[NFP] I really hope New Frontier isn’t the Final Frontier

[Ivan Hunger]

The only reason we got Civ 6 instead of a third Civ 5 expansion is because they couldn't get districts to work in the Civ 5 engine.

Likewise, there's no reason for Firaxis start all over again with a Civ 7 unless they've thought of another mechanic that necessitates building another engine from scratch.

Until then, we'll probably continue to get New Frontier Pass style content updates.

 

[kaspergm]

The only reason we got Civ 6 instead of a third Civ 5 expansion is because they couldn't get districts to work in the Civ 5 engine.

Likewise, there's no reason for Firaxis start all over again with a Civ 7 unless they've thought of another mechanic that necessitates building another engine from scratch.

Until then, we'll probably continue to get New Frontier Pass style content updates.

I don't think this logic is entirely valid. If they want to change aspects of the game to make them go directly against how it is in Civ6, that would also be reason for a new game chapter, even if it was technically possible to do this on the Civ6 engine.

 

[Flactine]

I hope it too, because found city on water, establish a puppet regime and better sea battles (similar to Pirates Mode) are not yet.

 

[KayAU]

If it is not about NFP this tweet sounds like they are working on a Civ6 version of Beyond Earth or something similar.

I would be so happy if this were to be the case. Beyond Earth has its problems, but I still enjoy it, and there is a lot of potential there.

 

[DizzKneeLand33]

Civilization 6 is almost a finished product. I don't mind if we don't get corporations or ideologies added. I don't mind if radically improving the AI is too difficult. What I do mind is that there are still no fixes to all the minor annoyances, incomplete and broken bits which have been around since long before the NFP. As one of my schoolmasters used to say, "Make sure your foundations are sound before you start building on them".

Four years later, and still every time I press Ctrl+S to save my game my heart drops and I have to go through the extra keystrokes. Something as simple as this has still not been fixed (it worked in versions 1-5).

Wouldn't it be also a basic concept to tie tourism to loyalty (along with other things, but keeping it simple)? Forgive me if it is, in which case I just missed it. But this would tie a culture-type flip into the game -- as it has been whenever culture flips were introduced in Civ 3 and continued into Civ 4.

This has the potential to be the best game of them all. I was ready to be a real modder 3 years ago (you know, when they promised us the code?). Sadly, if they release the code tomorrow, I'm not sure I would care anymore. And I'm not alone. The Civ 6 project has not been managed well imho. And before anyone gets on me for being critical, take a look to the left and see how long I have been here on these boards (and this is my second avatar here). I have purchased every iteration since Civ 2 (sometimes twice). So, I say this out of love for Civ -- I have over 5000 hours in Civ 5 alone (1350 in Civ 6, and thank the good lord I don't have the numbers on 3 and 4 pre-steam lol).

The unfinished endgame is the worst part. I'm trying to work with a mod that gets the AI to be more aggressive through the later eras but I think something is hard-coded into the passivity (testing continues). But how will we ever know without the code -- the code that we were promised a long time ago.

 

[KayAU]

This is probably where I part company a bit.

I really feel that most of the existing Civ 6 mechanics are basically spot on the way they are. I can’t see another version of Civ doing a better job with 1UPT (which, by the way, I love), governments and policies, tech and civics, districts and buildings, spies, city states, loyalty etc. Indeed, even stuff like Religion and World Congress feel basically right to me as implemented.

This is pretty much the opposite of how I feel. Well...it's a bit more nuanced than that:

• 1 UPT is good, and the change to the movement rules from Civ V are probably for the better.
• The government system looked promising, but the slots and cards system just doesn't please me. There are so many cards, some of which I always use, some which I never use, and some which I may slot in for a single turn to do something. None of them feel like I'm choosing the policies and direction for my civ, that bit of flavour just isn't there. I'm just slotting bonuses in and out. I much prefer the system from Civ IV, and even better than that, Alpha Centauri. Civ V, surprisingly, didn't have a government system at all, so Civ VI does beat its predecessor there.
• Techs and civics...well, the techs and civics themselves are fine. I am in two minds about the separate trees. On one hand, it is interesting and sort of makes sense. Why should hard science bring you new government types, and why should culture give you submarines? On the other hand, I found it more enjoyable to use culture to "level up" my civ by buying "traits/perks" as it was done in Civ V and Beyond Earth. With regards to Eurekas/Inspirations, this is one of the ideas I loved the most in Civ VI, but for which the implementation left me the most disappointed. For one thing, I hate the meta of remembering to swap out techs in order to wait for the boost. They could easily have mitigated this by having the Eureka/Inspiration give you a percentage modifier to future research instead of a lump sum. I also feel that the way you earn Eurekas/Inspirations gets tedious. Instead of your situation influencing your technological development, which is how I first saw it, it becomes a set of "fetch quests" where you do things which don't necessarily make sense to you, in order to purchase some tech boosts. I find it tedious and restricting.
• Districts and buildings are a mixed bag to me. I love district placement, it is a great idea, and it works well. I like that buildings go in districts. I don't like the buildings themselves. I don't like that yields from buildings and districts have no relation to city size, and I don't like how bad specialists are.
• Espionage is merely okay, I think it was better in Beyond Earth.
• I think loyalty is good, but this could have been fleshed out a lot more, with citizen unrest being influenced by a number of factors, including which civ the citizens originally belonged to.
• Religion is pretty meh, in my opinion. I don't enjoy the "religious combat" aspect of it all, and unlike Civ V, I feel religion is not all that helpful in building my empire. In Civ V, getting a religion and being able to purchase religious buildings was a big deal.
• The World Congress in Civ VI is bad. I was so hopeful for this, perhaps it would be an arena in which civs would strive for influence, perhaps somewhere peaceful civs could excert power without violence. But no, what we got was random proposals to receive some temporary bonuses, completely disconnected from everything else. Civ V's implementation was not sophisticated, but it was way more engaging, and for an example of a really good implementation, see Alpha Centauri's Planetary Council.

Currently, I'm playing Vox Populi again, and it is striking to me just how much more refined, sophisticated and interconnected everything is in that game. Civ VI is full of interesting ideas and systems, I just wish they could have been iterated upon and refined to a similar level.

 

[darkace77450]

NFP is fine for what it is. As a season pass, it's kept me engaged with the game throughout the year by adding content and introducing new ways to enjoy the game. NFP is not a success if it's meant to give us an expansion worth of content spread out over 12 months. Without adding new mechanics - things akin to R&F's loyalty or GS's disasters - there's not enough substance to fill holes that need filling (mid-game/colonialism and late-game/ideological blocs, to be specific). So, I'm cool with season passes, but I want them to be supplemental to and not replacements for genuine expansions.

 

[acluewithout]

NFP is fine for what it is. As a season pass, it's kept me engaged with the game throughout the year by adding content and introducing new ways to enjoy the game. NFP is not a success if it's meant to give us an expansion worth of content spread out over 12 months. Without adding new mechanics - things akin to R&F's loyalty or GS's disasters - there's not enough substance to fill holes that need filling (mid-game/colonialism and late-game/ideological blocs, to be specific). So, I'm cool with season passes, but I want them to be supplemental to and not replacements for genuine expansions.

This basically nails my views, more or less.

NFP is fine for what it is (although needs some polish), but NFP isn’t really pushing the game forward.

Base game is just missing so many nice little touches (like Reformation Beliefs, Spies as Ambassadors, a few more units) and the back half of the game is missing a tonne of content (eg Ideology).

Four years into Civ 6, and it feels like we’re just stuck at “Almost Great”.

 

[AntSou]

Well, I've said it before, but since you ask: I think the very nature of the NFP project dooms it to be a failure. The idea of small individual "game modes" that can be turned on and off individually and at will necessitates that any new game element introduced this way can't be strongly interlinked with the others or with the core game.

The very nature of NFP - the modular approach - has successfully been used on many titles, and it's very common in board games, so I don't see why it should doom it to failure.

One could argue that the modes, Civs/Leaders, and the other trimmings are not good enough, but I don't see it as a problem inherent in the approach.

I was so confused when NFP was announced. I couldn't spot anything that would add value to the game I was playing.

How would you be able to spot value when the value wasn't even fully disclosed?

 

[kaspergm]

This is pretty much the opposite of how I feel. Well...it's a bit more nuanced than that:
*snip*

I couldn't have said it better myself, I agree with pretty much every point you make. The only place where I disagree is about religion not helping your empire, I don't think that's true, particularly not since they boosted the beliefs that grant you science or culture per 4 followers, those beliefs are very strong imo. (and although I'm afraid to mention it, the AI completely bypasses these beliefs, meaning they are always available for you to grab).

 

[JJOne]

Well, I guess my (forlorn) hope is that the reason NFP is so light is because FXS are actually working on more substantive content in the background, i.e. developer resources are instead being spent on something like another expansion or expansion lite, and game modes are designed to be flexible enough to fit with new mechanics introduced in the future.

Or they're just working in making those graphics shine in 4k & 8k for the ports on the PS5 and the new X-Box.

 

[KayAU]

I couldn't have said it better myself, I agree with pretty much every point you make. The only place where I disagree is about religion not helping your empire, I don't think that's true, particularly not since they boosted the beliefs that grant you science or culture per 4 followers, those beliefs are very strong imo. (and although I'm afraid to mention it, the AI completely bypasses these beliefs, meaning they are always available for you to grab).

I mostly agree, actually, it has become a lot more useful after some rebalancing. I would say it doesn't feel quite as impactful as in Civ 5, though. It always seemed like religion came around at just the right time when I needed it to keep growing my population, and population was very important in Civ 5. It also helped develop my culture, which sped up development of Social Policies, which again helped me grow and develop faster. In Civ 6 you do get some strong bonuses, which are certainly useful, although I don't feel like it is propelling me forward in a way which is quite as profound or satisfying as in Civ 5.

 

[Ivan Hunger]

I don't think this logic is entirely valid. If they want to change aspects of the game to make them go directly against how it is in Civ6, that would also be reason for a new game chapter, even if it was technically possible to do this on the Civ6 engine.

They’ve already done that a few times in Civ 6 though. They completely changed how strategic resources work, for example.

 

[Starina]

They’ve already done that a few times in Civ 6 though. They completely changed how strategic resources work, for example.

One gets the impression that they were aiming for this from the very beginning. Remember at least the first Jebel Barkal