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.
