...has probably got to be the unfortunate combination of relatively easy military production with the 1UPT-mechanic and an AI that will nearly always be producing units.
Let me elaborate:
1. In Civ V you had a pretty hard cap on how many of the more powerful units you could build. Not only did all units cost maintenance but most of the better ones required one strategic resource per. Meaning you could only build more swordsmen or frigates so long as you had iron to spare. Not so in Civ VI where we get a slightly modified version of Civ IV's approach: So long as you have iron, you can build swordsmen (more or less).
2. And then you get Civs like Scythia who not simply get a price reduction for cavalry-units, but get it in the form of "build one, get one free". In my current game, she is filling up the map with cities *and* countless horsemen for no real reason. Even if she didn't have that insane UA, it would be pretty bad ... but *with* the UA it's getting downright ridiculous.
3. And on top of it all, AI civs will get pretty significant boosts to their production on medium to higher difficulty. My guess is that because of these, they probably nearly always have their cities built-up the way they want them and then (for lack of other build-actions in some of their towns) they simply jump into military production.
My suggestion would be to re-examine some of the more insane UAs related to military production, plus a serious tweak in AI behavior *and* tweaks to the requirements for certain military units. In Civ IV it didn't really matter if the AI pumped out military unit after military unit. They could put them in a stack of doom and go on a rampage. But in Civ VI, with limited map-space, this behavior does matter.
What I don't get here is: Why keep Civ V's 1UPT-rule but ditch the much more limiting system of handling military production as it relates to strategic resources? Why not keep that system more or less "as is" (one unit requires one copy of a certain strategic resource) or even expand it? Like using copper as the limiting resource for, say, spearmen?
S.
Let me elaborate:
1. In Civ V you had a pretty hard cap on how many of the more powerful units you could build. Not only did all units cost maintenance but most of the better ones required one strategic resource per. Meaning you could only build more swordsmen or frigates so long as you had iron to spare. Not so in Civ VI where we get a slightly modified version of Civ IV's approach: So long as you have iron, you can build swordsmen (more or less).
2. And then you get Civs like Scythia who not simply get a price reduction for cavalry-units, but get it in the form of "build one, get one free". In my current game, she is filling up the map with cities *and* countless horsemen for no real reason. Even if she didn't have that insane UA, it would be pretty bad ... but *with* the UA it's getting downright ridiculous.
3. And on top of it all, AI civs will get pretty significant boosts to their production on medium to higher difficulty. My guess is that because of these, they probably nearly always have their cities built-up the way they want them and then (for lack of other build-actions in some of their towns) they simply jump into military production.
My suggestion would be to re-examine some of the more insane UAs related to military production, plus a serious tweak in AI behavior *and* tweaks to the requirements for certain military units. In Civ IV it didn't really matter if the AI pumped out military unit after military unit. They could put them in a stack of doom and go on a rampage. But in Civ VI, with limited map-space, this behavior does matter.
What I don't get here is: Why keep Civ V's 1UPT-rule but ditch the much more limiting system of handling military production as it relates to strategic resources? Why not keep that system more or less "as is" (one unit requires one copy of a certain strategic resource) or even expand it? Like using copper as the limiting resource for, say, spearmen?
S.
