Notes from Ed Beach's Civ VI talk at GDC

[Esperr]

I think that would be a lot more confusing. Pathfinding would get even more complex with such a system unless you always tried to have stacks of 1 everywhere, which you probably wouldn't want because full stacks are more effective/compact.

I meant something along the lines of, you can have stacks that max out at 3 units per stack or something like that. This would help alleviate congestion and make moving armys around the map less of a chore. Corps and Armys are not the same thing as you combine the unit and it is unlocked with a tech and the units must all be the same.

Agreed. Not sure why though. Lowering the amount of cards could work, but that would cause balance issues between current civilizations. Maybe having some more impactful cards which requires multiple slots? That would solve the issue with the cards not having the umph.

I think civics that are more powerful but take up more slots may be the solution. You could even design it so that certain governments, because of there lack of slots couldn't even adopt certain policy which would be interesting. For instance just as a made up example, if you adopt fascism, "free speech" could require two wild card slots which fascism doesn't have, so therefor without some kind of wonder bonus would be unable to adopt.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

This was really interesting, OP. Thanks for sharing.

I'm glad that the devs acknowledge unit congestion as a major problem in Civ V, but the stacking of support units and the introduction of corps/armies in the late game are clearly a very weak solution to the issue (especially since the new movement rules effectively made congestion worse). Something much more robust was needed.

I'm also surprised that poor AI combat performance wasn't listed as one of the big problems for Civ VI to overcome. That was by far the most common complaint about Civ V on these forums. Or maybe it was one of the problems that they aimed to fix in Civ VI but they just weren't successful, so he didn't talk about it.

 

[Jarms48]

I just want my World/UN congress and diplomatic victory back

 

[rschissler]

This was really interesting, OP. Thanks for sharing.

I'm glad that the devs acknowledge unit congestion as a major problem in Civ V, but the stacking of support units and the introduction of corps/armies in the late game are clearly a very weak solution to the issue (especially since the new movement rules effectively made congestion worse). Something much more robust was needed.

I'm also surprised that poor AI combat performance wasn't listed as one of the big problems for Civ VI to overcome. That was by far the most common complaint about Civ V on these forums. Or maybe it was one of the problems that they aimed to fix in Civ VI but they just weren't successful, so he didn't talk about it.

I think they (especially Ed) think of it as a minor problem.

 

[Athmos]

I found the section on playing the map mystifying. Allegedly the problem is the "Rote Tile Decisions"

which is fixed by

My reactions are

• One doesn't build anywhere near enough wonders to warrant inclusion here
• Tiles aren't so scarce that building a district has much impact on your ability to improve tiles
• All of your tile improvements are still "farms on flat land, mines on hills".
• It's missing the point that the big decision in playing the map is how to develop and use your city

The adjacency bonus minigame requires some amount of planning, but that's something else entirely. (and debatable as to how well it fits into the game)

I suppose they're only really comparing to Civ 5, and maybe this is a big improvement as compared to Civ 5. (I don't have enough experience to know) It does makes me wonder of he knows anything about Civ 4 gameplay.

I think the "adjacency minigame" is actually the whole point. It affects where I put my cities almsot as strongly as fresh water and tiles yelds. What civ6 brought here is that you don't just think "what improvement should I use on that tile" but "what is the best use for that tile", which has become a completely different thing
A resource will make you want a farm, the adjacency bonuses from feudalism will incite you to make at least a farming triangle around it, which means your commercial hub will be on the other side of the river, these stones and hill will dictate the position of an industrial district, etc.

I think they did a pretty good job of it, there is a lot more forward planning in there than spamming river cottages in your commerce/science cities. I know there is a lot more to civ 4 improvement than that - I played it to boredom and that took a LOT - but I have to admit civ 6 is doing a very good job here.

And a few wonders are very nice and could be crucial to a chosen strategy. You might want to place your encampment near a hill to be able to get Alhambra. You might keep an empty tile adjacent to your city for Eiffel tower or the Forbidden city. A given campus place might look great but won't allow for oxford university later... Maybe you want to play naval battle and will need your industrial zone to be coastal to get the Venetian arsenal ?

You don't need to be chasing all the wonders for their presence to influence your consideration about what to do with the map.