of "reading the map" and there is zero defence for dropping the ball on hills. Why are you so keen to defend the undefendable @Gorbles? Are you worried that if they sink resources into this, that'll be less into AI? Or less into modding tools? At least that makes sense, if for you it's a priority thing of what needs fixing most. But to say it's fine as it is? Nope. Lol.

 

[Gorbles]

If you're calling something "undefendable", it's clear that you don't want a discussion. You just want to vent, or to have it fixed as according to your wishes. Sorry for the tangent.

 

[nzcamel]

If you're calling something "undefendable", it's clear that you don't want a discussion. You just want to vent, or to have it fixed as according to your wishes. Sorry for the tangent.

Hey, let's have a discussion. I'm all about discussions not being shut down.

But the hills being hard to pick was dumb without the emphasis on "reading the map" and once Firaxis added that emphasis it did become undefendable. They made that choice, not anyone else. You have to keep that in mind as you defend them.