• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Is civ 6 the most peaceful iteration ever?

Oddly, city-states, in my experience, are much better at conquering.
Iirc the AI organizes its units into groups stationed at cities. Since city states only have one functional “group” that stays near their borders, it’s very easy for them to deploy forces. I’ve watched them do combined arms catapult sieges and stuff.

I suspect the major civs have a break down with keeping their units organized, which messes up deployment.
 
I would suspect the ai would perform better if the movement Points of units are increased since it should counteract less positional errors.
 
one thing about the game I find odd... I've been playing it for a few years now, and I usually finish the games I start, and... not once have I ever seen the AI use a nuclear weapon (be it against me or another AI). Not once! Is this normal, or due to the difficulty mode I play (usually Prince)?
 
one thing about the game I find odd... I've been playing it for a few years now, and I usually finish the games I start, and... not once have I ever seen the AI use a nuclear weapon (be it against me or another AI). Not once! Is this normal, or due to the difficulty mode I play (usually Prince)?
The AI is usually the same on all difficulties, but with varying bonuses or penalties. Prince often doesn’t get them to the level of being nuclear capable. If you run a higher difficulty game or a late start, I think I’ve been nuked before. The issue is they very rarely have the pieces together (build a nuke AND a delivery system.)
 
Iirc the AI organizes its units into groups stationed at cities. Since city states only have one functional “group” that stays near their borders, it’s very easy for them to deploy forces. I’ve watched them do combined arms catapult sieges and stuff.

I suspect the major civs have a break down with keeping their units organized, which messes up deployment.

Would that why major civs always have units milling about inside their borders? Every time a unit gets built/killed, the AI reorganizes?
 
Just when I was about to post that I couldn't remember the last time an AI actually conquered another AI, Gilgamesh took Mecca on turn 33.
 
Just when I was about to post that I couldn't remember the last time an AI actually conquered another AI, Gilgamesh took Mecca on turn 33.

Really? I see multiple civs wiped out every game. Maybe because of my slow speed.
 
I play for domination victory 80% of the time. I’ve been disappointed in the direction that Civ has been going now for a long time. The new DLC does not add one new universal military unit, nor does it address the poor AI military abilities. It’s veering now toward fantasy which is a real let down. I’ve played Civ since the beginning and have logged over 2000 hours on Civ VI, but I see no hope that this game will ever appeal to someone who enjoys a “conquer the world” game. Hoping Humankind is better than what CIV has became.
 
Last edited:
The more I play Civ 6, the more I come to the conclusion that this is (beside a mediocre AI) a scaling problem - both on the strategic level (concerning who DoWs on whom and who supports the bellingerents) and on the tactical Level (concerning troop movement and gaining land).

Civ 6 has shrinked the maps, while everything cries for the opposite. On the strategic level, on the biggest intended mapsize (huge) 12 civs compete. Each can have 5 allies, not counting a potentially unlimited number of friends on top. Not quite a big and realistic room for foes, don't you think? Smaller map sizes are even worse, because the 5 alliances per civ stay. Just imagine a game with 20 or 25 civs - suddenly having 5 allies would be needed and likely still not enough.

And it continues on the tactical level. Civ6 is the first iteration, where cities are drawn out over the map. Each city means potentially up to two range fire sources (and it the hands of the AI rather not so potentially, given their love for Encampments) and with only three tiles in between the next city can follow. Tiles were you can can get under fire from two or even more sides are not uncommon, while often mountain ridges take space away, too. That greatly cuts manouvring space - and if I as a human player already often fight as much with geography as with the enemy, it is even worse for a less competent AI. The tactical game would greatly benefit from a tile more mandatory city distance.

I really hope that Firaxis can iron out the late game crashing on fan-created map sizes beyond huge. I'm understanding that such huge map sizes aren't shipped wih the game itself and many people don't like huge long processing times in the AI turns, but I really would wish to have the option to exchange some extra procession time for a "bigger" gameplay experience in terms of a living civ world, which includes large scale warfare.
 
Scale/scope is definitely a major issue with CIV AI.

I recall playing the ACW scenario in CIV5 - and was pretty surprised how well the AI did there. Since that map has 4 times the space compared to a regular one there were a lot fewer blockers that hindered movement, which meant the AI was actually able to move an entire formation properly between two points. I even had an instance where the AI cavalry managed to outflank my forces and attacked artillery in my back, forcing me to shift my frontline & disengage some units. In another case it actually withdrew towards a forest, which meant that I had to spend significantly more time & resources to wipe out their units before I could besiege a nearby city.
 
So I maybe found an explanation to the peaceful conditions in my game. I use Yet Another Map Pack mod in my game and I only recently noticed the "number of major players slider" in the settings. Does this slider set how many AIs should be running for a victury or how does it work? As standard it is set to 2 so it could be an explanation to why so many AIs act so passively in my large map games.
 
Top Bottom