[NFP] Is there a danger that Civ6 becomes "bloated"?

[Stilgar08]

I like that it's more or less up to you.
Civ6 is packed. True. But from what I understand that's exactly why they chose to put all the NFP stuff in as optional additions to toggle on/off as you like. I for one ain't very much interested in the Armageddon mode but will very likely try the societies regularly.
Lots of choices and options but you can stick to your traditional route if you wish. You could even toggle the XPs, if you'd want to...

 

[SammyKhalifa]

No, it’s not bloated. But it depends a bit where you look.


Many systems do work together or have interesting synergies. There’s only a few areas where stuff isn’t joined up. Envoys being its own system is the most obvious example I can think of, although even that has got a lot more integrated with other systems.

I'd consider changing adjacency bonus for holy sites to be based on appeal (instead of mountains). It actually wouldn't change placement all that much, as the "good" tiles would still be largely the same; however, it would differentiate the HS from the Campus a bit more, and make appeal feel like it has more of a reason for being in those 90% of games where you currently don't care much about appeal. I think it makes thematic sense too.

Similarly I think you could have tourism give a modifier to loyalty, maybe based on the difference between your tourism and the opposing cities. You'd want tourism even in games where you aren't trying to win culturally.

I know this is not an "ideas" thread but these things were kicking around in my head while I was out on my walk after work. I think there are similar things they could do to tighten the game up a bit without a massive overhaul.

 

[acluewithout]

I'd consider changing adjacency bonus for holy sites to be based on appeal (instead of mountains). ... it would differentiate the HS from the Campus a bit more...

Similarly I think you could have tourism give a modifier to loyalty, maybe based on the difference between your tourism and the opposing cities. You'd want tourism even in games where you aren't trying to win culturally.

I think the point of the current design is that Holy Sites and Campuses somewhat conflict for mountain adjacencies (or, at other times, maybe synergise). Hence the reason they both need Mountains.

The tourism and loyalty thing is basically Civ V ideological pressure, which I really hope makes a come back.

 

[Snarf054]

It probably is, but if it wasn't I would have bloated it to hades and back with mods anyway, so no biggy here. As long as they never get to the point where Paradox is 30 DLC's and you can get a bundle of them for ONLY $400.

 

[Futumch]

I don't mind more features being gradually added to the game. As long as the key aspects of the game aren't tinkered with too much, and the newer things are able to be toggled on and off, then I think Civ has a good amount of life in it.
It should be like a salad bar, where you can pick and choose what you want to enjoy (the DLCs) alongside your steak* (the core game) for any one individual meal.

*for vegetarians, simply insert some meat substitute for the steak.

 

[The googles do nothing]

Instead of bloat I would say there is a lot of variety - as long as you are in to role playing and don't just the game as a pile of yields. There's a recent thread about lacking production in the late game and people spoke up about the many ways you get big piles of hammers.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Bringing Vampires to a Civ game is just terrible.

 

[acluewithout]

I don’t think the game is bloated, but I do feel some mechanics are a bit thin and I think some mechanics could be consolidated. And I think both thinness and lack of consolidation is somewhat a result of how much is in the game.

eg

• Dedications [thin]. We could really use an extra dedication per Era. Four seems too restrictive after repeat plays.

• Religious Units [thin]. There isn’t much differentiation of Religious Units by Religion, which is a bit lame. Everyone gets Missionaries, Apostles, Gurus? As I’ve said before, Religion could use a couple of more Unique Religious Units like the Monk.

• Military Units [thin]. Too many gaps. No real differentiation between Gunpowder and Non-Gunpowder Units.
  
  
• Barbarians [thin]. These guys could really use more variety, ie a few more different skins and a few more unique units.

• Governors [thin]. I’ve banged this drum too much I know, but it’s really lame having the same seven governors at turn one, for every Civ, for every game. Looks like Secret Societies will broaden Governors a bit, but I really think we need a couple more unique governors tied to particular Civs (eg like Ottomans) and some Civics or Governments that unlock new more powerful Governors in the mid to late game (eg Colonial, Feudal, Communist, Fascists and Democratic Governors).

• Spies [thin and consolidate]. Macro Spy Options are very limited, just Spy and Counter-Spy. I think a third Ambassador Option would help with variety. In the other hand, there are too many Spy Missions. I think missions could be consolidated a lot. EG instead of stealing gold or stealing great works, maybe there is Hijack Mission where you steal Gold but also a Great Work if you’re very lucky (bit like a “critical success”); instead of sabotaging IZs, Spaceports and Dams as separate missions, have a Industrial Sabotage Mission that might do any of those three.

• World Congress [thin and consolidate]. It’s still a bit lame the World Congress starts without any flexible trigger, and doesn’t really upgrade or change how it works (eg becoming the UN). Feels like it should trigger via a Wonder (eg Apostolic Palace) and maybe upgrade via UN Building Wonder. Resolutions are fine, but the B options could be consolidated. EG instead of banning specific luxuries, which means you have to wade through every luxe in the game as the b option, instead group luxuries by type (eg Animal Products - Fur, Whale, Ivory). That would make resolutions more workable, but also make resolutions more situational (eg you have Fur, I have Ivory and Whales, should I try banning them or not?).
  
  
• Envoys [Consolidate]. I don’t really get why we have Envoys for City States, but Delegations and Embassies for Other Civs. I feel like these mechanics could be somewhat consolidated, so you could essentially put envoys into other Civs to get the equivalent of an Embassy etc.

More generally, there are just a lot of units in the game. Military Units, Religious Units, Spies, Traders, Settlers, Builders, MEs, Great People, and all the “special” Civilian Units like Rockbands. It’s a design feature of Civ, so I think we’re stuck with this approach. But, yeah, it can get overwhelming having so many “units” flying around, particularly when things like Great People could mostly have been implemented without having specific units.

 

[alancsilver]

oh.... We have already jumped that shark

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

We all love new content. So far I am enjoying a lot of the new content. But with 2 big expansions and now a ton of new content with the New Frontier Pass, is there a risk that civ6 could become "bloated" where there is just too much in the game? If not, at what point do you think civ6 could become "bloated"?

I am unconcerned, as all of the biggest game elements can be toggled on or off.

 

[nzcamel]

I’m a bit worried about yield creep overall, particularly when things like maintenance and happiness are so weak, but also the increasing “flatness“ of the game ie flat yields tame or yields that don’t require playing the map or any real strategy.

Meanwhile toggle those off we still have volcanic soils and floodplains improving through time despite you and now you don't need anything resembling an industrial revolution to have high production just....a really good Work Ethic?

It feels like they caved somewhere along the way to people who wanted to build everything in every game and not have to make meaningful choices.

 

[Stilgar08]

Bringing Vampires to a Civ game is just terrible.

Then it's up to you not to use societies in your games just like I don't play Red Death or use Armageddon.

 

[kaspergm]

There's definitely a chance of the game becoming bloated if more features are added, but there's also a chance it won't, and it's a hard fact that as things are now, second half of the game is a complete bore.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

It depends.
- For new players, it's already bloated.
- For those with +500 hours played it's probably acceptable, those with +1000 hours played it will be hardly bloated ever. new stuff keeps you engaged.

 

[isau]

It's not that it's bloated, it's that it keeps bloating in ways that aren't particularly interesting.

The hex combat system is needlessly dull. Mostly just units colliding with each other, and some ranged attacks.

I wish the Civ 6 developers had been more inspired by the richness of combat in the Age of Wonders series. Not necessarily a full battle scenario on a sub-map, but at least the status effects, overworld spells, and so on. Civ 6 is mostly +3 to this, -2 to that, and it becomes monotonous very quickly.

 

[Spaceturtle]

I love the game but it's already bloated and has been for a while.

I've always had the feeling that the systems and mechanics don't fit as seamlessly and elegantly as they could. I blame it mostly on the UI.

I don't mind the extra modes at this point in the game's life cycle. They are a fun addition and you can pick and choose, which is great (they should do that for civ 7). They are just a bit frustrating because you can see great ideas that could be cool additions to the main "serious" game if they were properly fleshed out. I guess they are using them as testing grounds for Civ7.

 

[Casworon]

I don't think the game needs new systems.

What it really needs is a polishing, tweaking and interconnection of the features already present, and a lot of work put into the AI. However i don't think we are really going to get that outside of the free patches.

I'm happy that the NFP exists because it means they are still working on the game. But i'm much more interested in the free patches than the new civs, game modes etc

 

[Onii-chan]

I mean if they're just adding optional game modes then that's not really an issue. You don't have to activate them if you don't want to after all

That being said, I do wish some of them regular gameplay mechanics got redesigned somewhat because there are a couple of them that just aren't as good as they could be

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Personally, I wish the devs would focus on polishing some of the existing game mechanics rather than adding a bunch of optional game modes. Specifically, I think combat could be made deeper with things like supply lines, morale, and prisoners of war. Also, adding more units to fill in some of the holes in the tech tree. Diplomacy could be polished some more to make the agendas work better, add new treaties like "non-aggression pacts". The World Congress definitely needs some work to make it more transparent and more relevant. And finally, I would love to see mechanics for revolutions and civil wars tied in with the loyalty system.

 

[acluewithout]

second half of the game is a complete bore.

First half: intense tactical skirmishers and empire management strategy game.

Second half: sand box. Also, Van Halen and Comets.

Personally, I wish the devs would focus on polishing some of the existing game mechanics rather than adding a bunch of optional game modes.

Agreed. There’s also stuff from Civ V that really deserves to be carried over.

Civ is one expansion short. The extra stuff in NFP is great, but it’s going to come up short when the base game is still somewhat incomplete.

I mean seriously, we have Vampires, Zombies and Aliens before Trebuchets. There’s a freaking Trebuchet in the Rise & Fall video.