1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Is Civ 6 up to par with Civ V yet?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by labellavienna, Jun 14, 2017.

  1. craney1987

    craney1987 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2016
    Messages:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    I feel it's unfair to compare a game that's had two expansions to a game thats had a few patches.

    that being said, I find the base game of VI to be better. They will continue to fix the AI and in the meantime I can hone my skills at higher difficulties. I went back to V for a month not long after VI launched and while it was fun, I never had the drive to improve myself like I do with VI. So it wins for me
     
  2. kaspergm

    kaspergm Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,989
    To answer OP: No, it's not as good as Civ5 yet. Particularly the endgame is pretty disastrous, and Civ5 was pretty bad in this regard in itself. Unless you go for domination victory, Civ6 endgame is pretty much hoping for a loophole in terms of recruiting Carl Sagan and one of the +100 % space production, or look forward to an endless number of "next turn" clicks.

    There are also serious balancing and scaling issues that remain. District, unit and building costs just blow up way too much in late game to make it fun for me. 10-15 turn production time on regular speed for a military unit is just way too much. And it doesn't help the AI at all, which is seriously lacking to begin with. Other things like policy and espionage system needs lesser amounts of adjusting and polishing.

    Civ6 has huge potential, and if they take good care of it, it can become a killer game. But it needs at least one expansion before it starts to compare favorable to Civ5:BnW.
     
    Eagle Pursuit and craney1987 like this.
  3. craney1987

    craney1987 Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2016
    Messages:
    232
    Gender:
    Male
    couldn't agree more. It definitely has the potential to be the best civ to date.
     
    MisterBoomBoom and Eagle Pursuit like this.
  4. Gorbles

    Gorbles Load Balanced

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2014
    Messages:
    5,256
    Location:
    UK
    I don't get the whole "the endgame is bad" with reference to CiV.

    CiV's endgame was beyond tedious, especially for non-military victories. It's common to most games of this type, though, in any situation but a precise turn-by-turn competition from other players (which are unfortunately usually not humans), the human player advantage means that you click through a lot more turns. It's inherent to the design of scaling costs in a game where the limiter on progress is yields reducing the impact of said cost increases. In other words, inevitable. If you need 6,000 hammers to build something in a reasonable timeframe and you only have 3,000, that's a lot more clicks. If you have 12,000 hammers in the required city, it's a lot less clicks.

    So even if we assume that CiV and Civ. 6's endgames are similarly tedious, I don't think we can use the former as a point in favour of the latter? It makes no sense.

    I find scenarios are a lot better at resolving this kind of design, simply because the turns are usually more limited and the victory conditions a lot more carefully-designed.
     
    Eagle Pursuit likes this.
  5. Zuizgond

    Zuizgond Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    558
    Yes, but Civ 5 is bad.
     
    Leyrann and ZubieMaster like this.
  6. agonistes

    agonistes wants his subs under ice!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Vermont
    I will with great pride forever consider myself a c3'er. But VI is crazy good imo.

    I have seen the ai utilize a navy. Large navies at that. Japan, England, and Norway. Not as well as a player, but oh well.

    I think the biggest negative is diplomacy. Which is both a shame and ironic. They wanted a sweet diplo game and built a platform for it, but jeapordized it for the sake of more frequent wars and sn attempt to make the game more challenging. They should have let diplomacy trump war, chips fall where they may, and taught the ai to attempt to dominate the player its friendly with using non-military methods.

    Maybe these upcoming civs will try hard to avoid war, which would require some new strategy/behavior pathing, which could then be applied to older civs in some games.

    I guess the majority of players would be bored with a less aggresive game?
     
    Pythakoreas and Photi like this.
  7. lietkynes

    lietkynes Hello sword !

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    883
    Location:
    Rome
    Meh. Civ6 has been out for 9 months already. At this speed it will take many years to become a good game.
    As of today it's a boring 4x game with a frustrating user interface, questionable game design choices and a bad combat AI.
     
  8. Pythakoreas

    Pythakoreas Chef Tain

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    Messages:
    486
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    So I'm not the only one who dislikes Civ6's diplomacy. It needs a BNW style of overhaul.
    Diplomacy is by far what needs to be improved in future expansions.


    If someone has the choice between buying Civ5 complete package and Civ6 (with or without expansions),
    I'll recommend buying Civ5. It's a lot more complete as a game and cheaper.
    On the other hand, Civ6 is riddled with:
     
  9. Alkaid

    Alkaid Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2014
    Messages:
    208
    For me, not even close yet. I even enjoyed Beyond Earth more than Civ 6 so far.

    I find it very boring compared to Civ V. Warring isn't as fun as movement is more tedious, the AI is still pretty bad, diplomacy is both frustrating and underwhelming, and late game is a snore. Also things like the way religion works in this game I don't care for, and warmongering penalties and the ability to actually become friends with AI without them hating you further brings down any fun from diplomacy.

    Actually winning the game is usually a huge drag. Science victory is such a slog of hitting end turn with the massive production on space parts, domination is a slog due to the movement changes in Civ 6 like I mentioned above, religion is tedious spamming missionaries everywhere, and culture's never been a very exciting VC for me even in V.

    Aside from that, I just can't get into the aesthetics of the game either. I know a lot of people knee-jerk hated the look of the game at first, and then warmed up to it, and to a degree I have too. But the art style for the leaders still ranges from decent to awful for me(Alexander is horrendous in my opinion, while Tomyris is okay), while I really liked how Civ V presented the leaders with the more realistic style. Also the environment, while it's brightly colored, I find a lot of it just looks really bland and simplified compared to Civ V's graphic style. I just don't really care for it, plus it makes some tiles like grassland hills very hard to see at a glance.

    I spent about 100 hours trying to like it (mostly dropping games before getting half-way finished with them) since I loved Civ V, and even enjoyed BE to an extent, but I haven't bought any of the DLC since I just don't enjoy it enough to put more money into it. I almost feel bad not liking it, since I really wanted to and was hyped for months before release(even despite my dismay at the graphic style) Perhaps an expansion or two will do something to it that makes me enjoy it a lot more, but so far I think a lot of my issues are intentional choices by the devs that I just don't care for. I even pre-ordered the game since I thought it looked so much like an upgraded Civ V that I'd surly like it from day one, but I've learned by lesson. I definitely won't be pre-ordering the next Civ game off that feeling.

    Please note I'm not hailing Civ V as some perfect game, but just in relation to 6 I enjoy it a lot more. I can still fire up Civ V and get sucked into finishing a whole game, while Civ 6 I barely feel like playing past the Renaissance era now.
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2017
  10. historix69

    historix69 Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,242
    You cannot easily compare Civ 5 and Civ 6 since they are different games.

    They put a lot of new interesting ideas into Civ 6 which are worth to explore and which should be acknowledged, even if one does not like Civ 6 :
    - Great Persons are now featuring individual benefits
    - City States are now featuring individual boni (for suzerain)
    - Civics tree and Eurekas are nice idea
    - Policies / Governments feel more like Civ 4 than Civ 5
    - The right timing of Eurekas saves a lot of research and often grants CS envoies
    - The right timing of Policy Cards saves a lot of production / gold
    - A wide empire is not bad (no penalty for having additional non functional cities) but the cost-increase for districts (progress based) and builder and settler (by number) sucks
    - Maximizing adjacency boni for districts can be very complex and rewarding when placing cities closer together with overlap which allows placing multiple districts of the same types in a small area
    - Civ 6 feels more complete than Civ 5 vanilla ...

    The amount of micromanagement in Civ 6 to optimize play is huge.
     
  11. Acken

    Acken Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    QC, Canada
    Not yet. These days I play neither but even though I have 2500h on Civ5 I'd probably start it before Civ6. We'll see how and if it passes the first expansion benchmark which to me usually make or break a civ game. After all I treated Civ5 the same way until GnK and I actually think Civ6 is at least better than Civ5 vanilla.

    I'm actually considering going back to Civ4 because I have only played it casually and it seems to be rewarding at a hardcore level contrary to like every modern 4x.
     
    Zuizgond and Roald Amundsen like this.
  12. gettingfat

    gettingfat Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,417
    Civ6 currently has too many issues, and I am a bit too pessimistic to the point I don't believe even 2 expansions will iron out most of them. The most critical issue is this game involves too much micromanagement so there is no way the AI can get truly competent. The game also encourages playing wide too much basically in every way so the first 150 turns is all about settling or capturing as many cities as possible. I think this bias is too deep that is hard to change. There are many other concerns but I am going to stop here, and wish the game the best.
     
    ZubieMaster likes this.
  13. spfun

    spfun King

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    655
    The bias is true, which I can't understand why they didn't have a system in place for vanilla that helps manage all that city spam... Civ 5 had puppets from the get go, Civ 4 had vassal states later. They should have learned from history! With small maps being the default now I think they ran out of time to put a system in place, districts would have made civ 5 puppet system difficult, unworkable.

    As to Civ 6, i found it and BE to have reduced replayability over previous iterations. I had 1k+ hours in vanilla Civ 4/5 and have only managed 350 hours in civ 6.
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2017
  14. unpossible251

    unpossible251 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2016
    Messages:
    241
    oh boy. i really, really want to say 6 wins, because unstacking cities is absolutely fantastic and works so well. and i want to say 6 because i've put some crazy hours into it, the old sunk cost fallacy lol.

    But I don't think i've ever, ever, ever faced a serious invasion in or after the medieval era. not one. that's... not good. civ 5 I can remember a runaway industrial zulu putting me to the torch, civ 4 I lost half the modern Roman empire in one turn to a sneak amphibious invasion that still gives me nightmares.

    civ 6 is 100 exciting turns of setting yourself up, then 400 turns of watching buckets fill, then emptying them, and watching them fill again. i think i need a new hobby :D
     
  15. DizzKneeLand33

    DizzKneeLand33 Fall from Heaven 2 still rocks

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    506
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Again, if you play the time x2 or time x3 (epic) mods, the AI builds a lot more units throughout the game. This is because the techs and civics come slower, but the production remains the same. I am currently looking at a Sumerian galley. Not sure I've ever seen one before.... :mischief:

    I've always been a purist in previous civ games. 5 was bad enough to need Mods, and 6 I will be on the forefront of using mods -- the purist is indeed gone. Use mods, you will like the game so much better. Consider it a "platform" instead of a "finished product."
     
    ZubieMaster, kaspergm and PYITE like this.
  16. gettingfat

    gettingfat Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,417
    One of the most exciting things playing civ4 is indeed fighting off waves of transporters. People keep saying that the 1upt is not compatible with transporters, which I don't believe at all. This excitement was lost in civ5, but 6 is even worse than 5 regarding naval and amphibious attacks because in 6 many cities are no longer truly coastal. The idea of cliff is good but it makes amphibious attacks even more congested.
     
    ZubieMaster and rschissler like this.
  17. kaspergm

    kaspergm Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,989
    That's a very interesting point. I currently play with a mod that dramatically reduces district cost scaling, and contrary to what many players assumed, it actually seems to help the AI a lot. It produces many more and many different districts, and there will almost always be one or two civs that keep ahead of me entire game. I last finished a game where Greece only needed to finish one spaceship part of the last three to win, when I got mine finished.

    Next thing I'll look into will be toning down unit costs, because having to use 10-12 turns for a single unit in late game, even in cities with high production, just doesn't make the game very engaging. And like you say, cheaper units will probably help the AI be much more competitive in war also.
     
    ZubieMaster and DizzKneeLand33 like this.
  18. Canadian Bluebeer

    Canadian Bluebeer Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    317
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    UI still needs work. (should not have to have a mod like CQUI).
    Diplomacy: um. yeah, I'm a warmonger. get over it.

    Good: Going wide is more fun than in V. No penalties on culture/science. (never understood that reasoning why you got penalized for MORE artists/scientists)
    Graphics are nice.
    Districts. I like'em.
    Traders make roads is good, needs work. Auto upgrade of roads is good too, except when out of your territory. (yeah, those stupid 1 or 2 hex empty areas are a pain)
    Card system is nice too. Not sure if better or worse than Civ5 though for culture policies. More options in V in one way.

    Is it fun? Yes. The warmongering part is the worst, but, once you start that path, well, may as well keep going.
    Course, you can warmonger away while building spaceship bits, and then lift off and leave a nuclear wasteland behind. My fav thing in V.
    (get that last part in place, fire off all nukes, then launch the ship. Here, have to wait for the next turn, so it could backfire. hmmmm......)
     
  19. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,804
    If you put transports in a 1 UPT game, you either add micro to no benefit (naval invasions are already more costly and difficult than usual, and don't need to be harder in gameplay terms) or you wind up breaking the stacking rule.

    Stacking in a game that otherwise blocks stacking confers a major advantage...it would be difficult to allow this, actually reduce inputs, AND avoid a scenario where suddenly naval invasions are stronger, easier on the attacker and more threatening than fights between neighbors.
     
  20. miaasma

    miaasma Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2015
    Messages:
    587
    diplomacy is still effectively broken with most personality values either not working properly or acting as an auto-denounce on higher difficulties

    the game slows to a crawl in the mid game unless you're at war constantly, which discourages the nuanced sort of play the civ games are usually so good at encouraging

    nonsensical wars initiated by AI that generally just result in them giving you free stuff, frequently without them even sending a single unit at you

    right now, there are too many things about the game that make me scratch my head which makes it difficult to enjoy thoroughly. civ V is more polished by far because it's been out for longer, so right now my eggs are in that basket, but i appreciate what the developers are trying to do with VI and hope it improves further down the road. as for right now, it just smacks of premature release, which is a common theme in games released these days
     
    Pythakoreas and agonistes like this.

Share This Page