'I really tried to like this game, i really did but' thread

[andreafin]

i have tried. i love sean bean and the advisor voice whoever she is. the actual movement of units is identical really to civ 5, combat, but the cities... i spend all my time stressing over where to build districts. since when has civ been about city planning? yes you need to choose what to build to achieve what victory you are aiming for - but town planning now on top? and you get to the stage where you need to build residential districts, neighborhoods (suburbs really) - but the most effective places to build them remove the food your city needs to grow! and they keep nagging you over and over that you need to build them...

i feel civ 5 city system was better. you tell them what to build AND LET THE CITY COUNCIL OR MAYOR think about where to cram it in. the governor still assigns the workers to what hex, and he should still assign the districts. im a ruler not a lord mayor. i deal with the STRATEGIC things. i tell them what i need - if i wanted sim city well i have cities: skylines for a city simulator.

i would have been happy with civ 5 with added civs and remade so you could have FAR bigger maps than civ 5 could handle, and a better espionage system. sure we got the missions i wanted - but we have limited spies? we should be able to build far more spies. the enemy civs seem to have enough to guard and to steal all the same time from every other civ. i have so few i need to target mine?? just make them like in civ rev and keep the missions.

and i cant really play without an IGE mod anymore. its just no fun on settler leading for so long and suddenly for no reason a distant civ just overtakes you in tech - probably because hes stealing them all from you on top of making research agreements. unless you do war upon him you will lose to science victory.

the upshot is, i just cant face another game, and i didnt finish the england one. my heart isnt in it. i feel a yearning to just run civ 5, with the middle earth mods and maps and ige and infoaddict and play that despite all the problems.

its not that i hate the cities expanding onto other hexes; its that the hexes are too big, the maps too small for the scale. the hexes in scale must be 100 km across at least - 200km diameter hexes? idk. but the cities are too big for the maps. the hexes needed to be much smaller for it to work for me with expanding cities - and then the unit graphics would be too tiny to see unless you spend all your time zooming right in and then all the way out again to move quick across the map...

idk what the solution is aside from going back to the drawing board and simplifying the unit graphics to symbols, so they fit into tiny hexes, and then you can set the cities 30 or 40 or 50 hexes apart so they have plenty of room to grow, still plenty of room for suburbs without sacrificing the food they need. and stopping the nagging that you need to build more neighborhoods in every city on every hex over all the other sites. because you leave it to the city rulers to do all that stuff so you can concentrate on directing the nation not building and planning every city and trying to defend it all through diplomacy and war.

am i just insane wanting one hex cities back unless the hexes are smaller?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

i spend all my time stressing over where to build districts. since when has civ been about city planning?

Civ 1 is the answer.

The only advantage civ 5 had is that they hid the UI/design flaws with it behind a soft-cap on cities. City planning has always been a central facet of civ play, going back to the settler/worker pump days, specialist micro, whip micro, tile improvement swapping to squeeze overflow, onward to civ 5 tile sharing/spec management.

The problem in civ 6 is that the developers don't want you to think, they want you to click many times to navigate menus (some of which provide misinformation or don't let you know the rules) to create the illusion you're playing .

More hexes (IE smaller ones) would help with clutter, and would be a good idea if they ever decide to optimize the game.

 

[zarakand]

Come back in a few years after 2 expansions and the game will be significantly different. It's a very fun game on it's own right now, but a dissapointment when I compare it to CiV (complete) or Civ IV.

On the bright side, I remember feeling this way about V when it came out and went back to 4 for a while. Now I love 5, and in a little while when I come back to 6 I'll probably love it too.

 

[Piruparka]

Do we really need a thread like this every week...? It's getting tiring tbh.

 

[Leyrann]

Oh come on. Districts are the best invention in any 4X game EVER. Full stop. Finally you get to see huge metropolises, or even megalopolises of cities growing together because they just become so big. And what's more, you have to think about what you're doing when, instead of just mindlessly doing the same thing every game around. If I wanted to do the same thing a thousand times over, I'd play Cookie Clicker (oh wait, I do... @#$%).

 

[Piruparka]

I'd play Cookie Clicker (oh wait, I do... @#$%).

I gave it up after playing until Octillions without cheating

 

[Leyrann]

I gave it up after playing until Octillions without cheating

I don't remember how far I got before giving up, but I did start again... 1354 hours ago. Already got to Quintillions, so...

(sorry for off-topic)

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Oh come on. Districts are the best invention in any 4X game EVER. Full stop. Finally you get to see huge metropolises, or even megalopolises of cities growing together because they just become so big. And what's more, you have to think about what you're doing when, instead of just mindlessly doing the same thing every game around. If I wanted to do the same thing a thousand times over, I'd play Cookie Clicker (oh wait, I do... @#$%).

Sounds like "city needs orders" or "hey, what do you want to do with this one of your 25 trade routes this turn??? How about this one??? This one???"

 

[Balkans]

With the last patch i realized that they won't improve game with patches - anything substantial will come with a price tag. Just because they can, and just because people are willing to pay. I am not just disappointed with civ 6, i kinda died on the inside realizing what the gaming industry became and just how softcore the new generation of gamers are. I'm getting too old for this ****.
I tried, i really did, but i'm shameful to admit that i threw away good money for deluxe version. It's not that the game is pure manure, but the cries of hardcore fans and suggestions are like echoes send to space, we can't really expect any feedback from a company that operates in a bubble. When i see them doing their livestream, and they are all smiley and giggly, and they are presenting something like it's the cure for cancer, i swear to God, i want to punch them in the face, not because of violence and for my own pleasure, but to wake them up! They are so detached from community it's almost painful to see them actually believing stuff they are saying...then again, maybe it's me, being hardcore is like a disease, it's like unemployed developer no one listens to. I guess people love this UI, this AI, broken mechanics, balance issues, trivial stuff that don't work, no numbers, WAIT TILL NEXT TURN UPDATE (ARE YOU KIDDING ME) ... and my nail in the coffin - ESCaping from citizen screen into setting menu, it gives me chills.
I tried, but i think i'm done with civ 6. There's like 1% chance i'll try another game, it will take a divine intervention.
The other day i see a thread with guy saying he finally beat the game on immortal, it's made me kinda sad. This is not the game where it holds any weight to say you beat the game at highest difficulty.
/rant_over

 

[Leyrann]

With the last patch i realized that they won't improve game with patches - anything substantial will come with a price tag. Just because they can, and just because people are willing to pay. I am not just disappointed with civ 6, i kinda died on the inside realizing what the gaming industry became and just how softcore the new generation of gamers are. I'm getting too old for this ****.
I tried, i really did, but i'm shameful to admit that i threw away good money for deluxe version. It's not that the game is pure manure, but the cries of hardcore fans and suggestions are like echoes send to space, we can't really expect any feedback from a company that operates in a bubble. When i see them doing their livestream, and they are all smiley and giggly, and they are presenting something like it's the cure for cancer, i swear to God, i want to punch them in the face, not because of violence and for my own pleasure, but to wake them up! They are so detached from community it's almost painful to see them actually believing stuff they are saying...then again, maybe it's me, being hardcore is like a disease, it's like unemployed developer no one listens to. I guess people love this UI, this AI, broken mechanics, balance issues, trivial stuff that don't work, no numbers, WAIT TILL NEXT TURN UPDATE (ARE YOU KIDDING ME) ... and my nail in the coffin - ESCaping from citizen screen into setting menu, it gives me chills.
I tried, but i think i'm done with civ 6. There's like 1% chance i'll try another game, it will take a divine intervention.
The other day i see a thread with guy saying he finally beat the game on immortal, it's made me kinda sad. This is not the game where it holds any weight to say you beat the game at highest difficulty.
/rant_over

So uhm. Basically this is a statement in sentence one and then some 15 lines of ranting about it?

You could've saved yourself the effort. The game's AI improved a LOT in the last patch (to the point that the maker of the most used AI mod adviced people to play without his mod until the next update because the base game was now better than the mod), so your point is already disproven.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

So uhm. Basically this is a statement in sentence one and then some 15 lines of ranting about it?

You could've saved yourself the effort. The game's AI improved a LOT in the last patch (to the point that the maker of the most used AI mod adviced people to play without his mod until the next update because the base game was now better than the mod), so your point is already disproven.

Not sure what an AI mod did for the controls. Care to explain?

 

[Noble Zarkon]

i spend all my time stressing over where to build districts

Districts are the best thing about Civ Vi IMO ....

 

[slyone14]

I really want to like this game, but I still do love it and I am very thankful that Fireaxis put it out for me to play. I enjoy playing it and will continue to do so. I will not complain about the flaws of a game out only a few months, is it perfect, Nope. I do understand it will continue to get better and better with time and expansions. I am also thankful for the continued patching and DLC. Thank you Fireaxis, I am happy.

 

[Leyrann]

Not sure what an AI mod did for the controls. Care to explain?

He just made a general rant about nothing in the game getting improved in patches, and everything have a price tag to it, I proved him wrong. That said, if the UI is gonna change, it's not going to come with a pricetag.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

He just made a general rant about nothing in the game getting improved in patches, and everything have a price tag to it, I proved him wrong. That said, if the UI is gonna change, it's not going to come with a pricetag.

He is ranting about UI and mechanics in addition to UI and calling out the low quality of the game in general. The assertion you have "proved" him wrong is falsifiable and (in the case of UI) proven false, not the opposite. Some mechanics are objectively broken, but most are subjective. The AI might be somewhat better, but that hardly discounts his whole post, or even 25% of it.

 

[Stringer1313]

How has the AI gotten "a lot" better? After the zerg rush in the early game, AI still seems to be a cakewalk. I think I do notice SLIGHTLY higher number of military units, but as usual AI never declares war on me and skitters like cockroaches as soon as I have a dreaded wall.

 

[Leyrann]

He is ranting about UI and mechanics in addition to UI and calling out the low quality of the game in general. The assertion you have "proved" him wrong is falsifiable and (in the case of UI) proven false, not the opposite. Some mechanics are objectively broken, but most are subjective. The AI might be somewhat better, but that hardly discounts his whole post, or even 25% of it.

His first line: "With the last patch i realized that they won't improve game with patches - anything substantial will come with a price tag."

That's not true. Not everything substantial comes with a price tag, and the AI is proof. Once again, he talked about anything substantial. That's by the definition of the word "anything" not limited to the UI. On top of that, he explicitly mentions the AI later on. Also, if he were talking about the UI only - do you, or anyone else - honestly believe that if the UI gets improvements, we'll have to pay for it? Because I don't. You pay for "extra" stuff, as that's simply what DLC's and expansions are. If they would put a price tag on a new UI, they'd make it "extra" stuff. Do you have any idea how that will be recieved in the community? It'll make the current UI storm feel like a gentle breeze.

 

[Leyrann]

How has the AI gotten "a lot" better? After the zerg rush in the early game, AI still seems to be a cakewalk. I think I do notice SLIGHTLY higher number of military units, but as usual AI never declares war on me and skitters like cockroaches as soon as I have a dreaded wall.

They can capture walled cities now, while they couldn't (just couldn't!) previously. I call that "a lot better". I'm not gonna call the AI good, but I am gonna call it a lot better.

 

[Disgustipated]

This is not the game where it holds any weight to say you beat the game at highest difficulty.

Another elitist. Not everyone is the same skill level. I didn't see the thread in question, but why shame someone for being proud of their accomplishment? You are basically saying I'm smarter than you, and you are a moron if you can't beat Immortal. I can't beat immortal right now. It requires me to play the game in a way that isn't fun for me. I'm just tired of people making fun of other people because they can't beat deity. The game has many problems for sure. How about discussing those problems instead of making fun of someone who is proud they beat Immortal.

I get the attitude that you are too intelligent for this game. Then you should be playing EU4 or something more complex. Civ has always been a game that appeals to all demographics.

With the last patch i realized that they won't improve game with patches - anything substantial will come with a price tag.

Now this is a legitimate complaint, I'll give you that. Although I'm curious, is it possible that we could get AI upgrades without buying the expansion? Some games you do get those kinds of upgrades, you just don't get the extras you'd get actually buying the expansion (in Civ's case that being more civs, buildings, units etc and possibly a U.N. feature). Presumably there will be a patch update for the expansion pack that everyone will get regardless if they actually buy the expansion, and that patch update may have AI improvements.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I get the attitude that you are too intelligent for this game. Then you should be playing EU4 or something more complex.

Careful, that pothole is more of a chasm. EU 4 is something I have played a lot. It's sad that Firaxis got beaten even by them in UI, because EU 4 UI also lies. I like the game (most days) but the business practices are AWFUL, to the point of being legitimately construed as dishonest.

You're right about the difficulty and the way he worded it though. It's disappointing that the highest levels of the game are (far) below the level of ability required to win in previous games, but that doesn't mean people are wrong to like winning on a given level.

Things like AI upgrades w/o expansion do happen, but it's dangerous territory. If you are changing a significant amount of game systems mechanically, you wind up having two make multiple AI algorithms to handle different rules, with lots of potential unforeseen interactions. Firaxis attempting this when the base release was so poor in that regard would not build confidence.

Also, if he were talking about the UI only - do you, or anyone else - honestly believe that if the UI gets improvements, we'll have to pay for it? Because I don't.

I see no reason to expect otherwise, given the glaring evidence from the first 3 patches, with the only caveat being I see no good reason to expect the UI to actually receive enough attention to make it decent given the series' history.

I want to be wrong on this one though. That would be a good thing. If I were, however, why the low priority on fixing an alpha-state UI to this point?