Loyalty system already doesn't seem right

[Tiger Genocide]

I need to play a lot more before making up my mind but the loyalty system seems very well balanced to me. In my first game I was deliberately aiming for a tall, peaceful game as the Cree and although I saw other civs have loyalty issues (all that visibility with Poundmaker's ability is tasty) it never once affected my at all: I had full loyalty cities all the time.

I then had a go at a Zulu rampage, deliberately warring in the same way I would have in Vanilla, and had a lot of trouble with loyalty, it was a nightmare to deal with but fun.

I wasn't expecting it to be such a check on steamrolling through civs but it does seem to be effective, at least if you don't plan properly.

I had alot more issues with amenities on my Zulu rampage. Still having them and I have jeans, cosmetics, and stadiums!! Loyalty isn't a problem at all. I have flipped maybe 10 cities into my control so far, never lost a single one to loyalty.

I bet most of you guys posting in this thread would have played better, had you watched the videos on the loyalty system, the livestreams, and perhaps a few videos from either Marbozir or Quill18. Those videos prepared me extremely well.

 

[blackbutterfly]

I've not yet played a full game cos I'm also updating all my maps for R&F so i'm withholding judgement, but TSL maps are absolutely insane with the loyalty system

 

[OldCivDog]

Haven't looked at the numbers yet, but I am wondering how much of an effect you have on flipping if you prep a city by running the Cause Unrest/Decrease loyalty (sorry, at work and can't remember what it's called) espionage mission prior to invasion? Might give you enough time to do some damage control once you take a city.

Also, does anyone know what effect (if any) an active trade route to city has on loyalty? Might want to have a trader handy to send to your recently acquired city if it can slow or stop a flip

 

[Magil]

Also, does anyone know what effect (if any) an active trade route to city has on loyalty? Might want to have a trader handy to send to your recently acquired city if it can slow or stop a flip

I believe the Netherlands gets extra loyalty from domestic trade but other Civs do not.

 

[Victoria]

A 10 pop city effect with no Governor or other effects in place, all -20

 

[Brian LeClaire]

Sumer probably should have settled near the tobacco. Not sure why they didn't.

well as I said in the post that region had a heavy loyalty penalty.

 

[Brian LeClaire]

A 10 pop city effect with no Governor or other effects in place, all -20

Yeah that's what I'm seeing but Jesus it makes the game less fun, for me at least. I'm in a game where I've been peaceful but the Mongols declared war on me. My army was much stronger and I took over two of their cities I could've railroaded them but I didn't want to do that. I put my Diplo Governor in one city and both of them flipped on me in 5 turns. We've gone over the why's of all it so that's not what this is about. It's just less fun to me. What am I supposed to do if they attack me? Fight purely defensively? Never attack them at all even though they declared on me? How is that fun??

 

[Victoria]

Fight purely defensively? Never attack them at all even though they declared on me? How is that fun??

What I am struggling with is there is just more encouragement for war... if you were around in the early days I was purely peaceful. Sadly its just harder to play that way and in reality you are fighting the game.
To me now I treat a peaceful game as when we can get alliances. Up until then its up to you . But then the warmongering ruins the diplo side of it.

My second game was unsuprisingly Victoria played peacefully on emperor. I had Mvemba inland of me and I spready across the shores in a line. The outcone was no flipping until Mvemba finally decided to atack me and I was so annoyed when he took a city that I had to stomp him but we had warred a lot and that meant we both went into a dark age. Look, dedications are a bit ho hum for most of them but that pop change is nasty.

 

[Brian LeClaire]

I had alot more issues with amenities on my Zulu rampage. Still having them and I have jeans, cosmetics, and stadiums!! Loyalty isn't a problem at all. I have flipped maybe 10 cities into my control so far, never lost a single one to loyalty.

I bet most of you guys posting in this thread would have played better, had you watched the videos on the loyalty system, the livestreams, and perhaps a few videos from either Marbozir or Quill18. Those videos prepared me extremely well.

I actually watched every single one of them. It's not a matter of not understanding it

 

[Brian LeClaire]

What I am struggling with is there is just more encouragement for war... if you were around in the early days I was purely peaceful. Sadly its just harder to play that way and in reality you are fighting the game.
To me now I treat a peaceful game as when we can get alliances. Up until then its up to you . But then the warmongering ruins the diplo side of it.

My second game was unsuprisingly Victoria played peacefully on emperor. I had Mvemba inland of me and I spready across the shores in a line. The outcone was no flipping until Mvemba finally decided to atack me and I was so annoyed when he took a city that I had to stomp him but we had warred a lot and that meant we both went into a dark age. Look, dedications are a bit ho hum for most of them but that pop change is nasty.

I usually play on Emperor, solely because I think that the AI just getting a massive bump to all it's research, production and extra settlers and works and etc etc is not fun. These last few games I've been playing on King, lower than I normally play. I have yet, since Civ 6 came out EVER lost a city to the AI. Not once. That's still the case. I'm having the opposite experience, I'm feeling like war is completely discouraged. 99% of the techs and civics are geared towards military but if I fight, I just lose out to loyalty.

 

[Thormodr]

I think the loyalty system could use some tweaking.

I don’t like the idea that it is better to raze cities or outright conquer Civs to combat loyalty penalties.

 

[Brian LeClaire]

I think the loyalty system could use some tweaking.

I don’t like the idea that it is better to raze cities or outright conquer Civs to combat loyalty penalties.

Yes I agree 100%. It's like hey the allies captured Dunkirk, now they have a foothold to defeat Germany in Europe. Ooops, nope got flipped because loyalty is to low...

 

[Thormodr]

Historically, a lot of cities or regions were given some degree of autonomy in order to combat loyalty issues.

Perhaps vassals could make their return? Or maybe reduced yields in the city to reflect that the city is governing itself?

 

[Sagax]

Historically, a lot of cities or regions were given some degree of autonomy in order to combat loyalty issues.

Perhaps vassals could make their return? Or maybe reduced yields in the city to reflect that the city is governing itself?

Suddenly I was reminded of the Civ 5 puppet city mechanic that didn’t carry over to Civ 6.

 

[Thormodr]

Suddenly I was reminded of the Civ 5 puppet city mechanic that didn’t carry over to Civ 6.

Ah, yeah. Forgot about that mechanic. Maybe something along those lines.

 

[acluewithout]

Do any of the unique loyalty bonuses which some Civs have make any difference to capturing cities or forward settling (eg RND loyalty bonus, Cyrus’s garrisoned units)?

Do ages actually impact on loyalty / city flipping much? It seems like they don’t, because it’s so hard to actually fall into a Dark Age.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Ah, yeah. Forgot about that mechanic. Maybe something along those lines.

I really miss puppet cities. There's too much tiresome micromanagement in Civ VI.

On topic: I'm beginning to see the light to the Loyalty system. I still don't know how to use it especially on TSL maps. I'm playing a TSL map RN and civ caps are flipping left and right. Europe is in chaos

 

[kb27787]

As suspected, Shaka is seriously OP. In my first game at King level on a Tiny map, he rolled through the Scots, Dutch and Georgians like a hot knife through butter. And I never had any problems with loyalty in spite of my warmongering. I had Full Loyalty in all but one city, and that was quickly taken care of by placing an impi corps and a governor in that city.

Even at Deity, I don't see how the AI will stand a chance against the Zulu in the hands of a human player. Definitely needs some serious nerfing.

Play deity and you will notice that cities which were size 7 on king are 15 on deity... dont bother trying to take cities on deity unless you can wipe out a whole swath

 

[Sansa_Stark]

Sorry if this is obvious but I don't get it. Why has that city on the left (Pihto...) base pressure from citizens 20? I thought is sum of positive and negative citizen pressure. There is no foreign influence, and my influence is from city itself and from the one to the south. City itself is 5 pop, the other is 3 pop, but I understand that each tile makes it 10% less effective, so it should be worth only 1.2. So total pressure should be 5+1.2=6.2, and since I am in golden age, it should be 9.3.

Why it is 20?

Also, what is or could be "other effects" (number on the very right, currently 1 in both cities)?

 

[cinattra]

I think a sort of realistic solution could be that military units within a city's border could block flipping. Kind of like when you blockade a city you are sieging. A blockade of a city you just captured could have the flipping blocked in a similar way.