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

[R&F] It's Been a Few Months, R&F Thoughts?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Wingednosering, Aug 28, 2018.

?

How Are You Liking R&F After a Few Months

  1. Haven't had it very long yet

    3 vote(s)
    2.8%
  2. It's great! Blows vanilla away!

    43 vote(s)
    40.6%
  3. It's fine. I'm pretty neutral towards it

    52 vote(s)
    49.1%
  4. The game is actually worse now

    8 vote(s)
    7.5%
  1. Wingednosering

    Wingednosering Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2011
    Messages:
    536
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto
    Hey everybody! It's been a while!

    I finally scrounged up the cash for R&F last weekend and was wondering what people were thinking of it several months after release (I noticed it had a Mixed reception on Steam, but didn't know if that was quality related).

    For myself, I've played a few games and am unfortunately underwhelmed by it.

    - Loyalty seems like a non-issue

    - Governors seem like you have to jump through hoops to make the most of them and their bonuses often aren't worth the maneuvering. Magnus just seems like an exploit magnifier (I swear that's how they chose his name) and the governors in general don't fit the game at all for me. They really break immersion

    - Ages are alright. I find the golden age saturation to be tough on my eyes, but otherwise they're good. Would've been nice to get more dedication options though

    - Barbarians are still ridiculous (had three barb scouts from separate camps at my first city at turn 5 on Immortal. Instant restart)

    - The new civs are largely underwhelming. The copy/pasted leader abilities really turn me off of most of them. This is a real shame since I was looking forward to Scotland and the Mapuche especially (and the Cree, but I have to say they're the best designed civ here. Just a shame the barbs nullify that trader immediately)

    - Dunno if it's unique to me but my screen glitches out pretty hard basically once a turn. Clearly a graphic card issue on DX11 machines

    - In terms of positives, the diplomatic AI seems better, espionage combat bonuses are good and the new alliances seem useful. Liking everything on the diplo side​

    My list is more of a first impressions list. I'm curious how people that have been playing it for months feel.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2018
  2. Slip de Garcon

    Slip de Garcon Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Messages:
    233
    Location:
    SW England
    Loyalty - while having drawbacks - does solve at a stroke the ridiculous AI forward settling and very messy player boundaries with Vanilla.

    Governors I really like. Adds another layer of specialisation.

    New civs - yeah, I'm with you, they all seem a bit meh.
     
    Aussie_Lurker likes this.
  3. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,899
    Gender:
    Male
    Taking your points in turn, here are my thoughts:

    Loyalty: great concept, lots of potential, current implementation is underwhelming, but I'm looking forward to finding out what they can do with it.

    Governors: fiddly micromanagement, would be happy to see these dropped in Civ 7, or receive a major re-work

    Ages/Era Score: adds a fun aspect to the game

    Barbarians: Paper tigers. In my current test camp, 2 horse camps and 1 foot camp spawned near my capital almost simultaneously at the beginning of the game. As I entered the Classical Era I had 12 Barbarians running through my territory, most of them Horsemen. No real impact. Eventually they were all dead and I exited the Classical Era with my empire as big as it would have been without the Barbarians.

    New Civs: seem fine. I'm mostly disappointed by the lack of variety when you play against them. Playing as each civ feels different, to me.

    Screen glitches: haven't had one yet. I play on a relatively new laptop.

    Diplomatic AI: I haven't noticed a material difference

    Espionage combat bonuses: nice touch

    New Alliances: underwhelming from a fun or interest perspective. I'm glad, though, that they've introduced a bonus for maintaining positive relationship with your neighbours, so positive on that front.
     
  4. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,666
    Gender:
    Male
    It's pretty good.

    Warring is no longer as mindless with loyalty throwing a wrench in the equation. Sure it's still easy if you move fast enough, but at the very least it requires a minimum amount of planning and no longer just bulldozing from one city from the next while ignoring the previous ones for the entire game.

    The era score and history log is a good first step towards attaching meaning to events in the game.

    The new civs are mostly well designed and add to gameplay.

    Diplomacy is a bit better, though much to go.

    The AI can actually take cities now, though not really sure if that's worthy of praise.

    Governors are pretty interesting though poorly balanced atm.
     
  5. UWHabs

    UWHabs Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,067
    Location:
    Toronto
    I'd agree with this all. It's a step up from Vanilla, but still a number of systems aren't balanced properly and lacking that little bit to really put them over the top.
     
  6. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,189
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Could use an option between #2 and #3. I couldn't vote #2 because I don't honestly think it blows vanilla away. That said, I haven't played a vanilla game since it came out. There is no reason to.

    Loyalty can be a pain when playing crowded TSL maps. I had a lot of fun with crowded Earth maps in the past, but that experience isn't very good now unfortunately.

    Other than that I rate most of the features good, but nothing that is overwhelmingly great.
     
    Babri likes this.
  7. BarbarianHunter

    BarbarianHunter King

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    981
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Have the barbarians recently stopped pillaging as much, now more prone to aimlessly wander about your territory like an AI civ's troops would? Or is this my imagination?
     
    Socrates99 likes this.
  8. LoneDragon

    LoneDragon Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2016
    Messages:
    207
    Came in to post exactly this.
     
  9. RohirrimElf

    RohirrimElf Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,119
    R&F is great. But it does not make me jump to civ 6 yet. Currently playing other games while i hoped to be playing civ 6 at this point. Waiting till next expansion and will reassess if it is the time to jump in and nonstop play civ 6 at that point.
     
    Mozzington likes this.
  10. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,899
    Gender:
    Male
    They'll pillage, but in the early game, I've only got three improved tiles for the civics boost. The next builder I create can repair those quick enough.

    With nothing to pillage, the Barbarians either wander around or suicide themselves against your city. They don't heal (unless they have a farm to pillage), so every attack they make brings them closer to disappearing.
     
  11. kryat

    kryat Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    586
    Gender:
    Male
    Golden/Dark eras - I really like these. I think the dedications add a nice focus to each age. I also think the cost scaling of techs and civics really helps keep the players closer to the right scale, rather than the old system where you’d depressingly see notifications that “The Kongo has entered the Renaissance” while you’re just getting iron working up and going. The only change I would make to this system is increasing cost threshold for normal and golden ages slightly. And lockout players from using non-dark age cards in the wildcard slots.

    Governors - Take or leave them. Sometimes they’re nice. Amani is fun to use offensively. Aquaculture is a blast. I appreciate Magnus’s settler training abilities. I wish one would increase war production and I wish there was one that had higher base loyalty than the others.

    New Civs -
    Mongolia is fun to play if you go full intel-based conquest, which is somewhat unique.
    Georgia is Georgia. Tamar requires unique thinking to play effectively.
    Scotland and Korea are easily overpowered for science victories, but both are fun to play.
    Poundmaker makes claiming huge tracts of land easy in a new, fun, and intentional mechanic.
    Mapuche interact with loyalty in an interesting way, but I haven’t played as them yet.
    The Zulu are classic conquerors and make for fun and challenging neighbors to repel.
    Polders are great since the update and can lead to some hilariously profitable cities.
    Chandragupta is another great grumpy neighbor. Playing as him is not that interesting other than the fact that it’s India as a warmonger.

    Loyalty - An excellent system that needs some slight tuning. The only change I would make is add a base negative loyalty to everywhere that other civs’ loyalty stacks with. This would make colonizing more difficult and make conquest more challenging.

    Emergencies - Another great addition that adds a break from the tedium of empire management. It could be enhanced by further refinement of alliances and adding a World Congress.

    Alliances - Solid. They make neighbors more predicatable, and really make the endgame wars feel more like world wars. The only change I would make is allowing multiple alliances of the same type, and scaling the alliance slots to number of players on the map. It’s too easy to be allies with everyone on a small map. And that gets boring.

    Others - The new legacy system is a clear improvement to the old system, and the new scaling of culture and science with population raises the importance of building tall. It’s still imbalanced toward wide, but it’s definitely an improvement. The changes toward envoy bonuses requiring buildings makes empire maintenance thankfully more important.

    Overall, this has been an excellent addition when compared to Vanilla. Definitely better than Gods and Kings was to V, maybe as impactful as BNW.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2018
  12. BarbarianHunter

    BarbarianHunter King

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    981
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Don't want to get too off topic here, but I think the barbs have been pillaging less. Like this fellow in the video. Shouldn't he have pillaged my pasture? Instead he aimlessly wanders toward Ulundi. With no target in the immediate vicinity, shouldn’t he (being a barb and all) have pillaged my goat pasture? It happens with a relative high frequency as of late.
    Spoiler :
    InkedOffTopic_LI.jpg

     
  13. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,899
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't disagree. Although I said they'll pillage, and they will, they won't always pillage even when they have the opportunity. Maybe it has something to do with higher priorities such as moving into position to make an attack or capture a civilian unit. Those priorities then may change the next turn and they move back to the improvement.

    Or maybe they're barbarians and they just like to be unpredictable. :)
     
  14. darkace77450

    darkace77450 Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,001
    Loyalty
    I like that this curtails forward settling by the AI, but I feel like the idea of Free Cities needs to be expanded upon. Right now they're either a free city, free experience for your military units, or a hot-potato you bounce back to your neighboring Civ who will lose it to rebellion another rebellion soon enough.

    Governors
    I really like governors. I've always played with a handful of fully developed, specialized cities (this is my culture city, that's my religious city, etc), so governors fit perfectly for my style of play without adding any necessary degree of micromanagement.

    Alliances
    I greatly prefer these to the old Research Agreement system.

    Ages
    I prefer V's system wherein Happiness surplus fed Golden Ages, but I like this system too. I do wish there was a wonder that allowed us to slot a dark age policy card, as I find many of them intriguing, but not so intriguing that I'm going to sandbag my performance to get them.

    Emergencies
    I think this mechanic was an complete failure. Most of the emergencies rely on combat, which the AI is exceedingly bad at. There are so many interesting emergencies they could have included: global warming, economic recessions, disease outbreak, famine and natural disaster relief, etc, and they opted instead to put all but one of their eggs in the warfare basket, which usually translates into free money for the player. I just pray this doesn't wind up being a permanent substitution for a UN/WC mechanic.

    Districts
    The Water Park is cool and I like the Government Plaza. The GP's tier 1 buildings are particularly interesting, as they each promote a different way to develop our empires. I do think GP buildings should have specialist slots and I think the developers missed an opportunity with R&F to make specialist slots worthwhile, but there's still time to address this in future updates/expansions.

    New Civilizations
    Most of the new Civilizations are fine (though I question the inclusion of Scotland since the game is already so heavily Eurocentric). That said, I pray we get a second leader for the Dutch at some point; I find Wilhelmina's ability to be by far the least interesting Leader Ability in the game.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2018
  15. JacquesBquick

    JacquesBquick Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    Messages:
    96
    Gender:
    Male
    I could parrot a lot of what people already have said. I think the more straightforward method of alliances is great, i think the age system is mostly good for the game. I think emergencies is a good concept that needs more work. I think governors are a good concept that needs better balancing. I like the new civs but think a few of the abilities are quite...bland especially when you see some of the inventive stuff that people like sukritact put in their custom civ mods that still feel within the bounds of whatever nebulous 'rules' would exist for creating balanced bonuses.

    Overall, i enjoyed my early forays into the expansion, but all that ends up happening is that i start remembering what I don't like again. RnF added a lot of of stuff ON TOP of the game, which can be good, but it didn't change aspects of the game i didn't like, with the exception of alliances which help that part of the game make more sense, to me at least. I still yearn for BNW style culture with more interesting 'collection' activities to try and go for a culture victory, which is still way too opaque for me. production costs still feel ridiculous compared to tech speed even if they tried to address tech speed some. AI trading algorithms are still stupid af, and their inability to utilize certain systems within the game gets really tiresome. I still want more interesting building choices beyond barracks/stable and art/arch. museum. trade routes are still onerous af late game. I still want more leader choices amongst existing civs.

    Its then i realize i'm still not playing the completed product. there's obviously at least one more expansion coming out, and it puts me in the same boat i ended up in with civ v, why bother with the game when it still feels incomplete to me and I know its going to change all over again in a year or so. I'll pick up the new expansion, play it for a few games and see how i feel then, and then it'll be a matter of answering whether we'll see a third expansion this time around or if they say "we're done" and i'm still not satisfied i'll wait for the modding community to catch up.

    ultimately i've realized Civ is not a game i should buy early, because i find it hard to enjoy when i know its going to change a lot. the best bang for your buck is waiting for the final DLC and Expansion content and then buying the finished product. vanilla and expac 1s are fine and all, i'm not going so far as to say they sucked or that i think they were OBJECTIVELY unfinished, but just for me and my play style, it FEELS unfinished, if that makes any sense. Like i can identify the holes where they plan to put future content and that demotivates my playing, cause why put the effort in to learn the game and get good at higher difficulties when by the time i'm feeling good about my ability at the game it all changes again.

    one last point I'll make is one thing about civ 6 is that i felt like all my games fall into feeling the exact same. I think overall a game is more interesting start to finish in mid/late eras, but each game back to back ends up playing about the same for me. I'm going for the same types of moments to get the golden ages, i'm picking the color of bonus from whichever system that matches the victory condition i'm going for, and if not that then production production production. my relationships with AIs always take the same inevitable course. there's a lack of replayability for me that further makes it harder to enjoy the game in this 'interim' form. That's where more options within existing systems would help a lot more, i think, and focusing on doing better with those existing systems would help rather than layering on more stuff in the future.
     
  16. Leathaface

    Leathaface Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,720
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cork, Ireland
    I can't see myself going back to Vanilla now. I wouldn't say it "blows vanilla Civ VI" away but it is a big improvement IMO. I like how you can flip cities with loyalty, plus how Golden/Dark ages plays into that.

    I like the Governor system, sending Magnus to a city with lots of choppable woods/jungle can really help you in getting a world wonder. Plus you've Pingala who gives you +100% Great Person points in a city. Put him in a city that has a Campus, Commercial Hub or Theatre Square with each a couple of buildings and you'll reap the rewards.
     
    Aussie_Lurker likes this.
  17. bite

    bite Unoffical Civilization Geographer Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,803
    The Loyalty and ages mechanic make the game that bit more thoughtful with how you approach it, which is nice
     
    Aussie_Lurker likes this.
  18. PendragonWRB

    PendragonWRB Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2002
    Messages:
    302
    Gender:
    Male
    Just got R&F because CQUI is finally supported with it. Only on my first game and maybe half way through it. The ages are fun and a definite plus to the game except I had to disable the lighting changes.

    The governors I just don't get. Their abilities seem so weak and pointless to me at this point that I have a hard time deciding what to choose. Is there a governor guide somewhere?
     
  19. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,899
    Gender:
    Male
    Get Magnus. Everyone else is optional.

    More seriously, Magnus + Liang early if you're into chopping, i.e. winning quickly. Magnus 2nd level for endless Settlers without any Pop loss, helpful if you're playing peacefully and need to pump out your own cities instead of conquering them. Reyna 3rd level + Pingala 3rd level to buy a Spaceport and speed up Space Race projects, if going for Science victory.
     
  20. acluewithout

    acluewithout Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    2,875
    Man, I keep seeing posts like this and thinking “I don’t need to reply; I’m just going to say the same things I always say”. And yet, I get sucked in every time… sigh…

    I saw this today…

    … and thought that was spot on.

    RnF is definitely a better game than Vanilla. But in reality I’ve liked Civ VI much less since it came out, and am not really playing much any more.

    Reasons:

    • Nerfing England. The various nerfs / re-works of England really killed things for me. I’ve posted at length about this elsewhere. One reason I really liked England was that they let you get round the “mid / late- game malaise”. Basically, you started with few advantages other than some funny stuff around harbours, commercial hubs and coastal cities, which is great because the base early game is where Civ is strong. By the mid-game, England gave you reasons to keep expanding and allowed for fun mid-game strategies around navy and sort of a “cultural violence” thing. The British Museum then made the very late game less of a chore, because it removed theming admin. After England got nerfed, I tried to find other Civs to play, but that lead me to a different problem…
    • Ongoing balance issues. There are parts of the game that just haven’t worked since the start, and which haven’t really gotten fixed since release. Specifically, anti-cav line (pikes in particular), military tactics, utility of walls and forts, industrial zones, industrial zone buildings and other late game buildings, utility of high-population, utility of mid / late game settling (colonial cities in particular). So, the other Civ’s I’ve been drawn to, specifically Norway, Japan, Georgia, and Germany end up feeling underwhelming. And lots of strategies I’d like to try, particularly around building economies, just don’t gel. What I’m left with is Knight Rushes, Chopping Space Ports, or Pure Roleplaying, and I just don’t find that fun.
    • Bland. Loyalty is great. Tier 2 and 3 Government Plaza Buildings are great. Governors letting you focus a small number of cities are great. I can’t go back to Vanilla because of these mechanics, just like I can’t get excited about Civ 5 without districts, or Civ 4 without hexes and 1UPT. But the implementation of Governors, the Government Plaza specifically and its Tier 1 Buildings, and the very tacked on way Legacy Cards have been used, are just so, so bland. So, when I play Civ VI, these elements just really suck the fun out of the game. I can’t go backwards, but I can’t go forwards, if you see what I mean.

    Someone above said they can’t be bothered getting invested in the game when it’s obvious there are still key mechanics to be filled in. I’m feel much the same, but would add “when there’s also (still) significant balancing to be done and colour to be added”. Frankly, I have better stuff to do than play Civ as it is currently (although, I’m still a huge fan of these forums – because you guys and gals are ace).
     

Share This Page