Is Civilization VI a Bowling Simulator?

[MrRadar]

But is Bowling a strategy game ?

Oh yes... as long as you can manage four strikes in a row

 

[elitetroops]

A bowling simulator would get boring pretty quickly... At least this is a bowling simulator where you can walk up to anyone in the alley, punch them in the face and take their lane.

 

[pholtz]

And I thought the search for the missing Ed Beach was about as silly as this forum could go. Guess I was wrong.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

And I thought the search for the missing Ed Beach was about as silly as this forum could go. Guess I was wrong.

You can never go wrong underestimating CivFanatics ...

 

[Sprenk]

A hallmark of satire is when it strikes close to the truth. But, in my estimation, this one is a turkey. The OP should spare us from any further attempts. I would go on, but I have to split.

Bolded to help poor Ryika out

 

[Babri]

Civilization 5 was a swimming simulator. Pick your lane then stay in it! No pivoting!

Civ VI seems to be much different and refreshingly so.

I generally don't agree with your harsh ciV criticism but I think you nailed it here!

On topic:

It is not only about placing districts but also where you found your cities which can maximise the benefit you'll get from districts & adjacency bonuses. That involves quite a bit of strategy. There was a thread on civfanatics about how it might be a good idea to place your cities in a certain way along river to maximise economic districts in your money generating cities.

There is a lot of thought process that can go in it, though you could just play Japan if you wanted more casual style play (more adjacency bonuses from nearby districts).

 

[DWilson]

You can never go wrong underestimating CivFanatics ...

I believe you mean one can never go right, or will always go wrong.

P.S., everyone recognizes this thread for the satire that it is, right?

 

[Red Menace]

P.S., everyone recognizes this thread for the satire that it is, right?

Satire? are you insane! this is possibly THE most important thing since the disappearance of Ed Beach! (still working on that book by the way, i'll try to have that published soon)

 

[GenyaArikado]

LOVE TOU RYIKA HAVE MY CHILDREN!!!

Unless you dislike Elodie, if so you can go "love" yourself

 

[anandus]

Now, it is clear that there are strategical elements in the design of Civilization VI. You can for example choose what to build, and, if it's a district, wonder, or Improvement, where to place it, but that's where the problems with the definition come in. Is it really "strategical" to place a district, or is it not more like you're throwing a bowling ball into a mass of pins, aiming to get a strike?

This may sound weird at first, and initially I dismissed the thought myself, but really, placing districts is not "strategical". You want to get the most out of a district, so you place it where you get the highest yield. You may factor in some other things such as "Is this place not better for another district?" etc, but in the end it's really not that strategical. You're literally rolling the ball into the center of the pins to clear them all (aka to get the highest yield). Any district you build after that will inevitably not get as good as a spot (assuming they compete for a similar ideal spot) which is, for the most part, like you're throwing a second ball at the pins that have not been removed by your first attempt. (assuming you didn't get a strike, which is the equivalent of having a second spot that is just as good for the second improvement.)

I don't get it. Isn't every strategy game a bowling simulator? You always choose the highest yield, etc.

You can even say it's the core of a strategy game, that you pick the highest yield for the right resource at the right time? Because every choice you make also means there are choices you don't make.

Especially with Civ it has always been the case. What building are you going to build and when?

 

[elitetroops]

I don't get it. Isn't every strategy game a bowling simulator? You always choose the highest yield, etc.

You can even say it's the core of a strategy game, that you pick the highest yield for the right resource at the right time? Because every choice you make also means there are choices you don't make.

Maybe. But the interesting strategy games might not have the pins placed in an equilateral triangle at the end of a straight lane. Maybe they are more spread out, the lane has some bumps and some pins might not even be visible to you. Then it's not as clear anymore where it is best to aim.

I agree with OP that the placement of districts doesn't seem that complicated yet. Maybe it will be when we know every detail. Though the larger decision is probably when to build it.

 

[anandus]

I agree with OP that the placement of districts doesn't seem that complicated yet. Maybe it will be when we know every detail. Though the larger decision is probably when to build it.

I disagree. Putting district A somewhere also means you're not putting district B or C there, nor any improvements, nor any wonders. There is always a flip side.

 

[Olleus]

This may sound weird at first, and initially I dismissed the thought myself, but really, placing districts is not "strategical". You want to get the most out of a district, so you place it where you get the highest yield. You may factor in some other things such as "Is this place not better for another district?" etc, but in the end it's really not that strategical. You're literally rolling the ball into the center of the pins to clear them all (aka to get the highest yield). Any district you build after that will inevitably not get as good as a spot (assuming they compete for a similar ideal spot) which is, for the most part, like you're throwing a second ball at the pins that have not been removed by your first attempt. (assuming you didn't get a strike, which is the equivalent of having a second spot that is just as good for the second improvement.)

What you are saying (if I might be so bold as to paraphrase), is that it is easy to decide where the optimal placement for a district is. I would argue that is not the case. You could maximise the yield of a district at that time. But how would this affect future districts? Not only might you lose a great place for them (as you stated), but placing a new district/wonder/improvement affects the yield of previous ones. The decision might be
"Do I place this district here now and get +X yield for the rest game, or do I place it somewhere else, get +Y yield for now, but once I've finished that other wonder I'll get +Z?"
The decision then becomes a short term vs long term one. Which is - at its heart - the fundamental decision in strategy games.

 

[Red Menace]

I disagree. Putting district A somewhere also means you're not putting district B or C there, nor any improvements, nor any wonders. There is always a flip side.

think of this situation: you dont have a lot of mountains but there is one spot bordering 3, on either side of these mountains are hills that extend many tiles in either direction its still early in the game and you havent explored out there yet because you went east with your scout and this is west.
should you put a holy site, or encampment? if you dont decide and try to wait for the scout to find out whats over there than you are trading risk for certainty, but at a significant price.

decision making is part of strategy, some games you will just start of by yourself and than other question will come up instead, such as do I rush navy tech? or can I do better by focusing somewhere else.

 

[Lilykamen]

What, you are telling me that Civ VI is not a datesim?

Well, comparing the leaders aestethics with Civ V, maybe is better this way.

Long Live our hardcore builder survival Civ VI!!

 

[Sprenk]

What, you are telling me that Civ VI is not a datesim?

I want romanceable World Leaders, a la The Witcher, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age!

(Cleo is a little too snake-bit for my taste, but Vicky is kinda cute. . . .)

 

[Bibor]

Another passive-aggressive thread that tries to degrade Civ by playing around with words until it sounds like Civ is doing something bad? I don't even understand why you feel the need to do this. Just accept that it's not the type of bowling game you want and move on.

I just glanced over the OP and I already feel offended and obliged to comment for no particular reason. I find your comparison to bowling laughable - you don't even know if the game will actually have the organic look and feel of bowling, as it's not out yet. I'm off discussing new screenshots of Philip II's chin.

/thread

 

[BrokenBokken]

Another passive-aggressive thread that tries to degrade Civ by playing around with words until it sounds like Civ is doing something bad? I don't even understand why you feel the need to do this. Just accept that it's not the type of bowling game you want and move on.

I just glanced over the OP and I already feel offended and obliged to comment for no particular reason. I find your comparison to bowling laughable - you don't even know if the game will actually have the organic look and feel of bowling, as it's not out yet. I'm off discussing new screenshots of Philip II's chin.

/thread

I think this is the first time you've posted something that I've enjoy and had a good laugh at instead of rolling my eyes at you. At least you've got a sense of humor! I'll try not to judge you so harshly in the future. Ha.

And to everyone taking this thread serious.... I'm always amazed at the inability to detect sarcasm in writing.

 

[Nikae]

Another passive-aggressive thread that tries to degrade Civ by playing around with words until it sounds like Civ is doing something bad? I don't even understand why you feel the need to do this. Just accept that it's not the type of bowling game you want and move on.

I just glanced over the OP and I already feel offended and obliged to comment for no particular reason. I find your comparison to bowling laughable - you don't even know if the game will actually have the organic look and feel of bowling, as it's not out yet. I'm off discussing new screenshots of Philip II's chin.

/thread

So, you strive to become a celebrity, the Kayne West/Taylor Swift/Donald Trump of Civilization, with haughty discussions about nothing at all, provoking answers left and right, hunting attention like there is no tomorrow and are hurt if someone makes fun of you?

I would say you got what you aimed for. Attention. Now please stop looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Very nicely done Ryika.

 

[Thormodr]

So, you strive to become a celebrity, the Kayne West/Taylor Swift/Donald Trump of Civilization, with haughty discussions about nothing at all, provoking answers left and right, hunting attention like there is no tomorrow and are hurt if someone makes fun of you?

I would say you got what you aimed for. Attention. Now please stop looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Very nicely done Ryika.

I guess you missed the humour in his post.