[R&F] It seems better to be in Dark Age

These "160 turns" or so really hurts them
Yes, I remember sending you one disbelieving message once. But then I did look watch learn and play that way and am finding it quite fun (but hard work). I learn from my mistake.Be aware though that it is the way that you say things that gets you some of those bad responses and so its a sort of cruel justice.

Some 'immersive players' are quite rude but not all. I play many games with no victory in mind, I will have targets like capture 5 ships with Sea dogs or have a city next to every Natural wonder. To me these things make the game fun because they are different. But yes i see what you mean, often people are disbelieving because the strategy is so strong.

What I find most funny is one of the strong things about the strategy is the concentration on eurekas... and thats exzactly what Ed said he does in the last live session, stop at 50% so he can get the eureka later. I mean getting 705 free science for building an airstrip... it just makes sense and how its designed.
 
Yes, I remember sending you one disbelieving message once..

It's always the best to learn from others. I'm glad you enjoy it. It seems that you're becoming more and more familiar with the game mechanism so that some of your comments begin to inspire me now.

For your goals, since these goals are quite clear, I think is a good point, different from those unclear "immersive" ones. You can require games for "fastest SV, but must capture 5 navys using Sea dogs." This makes sense. These constraints add fun to the game.

I remember in Civ4 there's a GOTM game said "fastest Victory, but must have 50 trees around the capital", that was a fun game.
 
Last edited:
Also I think a big problem is that most 'famous' Civ 6 streamers play appallingly bad (some are ok) - and there's so much wrong advice everywhere.
So many players don't have the opportunity to see/learn.
 
So much hate about chops and overflows here... If the devs didn't intend this to be a valid mechanic then it would have been patched a long time ago - just like all (all) real exploits present at launch were patched.

That's not necessarily true. There's a few reasons why Firaxis might be waiting before patching this.

For one thing, as you and others have pointed out in the thread, there aren't many people who know about this exploit, so there aren't many people complaining about it. Exploits in games can sometimes stick around for years before the problems they cause build up enough critical mass to make fixing them worth it.

The other thing is that the code may be written in such a way that fixing this exploit could potentially break other parts of the game, so Firaxis is gunshy about doing so until absolutely necessary.

I'm not saying that they'll definitely fix it. They might decide that it will just never be worth it. But don't be surprised if they do some day.
 
Hi Ivan,
I'm just trying to say that people who are complaining about it are trying to pin 'exploiting overflows' as the reason why some players get super-fast victories - which is definitely not the case.
 
So much hate about chops and overflows here... If the devs didn't intend this to be a valid mechanic then it would have been patched a long time ago - just like all (all) real exploits present at launch were patched.

I also don't get why ppl say that quick science/culture victories some players aim for are not immersive or fun or exploitative. They add a whole new dimension to the game:
You care and constantly plan on how to develop your empire given the map and surrounding enemies/city states. You constantly aim to take early opportunities and make the most of the map. Overcome all challenges. Overcome setbacks.
At one point you're forward planning your infrastructure in a bunch of cities AND striving to produce a huge wave of own settlers (while battling the increasing settler costs). You balance war on at least two active fronts, plan your conquest and conquer a huge number of enemy cities. You make the most of your civ's unique abilities.
You constantly have to make tough choices and prioritise. Its extremely challenging and at the same time very immersive.

And in this - chopping is just one mechanic that is being used. In fact - for my science victories (including all of the record breaking ones) - using % overflows only comes handy a few times - speeding things here and there for a few turns. If that was changed - the actual victory time would suffer a few turns at the most.

I chop all my traders (15-25). None of these chops uses overflows.
I chop all my late game builders (again 10+) using only 30% toward builders card and using it for builders.
In some games, I chop my early army (usually only horses need chops) - using only the 50% toward units and using it for units.
I chop to speed up settlers (6-8) using only 50% toward settlers and using it for settlers.
Most (and often all) of the districts and buildings are chopped without using any modifiers and priorities.

In fact, getting to the point where you can use % overflows for other things seems to be overestimated by the haters of chopping mechanic.
One spot that I use - and even then - rarely - I might chop a slinger one turn before completion (chop value 29-32, boosted to say 40ish left - and use that production to speed up my first district to get the boost). That's 2-3 turns saved.
In fact - apart from this boost - early chops do not yield enough to be warranted (except to speed up settlers)...

Look at the savegames I've posted (e.g. the GoTM Turn 70ish saves) and you'll see that at that point I have 15-20 cities (on any difficulty). That I have a large infrastructure. That I've produced and settled 8ish of my own cities and captured the rest. That I have produced my second army and have enough gold to upgrade it. And there is a huge builder wave about to pop.
NONE of this relies on any % overflow 'bugs' as you call it. None.

As for other, more powerful chops - such as the monarchy walls overflow - it is very powerful. But also you need lots to get it. You need to reach monarchy fast and thats a significant detour off the preferred civic progression. If you're aiming for quick science victory - often you can't even afford it as - without super strong culture - you cant compensate to reach democracy by T120. And if you can actually manage to squeeze it in - then getting your rewards should only come naturally.

If the chopping 'bug' as you call it would be patched then most of my science victories (turn-wise) could still be achieved, while some may be delayed by a few turns. And thats it.
It would still be a great empire. It would reach Mars before many players (including famous twitch ones) can reach Renaissance era.
And it would still be extremely challenging, immersive and satisfying.

Nothing but respect and admiration for your gameplay abilities and playstyle. I agree that chop overflow isn't that big of a deal now, but if you add in a governor with 100% chop bonus without nerfing the base chop values then early chops become OP and overflow becomes a very big deal. 150% chops on settlers and military units combined with 130% chops on workers in the classic era seems a bit OP.



What I find most funny is one of the strong things about the strategy is the concentration on eurekas... and thats exzactly what Ed said he does in the last live session, stop at 50% so he can get the eureka later. I mean getting 705 free science for building an airstrip... it just makes sense and how its designed.

The AI does this as well. I was pleasantly surprised when I found that out.
 
Nothing but respect and admiration for your gameplay abilities and playstyle. I agree that chop overflow isn't that big of a deal now, but if you add in a governor with 100% chop bonus without nerfing the base chop values then early chops become OP and overflow becomes a very big deal. 150% chops on settlers and military units combined with 130% chops on workers in the classic era seems a bit OP.

Hi @PYITE we are still in the dark as to how exactly it will work - and what other things will be nerfed etc. For example, the change to the trade-route mechanic is a significant hit that will impact current fast science victory strategies.
I'm thinking really - this is a nerf that is mostly geared towards multiplayer issues, but nevertheless - so there may be new mechanics/strategies to compensate for the changes.

Just like dark ages - it may seem to be better to stay in two consecutive dark ages - but they did say it will be easier to reach a normal/golden age after having a dark age - so we are all just shooting in the dark here.
 
Things always go like this. When I add a comment to some issues, such as "how to play", or " is a UU/UI/UD good", I'm always referring to my strategy in game, for example, start with builder, or build very few commercial hubs and prior campuses. And discuss about the effects of the original issue based on my strategy and my games.

Then these "immersive" people begin saying "how can you not build commercial hubs.", or " how can you not build a scout at the very beginning" or such things. These are of the friendliest replies. Ruder ones are even saying " Do you really know how to play the game? Experts shall spam trade routes!"

Then I have to say sth. like " I always play with my own strategy, and you see, these strategies can achieve SV in less than 160 turns for most maps, so I'm not going to change it." Can we discuss based on the main focus of that issue instead of strategies?

These "160 turns" or so really hurts them, since they may be in Renaissance or Industrial at that time according to their strategy, and cannot believe there exist people who can do this fast.

Then they begin suspecting that I must be using bugs, exploits, or even cheating. Of course I never cheat, but they feel their "strategy" being challanged, also they're not willing to change their strategies since it's not the strategy that comes from their heads, indicating that they're no longer the cleverest Civ6 player. That's unacceptable for them, cause they finally destroyed their diety opponent and look themselves as "world class players", they can't afford such a 100-turn failure!

So they decide to look for things like "immersive" play, or "peaceful" plays. But they can't give a clear definition of their goal, not because there is not possible definitions, but because they don't want us to challange their strategies. If there's not a clear definition, they can always say they're playing "immersively" while we not, but as soon as there's a clear definition, they'll be brought back to the 100-turn lose again.

@civtrader6 , I think everyone knows that you're not using exploits seriously to achieve that fast science victory, and will only delay a few turns if exploits are removed. But what they want is not strategy but a feeling of "I'm the strongest, although I can only do 250T SV". They don't want to see themselves lose by 100 turns, nor do they want to change their strategy to a better one.

To achieve T160 SV really don't take a lot of efforts(I think may 2~3 full games, 7~8 hour gameplay shall be enough) if one wants to learn, but is really hard for those who never learns.

We are talking about a game so I would assume that most people's objective is to enjoy the experience. If that means building wonders because they make your cities look cool than so be it, people can find enjoyment in very different ways.

Seems like you are looking for "I'm the smartest, look I posted a strategy for an expansion that hasn't had all of it's features fully described and doesn't come out for 2 months, put it in the history books I'm the genius that figured this out before anyone else. I'm clearly the cleverest Civ 6 player!!!"

It definitely seems hypocritical of you to describe others comments as rude given that you are easily the rudest poster on this site and seem to take pleasure in belittling people for not being expert players. Look at the last line of your post; it basically says that if you can't figure out how to achieve a 160 turn science victory in less than 10 hours of gameplay than you are an idiot who doesn't know how to learn. Congratulations you just insulted almost every person (including myself) who posts on this site. Another beauty I remember was a GOTM post where you posted a finish time that was better than any of the previous posters and then proceed to describe that the brain power needed for such a finish would be that of a sea creature. Would you make comments like this to someone in person, or does the anonymity of the internet embolden you to insult others?
 
Moderator Action: It is time to stop discussing each other. Post about the game, or refrain from posting.
 
Hi Ivan,
I'm just trying to say that people who are complaining about it are trying to pin 'exploiting overflows' as the reason why some players get super-fast victories - which is definitely not the case.
There are also complaints because it encourages micromanagy fiddliness. Even if it is only a 1% boost, it provides the 1% boost in a counterintuitive way.

See above for reason it hasn't been patched
(reason not yet mentioned firaxis is not good at patching their games...they could be worse)
 
If the devs didn't intend this to be a valid mechanic then it would have been patched a long time ago - just like all (all) real exploits present at launch were patched.

I can't really agree with this. There is nothing to suggest they're always on top of keeping the game of gamebreaking issues.

And I don't expect that of any mortal hunan being. Players will always know more about the game than the creators. They have collectively millions of hours of play and will uncover every crack possible. It is impossible to stay ahead of that by any singular entity.

So this might be a lesser issue too. But of course, we don't know either way.
 
Last edited:
So much hate about chops and overflows here... If the devs didn't intend this to be a valid mechanic then it would have been patched a long time ago - just like all (all) real exploits present at launch were patched.

I also don't get why ppl say that quick science/culture victories some players aim for are not immersive or fun or exploitative. They add a whole new dimension to the game:
You care and constantly plan on how to develop your empire given the map and surrounding enemies/city states. You constantly aim to take early opportunities and make the most of the map. Overcome all challenges. Overcome setbacks.
At one point you're forward planning your infrastructure in a bunch of cities AND striving to produce a huge wave of own settlers (while battling the increasing settler costs). You balance war on at least two active fronts, plan your conquest and conquer a huge number of enemy cities. You make the most of your civ's unique abilities.
You constantly have to make tough choices and prioritise. Its extremely challenging and at the same time very immersive.

And in this - chopping is just one mechanic that is being used. In fact - for my science victories (including all of the record breaking ones) - using % overflows only comes handy a few times - speeding things here and there for a few turns. If that was changed - the actual victory time would suffer a few turns at the most.

I chop all my traders (15-25). None of these chops uses overflows.
I chop all my late game builders (again 10+) using only 30% toward builders card and using it for builders.
In some games, I chop my early army (usually only horses need chops) - using only the 50% toward units and using it for units.
I chop to speed up settlers (6-8) using only 50% toward settlers and using it for settlers.
Most (and often all) of the districts and buildings are chopped without using any modifiers and priorities.

In fact, getting to the point where you can use % overflows for other things seems to be overestimated by the haters of chopping mechanic.
One spot that I use - and even then - rarely - I might chop a slinger one turn before completion (chop value 29-32, boosted to say 40ish left - and use that production to speed up my first district to get the boost). That's 2-3 turns saved.
In fact - apart from this boost - early chops do not yield enough to be warranted (except to speed up settlers)...

Look at the savegames I've posted (e.g. the GoTM Turn 70ish saves) and you'll see that at that point I have 15-20 cities (on any difficulty). That I have a large infrastructure. That I've produced and settled 8ish of my own cities and captured the rest. That I have produced my second army and have enough gold to upgrade it. And there is a huge builder wave about to pop.
NONE of this relies on any % overflow 'bugs' as you call it. None.

As for other, more powerful chops - such as the monarchy walls overflow - it is very powerful. But also you need lots to get it. You need to reach monarchy fast and thats a significant detour off the preferred civic progression. If you're aiming for quick science victory - often you can't even afford it as - without super strong culture - you cant compensate to reach democracy by T120. And if you can actually manage to squeeze it in - then getting your rewards should only come naturally.

If the chopping 'bug' as you call it would be patched then most of my science victories (turn-wise) could still be achieved, while some may be delayed by a few turns. And thats it.
It would still be a great empire. It would reach Mars before many players (including famous twitch ones) can reach Renaissance era.
And it would still be extremely challenging, immersive and satisfying.

You do realize that everyone here knows it's not just the chopping exploit that gets people those turn times?

Those turn times are possible as a result of a combination of multiple exploits and use of THE overpowered strategy of warmongering. The first thing that is most central to the speed method that some would advocate is taking cities, because it directly circumvents the rising costs of settlers and districts. The second is boosted overflow chops that allows districts etc. to be rushed out using production not meant for what that card is supposed to be boosting. Thirdly, the near free gold from the public transport policy that rewards players for just placing neighborhood districts without a need to complete them.

The first strategy ignores the need to build anything for yourself and takes full advantage of both the AI's 80% boosted production rates to build districts and wonders for you, and its complete inability to wage war. A combination of these two ingredients results in free cities built nearly twice the rate the human can. Can you imagine how useless this makes the building and investment part of Civ 6? Why bother placing cities at good spots? Why bother growing them? Why bother investing? Why plan for the long-term?

The second is an exploit because as stated earlier, players are using policy cards for a purpose other than what the card is used for. Did you really want walls or a galley? No you wanted something else that the boosted production overflow will grant you. Is that what the policy card is meant for?

The third is an exploit because players are placing Neighborhoods just to earn Gold and nothing else. They place them without completing them. Which means Neighborhoods just became an excuse for free gold. Were Neighborhoods meant to be free sources of Gold? This snowballs with warmongering because AI spams farms and when you conquered those cities all of those farms just became free gold. This nullifies any need for commercial hubs and any planning required to earn gold by the turn.

Using features for unintended purposes is the very definition of an exploit and the fact that those exploits supplant features in the game by sheer efficiency speaks volumes about their negative effect on design and balance.

Of course it takes additional mastery of the game on top of all these to actually achieve those turn times but I have never denied credit for anything done in the spirit of the game.


You also do know that no one has issues with others winning extremely quickly right?

It's great that people can achieve those turn times and such, good for them. It becomes an issue however, when a player starts making blanket statements about how the game is supposed to be played, beyond what the game is designed for; thereby playing god in re-defining what is right and what is wrong for others.

Is this hypocrisy in that I am doing exactly what I've just stated?

Well no. In stating that exploits are bad for game play strategy I have not imposed my will on any other. I'm merely stating a fact. Calling an exploitative way of playing the game the right way to play the game however, that is an opinion that imposes a created right or wrong on others. The curious thing about this though, is that players who make these claims are rather sly in that to avoid direct criticism they make complex statements that directly imply that opinionated right and wrong in such a way that it is an assumed fact when it is not so. I'll leave it to your discernment what these complex statements with prior assumptions are.
 
Last edited:
Hi @Kyro

I would kindly invite you to open and examine any of the numerous savegames I've posted with quick victories (e.g. 2x Gilgamesh, list goes on, and theres many more I can post) and have a look at T70-100 as well as final saves.

As one of those people with good turn times I can tell you this: your claim that these turn times are achieved through multiple exploits is simply not correct.

Kyro said:
The first thing that is most central to the speed method that some would advocate is taking cities, because it directly circumvents the rising costs of settlers and districts.
Taking cities and war has been a staple of Civilization games.
As for rising settler costs - I build a minimum of 6-10 of my own settlers. At this points settlers require 300+ production to complete.
Doing this is very challenging and to do it quickly - I use the 50% production card for settlers combined with selective chops in a number of my cities. Both of these are absolutely valid mechanics. This takes place from turns 30-70.

Kyro said:
The second is boosted overflow chops that allows districts etc. to be rushed out using production not meant for what that card is supposed to be boosting.
Again, look at my savegames and you will see that like 99% of the time - I do not actually use this mechanic at all. Again, I might use it to speed up my first district in the capital - to hit the boost. Assuming capital has enough woods for a later spaceport. In many cases (most actually - I save the woods for chopping the spaceport.
You will also see that, except in exactly two games to explore this strategy - none use the walls overflow.Finish times with walls overflow are pretty much in line with those that do not.
In any case - the effect of these chops are negligible. If this mechanic is removed - it will increase turn times in some of the games by a few turns and thats it. Negligible.

Kyro said:
Thirdly, the near free gold from the public transport policy that rewards players for just placing neighborhood districts without a need to complete them.
Look at my saves and you will see that I never - ever - used this card to get gold. Never.


Kyro said:
The first strategy ignores the need to build anything for yourself and takes full advantage of both the AI's 80% boosted production rates to build districts and wonders for you, and its complete inability to wage war. A combination of these two ingredients results in free cities built nearly twice the rate the human can. Can you imagine how useless this makes the building and investment part of Civ 6? Why bother placing cities at good spots? Why bother growing them? Why bother investing? Why plan for the long-term?
Look at my saves and you will see that I have Turn 138 science victory on Prince. Prince.Using what production boosts?

On the other hand - on higher difficulties - anything that the AI builds comes handy. The problem is - it for the most part AI builds totally useless infrastructure. Bunch of holy sites and encampments which actually cost me gold. A stonehenge? Hanging gardens? Arguably its better since the last patch - so there is sometimes a campus or two, or a theater square or two. Do the math - an you will see that this itself makes no difference.
The AI normally doesnt have time to make any actually useful wonders before I finish the game - so very little benefits are derived there.
In fact - have a look at the savegames and you will see that I captured most cities before AI has built the first district.
I will admit that AI does build a useful thing - the watermill - which comes handy to boost construction - and which I usually never even bother to repair.
In any case - I have tried quick and peaceful science victories. And these are actually doable in the T160-T170 turns range, on the condition that you are not squeezed by the AI and have room to expand.

As for war - I would love if Civ guys invested more resources into making a better AI and increasing the challenge.

Furthermore, look at the 8-10 cities I make and settle - and you will see that each has been planned carefully to get a maximum return on investment. That cities have been placed on T38 for example so that I can achieve a particular goal on turn 138 - with careful planning to develop these cities to achieve these goals.
Getting quick science victories requires ridiculous amount of long-term planning.
Do I need to say that I'm doing this while at the same time planning a bunch of wars and developing an incredible gold economy?


Kyro said:
The second is an exploit because as stated earlier, players are using policy cards for a purpose other than what the card is used for. Did you really want walls or a galley? No you wanted something else that the boosted production overflow will grant you. Is that what the policy card is meant for?
Perhaps you make a valid point, perhaps not - but again, it does not make any noticeable difference. You will also see that I never even make a galley. I did an experiment or two with walls and thats it. Everything else that is chopped uses chop with its own policy (if any). And most chops actually go into districts and buildings without any boosts.

Kyro said:
The second is an exploit because as stated earlier, players are using policy cards for a purpose other than what the card is used for. Did you really want walls or a galley? No you wanted something else that the boosted production overflow will grant you. Is that what the policy card is meant for?

Kyro said:
The third is an exploit because players are placing Neighborhoods just to earn Gold and nothing else. They place them without completing them. Which means Neighborhoods just became an excuse for free gold. Were Neighborhoods meant to be free sources of Gold? This snowballs with warmongering because AI spams farms and when you conquered those cities all of those farms just became free gold. This nullifies any need for commercial hubs and any planning required to earn gold by the turn.
I agree with the point that Neighborhoods are not meant to be free sources of gold. I can't understand why this card is there in the first place. Hence, I've never used it.
On the other hand - saying that it nullifies the need for commercial hubs and planning is incorrect - as ridiculous amounts of planning are put into maximising the gold per turn. And in all my games - the gold is the bottleneck.

Kyro said:
Of course it takes additional mastery of the game on top of all these to actually achieve those turn times but I have never denied credit for anything done in the spirit of the game.
Thank you for that. My thoughts above are just trying to make a point that these quick turn times are all achieved within the spirit of the game. More importantly - it requires a huge amount of forward planning, investment, development etc.
And I don't believe that the boost to first district which I sometimes have in my games (from chopping last turn slinger) makes a difference.

As far as the rest of your comments go (the god etc...) I don't think they apply to me - nor do I think I attack people on doing something wrong and believing I'm doing it right. So don't want to get into that.
Just wanted to take a chance to clarify a misconception that these victories are result of exploits.
 
So, back on topic: Yes, the dark ages seem to be a potentially "good" thing. It depends on the exact loyalty mechanics. It also depends on whether wiping out enemy civs eliminates loyalty pressure from their population. It also depends on whether you are still able to control lots of cities. The devs have hid important gameplay mechanics in the past, which is why I have grown very suspicious of what they "say" vs what the actual mechanics are.
 
Hi @Kyro

I would kindly invite you to open and examine any of the numerous savegames I've posted with quick victories (e.g. 2x Gilgamesh, list goes on, and theres many more I can post) and have a look at T70-100 as well as final saves.

As one of those people with good turn times I can tell you this: your claim that these turn times are achieved through multiple exploits is simply not correct.

Taking cities and war has been a staple of Civilization games.

To begin with, if you're not one of those who make complex statements that directly imply that others are wrong for playing a certain way, this post was not directed at you. It is great that you are able to achieve such turn times and I appreciate that you respect how others play as well. There are however, misinterpretations of what I was trying to convey so I will do my best to clarify things. This first portion is co-related so I'll address it together.

I did not say turn times are achieved through multiple exploits. What I did say however, is that the most important part of speed approaches is unbridled warmongering in Civ 6. In this regard, you have gone off track by trying to prove that the exploits I have mentioned aren't abused by you for your achievements. I have also qualified my point by stating that mastery of the game is required which you happen to be proving when I did not discredit it in the first place.

Taking cities and war has been a staple of Civilization games, but never has it been as profitable, without consequence and obsoleting of other strategies for the purposes of winning the game. I do not deny its importance in the game, I protest its monopoly on strategy because it makes Civ 6 a war game with no real challenge in war. I'm a hardcore RTS fan and this advantage of building through destruction is an insult to both building strategies and conquering strategies because it is open mockery to both.

As for rising settler costs - I build a minimum of 6-10 of my own settlers. At this points settlers require 300+ production to complete.
Doing this is very challenging and to do it quickly - I use the 50% production card for settlers combined with selective chops in a number of my cities. Both of these are absolutely valid mechanics. This takes place from turns 30-70.

This does nothing to disprove that it is overwhelmingly profitable to take compared to building yourself since they are not mutually exclusive.

Again, look at my savegames and you will see that like 99% of the time - I do not actually use this mechanic at all. Again, I might use it to speed up my first district in the capital - to hit the boost. Assuming capital has enough woods for a later spaceport. In many cases (most actually - I save the woods for chopping the spaceport.
You will also see that, except in exactly two games to explore this strategy - none use the walls overflow.Finish times with walls overflow are pretty much in line with those that do not.
In any case - the effect of these chops are negligible. If this mechanic is removed - it will increase turn times in some of the games by a few turns and thats it. Negligible.

Not as negligible for some who would call it an effective "strategy" that is totally intended. Just look around in the forums. Or, just do the math on how powerful it can be when abused.

Look at my saves and you will see that I never - ever - used this card to get gold. Never.

Well, again respect for not abusing the game.

Look at my saves and you will see that I have Turn 138 science victory on Prince. Prince.Using what production boosts?

On the other hand - on higher difficulties - anything that the AI builds comes handy. The problem is - it for the most part AI builds totally useless infrastructure. Bunch of holy sites and encampments which actually cost me gold. A stonehenge? Hanging gardens? Arguably its better since the last patch - so there is sometimes a campus or two, or a theater square or two. Do the math - an you will see that this itself makes no difference.
The AI normally doesnt have time to make any actually useful wonders before I finish the game - so very little benefits are derived there.
In fact - have a look at the savegames and you will see that I captured most cities before AI has built the first district.
I will admit that AI does build a useful thing - the watermill - which comes handy to boost construction - and which I usually never even bother to repair.
In any case - I have tried quick and peaceful science victories. And these are actually doable in the T160-T170 turns range, on the condition that you are not squeezed by the AI and have room to expand.

As for war - I would love if Civ guys invested more resources into making a better AI and increasing the challenge.

Furthermore, look at the 8-10 cities I make and settle - and you will see that each has been planned carefully to get a maximum return on investment. That cities have been placed on T38 for example so that I can achieve a particular goal on turn 138 - with careful planning to develop these cities to achieve these goals.
Getting quick science victories requires ridiculous amount of long-term planning.
Do I need to say that I'm doing this while at the same time planning a bunch of wars and developing an incredible gold economy?

The production boosts on Prince is zilch, that doesn't mean you didn't get free cities and districts from conquering. My question to you then is could you achieve those turn times on Deity doing exactly what you did on Prince; and if someone were to use those exploits I have listed would they do better than you?

On a side note, you said so yourself Wonders are quite useless. Don't you think that's a very good reason to invest production in armies for conquering instead?

I believe we have very different views with regards to long term planning of cities. To me, long-term planning/investment is specifically regarding to creating cities with the maximal yields in the long run. That however, is completely irrelevant in a game that lasts less than 200 turns because investments take long periods of time to pay off.

In other versions like Civ 5 it actually pays to make powerful cities. In Civ 6 they are irrelevant because of sheer numbers, and nothing beats sheer numbers than warmongering. Oh, and the fact that you can chop all the way without investing in production facilities. That does affect strategy a lot doesn't it?
 
Last edited:
To me, long-term planning/investment is specifically regarding to creating cities with the maximal yields in the long run. That however, is completely irrelevant in a game that lasts less than 200 turns because investments take long periods of time to pay off.
For a couple of cities, growing big has benefits, but only if there is lots of mines.

I played a fat city game the other day that lasted 300 turns, it was quite fun but not as much fun as it used to be. I kept thinking about the entertainment complex purely being there with all that production and gold maintenance so I can grow fat. My Aqueduct looked great which should have made me feel good but it no longer did. My neighborhoods were expensive as were my sewers.
Then I looked at my tiles and realized a lot of the population was there to make me grow fat.
Apart from a couple of cities with great mines the rest of my fat nation was just wasting my time.
Regardless it was still fun, and interesting but once you know the mechanics it feels a bit futile.
Its like I am starting to think either they have messed the design up or you are not playing the way they designed it.

The Entertainment Complex now gives me a complex
 
You do realize that everyone here knows it's not just the chopping exploit that gets people those turn times?

Those turn times are possible as a result of a combination of multiple exploits and use of THE overpowered strategy of warmongering. The first thing that is most central to the speed method that some would advocate is taking cities, because it directly circumvents the rising costs of settlers and districts. The second is boosted overflow chops that allows districts etc. to be rushed out using production not meant for what that card is supposed to be boosting. Thirdly, the near free gold from the public transport policy that rewards players for just placing neighborhood districts without a need to complete them.

The first strategy ignores the need to build anything for yourself and takes full advantage of both the AI's 80% boosted production rates to build districts and wonders for you, and its complete inability to wage war. A combination of these two ingredients results in free cities built nearly twice the rate the human can. Can you imagine how useless this makes the building and investment part of Civ 6? Why bother placing cities at good spots? Why bother growing them? Why bother investing? Why plan for the long-term?
Bravo. Essentially, early-rush warmongering takes the increased difficulty and turns into an advantage. Instead of demonstrating masterful play, winning in such a fashion becomes an Easy button.

As far as the game goes, there is little to fix here. Someone wants to go on a rampage of cheap-shotting their way to victory in 100 turns, there's no patching of the game that's going to make it particularly challenging. Hardly worth the effort. Players doing this are taking candy from babies. AI civ's that are building for anything other than early-rush are helpless to resist, and even the civ's that are warlike are not warmongering effectively. Peaceful players hate it when they start close to a warmonger civ and get rolled, and are very vocal about it, so the dev's are in no hurry to make AI civ's even better in this respect. We're talking about an issue that is inherent to 4X, although in space 4X the travel time afforded by larger maps and the bottlenecks provided by space lanes provide mitigation.

You also do know that no one has issues with others winning extremely quickly right?

It's great that people can achieve those turn times and such, good for them. It becomes an issue however, when a player starts making blanket statements about how the game is supposed to be played, beyond what the game is designed for; thereby playing god in re-defining what is right and what is wrong for others.
Exactly. We all play for enjoyment, we should all do our own thing. However, if or when there's a contention being advanced that beating the game by turn 160 is demonstrative of being an expert player, and a better player than those who don't, then that contention is worth challenging. For my money, an expert player beats a game on the game's own implicit terms. An expert doesn't hammer naked blindspots. A master doesn't rely heavily on exploiting short cuts that the AI itself won't avail itself of. An expert is the guy who wins with a significant handicap, which is of course what the difficulty levels are intended to represent.

There's a difference between beating a procedural program and beating a human, because a human can recognize and adapt to an opponent's behavior, and if they don't then that may be a genuine sign of inferior ability. Moreover, if a player can mask the means by which he's effortlessly winning, that is a credit to his skill.

I give some props for the discipline and ingenuity that's required to find and combine certain tactics into efficient and creative hacks, but that's separate and distinct from actually relying on them.
 
Last edited:
Well, in all fairness I did better not opening scouts, minimizing c-hubs, skipping divine spark, and ignoring industial zones. I may not like to hear it but that has never stopped me from taking in info even if it is not said nicely.

And this kind of insight can be very important to designers.

Now sure it is bad to overinflate one's ego but it is so hard to not delve into hypocrisy on the matter that I hesitate to really take any high ground on the matter. It would be pretty laughable to pretend I could so I will spare everyone the pretentious descriptions of proper morality that I may or may not have gotten off a fortune cookie or Tumblr.
 
Last edited:
I am playing a Catherine Emperor peaceful ATM in the perfect spot for an early rush on Rome but instead I am befriending everyone but Spain and Poland. I will try a safe peaceful mixed districts approach. Campus may win the game faster but I am looking forward to slipping back into some immersion over xmas.
My target this game is to get 5 master spies.

EDIT: Target reached T301 (6 master spies) and what a happy bunch most of us are
upload_2017-12-24_1-45-41.png
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom