1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Rise and Fall Made Civ 6 Much Better

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by MarigoldRan, Mar 6, 2018.

  1. MarigoldRan

    MarigoldRan WARLORD

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,687
    I've played this since Civ 1 and I skipped Civ 5, and my favorite was 4. Civ 6 when it came out was a hot mess (especially the AI) but now with the improvements (the AI still sucks tactically, but now at least it knows how to build out cities and spam units in a war) it's a pretty good game- probably my second most favorite.

    Civ 4 is more strategically deep than 6, with tougher AI competition. But 6 has a flavor and a joy unique in Civ games because of the District and the card system. The Civs really do play differently.

    Also, they got some of the Civs TOTALLY right. Especially the Zulus and the Aztecs. My God, when I play as the Aztecs I don't even want to conquer the enemy cities. Anytime I see an AI controlled warrior I think "ooooo, slaves." My build order for the Aztecs is like Eagle warrior, Eagle Warrior, Settler, Slinger, Eagle Warrior, Eagle Warrior, Settler. Followed by more Eagle Warriors.

    And Zulu Impi Corps are cheap and unstoppable, until infantry. The only preindustrial unit that's given me problems is the Korean Hwacha. Impis vs Scythia is like... wow.

    So let me know what you think of 6 and if you're a veteran, how it stacks to the other games. Thank you.
     
  2. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,577
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    when Civ6 came out it was WAY better than your favourite Civ4, and also better than Civ5. Aaah, human memory, so selective.
    Civ6 has been the best Civ release since when the gaming industry decided that it is ok to release unfinished games, since we consumers buy them anyways... and even remember them with fond memories.
    Civ4 AI is more competitive because it is easier for a programmer to make it "cheat" with its ridiculous boni, since the possibility of stacks of death eliminates a lot (and I mean A LOT) of AI logic and tactics to develop, it's brainless, just give the AI production boni and even with the faulty pathfinding of Civ4 it will pose a challenge. You think that that's more in depth strategy, I fail to understand your reasoning but to each one their own.
    I also don't find the expansion an improvement to gameplay worth mentioning. It is FAR from changing the game like expansions used to do in previous Civ titles. It has added stuff, which is nice, but gameplay is pretty much the same, production too slow, research too fast, which in most games results boring. In one aspect it has turned worse, namely City States, which now seem to exist for the sole purpouse to let the AI conquer them within then first 120 turns and expand faster than before, so they can lose a city of two to this new loyalty system which is... meh. The worst addition in a civ expansion ever.
     
  3. Noble Zarkon

    Noble Zarkon Civ IV Emperor EQM Moderator Hall of Fame Staff Supporter GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,066
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Fife, Scotland
    I agree 100% - don't think there's much doubt (especially with R&F) that Civ 6 is the 2nd best iteration of the Series.
     
    rattatatouille and nzcamel like this.
  4. isau

    isau Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    2,700
    I would be intrigued to see a version of Civ 6 with Civ 4's combat rules. It's not even necessarily hard to do once we get DLL access. I did not like stacks of doom very much, but I admit they made the game much, much harder. Especially in the sense that you could think you were winning and out of nowhere comes a DoW and an unbeatable stack that crushes you in 5 turns. Nothing like that in either Civ 5 or 6.
     
  5. Arilian

    Arilian Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Messages:
    619
    Location:
    Hungary
    Civ 4 is not nostalgically better than Civ 6, but because the AI can handle it better, and strategically harder.
    In CIV6 it is almost impossible to loose for me, In Civ 4 winning is a big challenge.
    And I still play Civ 4 sometimes, so I can compare.
    Both Civ 4 and Civ 6 are better than 5 for me - 6 is more enjoyable for me and 4 is more challenge and feeling.
    But back to the topic, yes the expansion made Civ6 better, no surprise there, and I love it. But it made it easier at the same time - especially the peaceful victories.
    It desperately requires a stronger AI for the late game.
     
  6. Kruos

    Kruos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2014
    Messages:
    73
    Agreed too. Civ4 complete > Civ6 incomplete >> Civ5 complete.

    R&F made a lot (I mean A LOT) of good to the Civ6 base game, while in the same time adding very few new mechanisms. It is a matter of fine tuning the already existing concept and integrating the fews news, which both has been really greatly executed.

    It's not a problem of human memory, it's a matter of fact : the vast majority of Civ players consider Civ4 as the masterpiece of the licence. Civ6 release was a good game but with also lots of rough edges (IA, UI, ...) and some missing features. So it's quite logical that despite being good it is still a little bit inferior to Civ4.

    Regarding the AI stuff, it's seems quite obvious that you are making the same error as lots of players do : you are confusing strategy and tactic. Civ games have always been about strategy until Civ5, which incorporated some tactics elements in the game via the 1UPT and thus created a division among the community. It's not the subject here but let's say that it was quite a big disaster in term of AI, and it is why lots of players still consider this concept (1UPT) a failure, and miss the 'great' (simpler and far more efficient) AI of Civ4.

    As said in a post above, R&F add few features to the base game but thanks to fine tuning of the existing mechanism the integration of the new ones is really greatly executed. Thus the whole game benefits a lot (I mean A LOT) from the expansion.

    There is already a mod with limited stacking, it's call "Limited Stacking Overhaul" or something like that. It makes ranged unit on a separate layer so you can stack them with a melee unit. It also reduce the range of fire. It seems really good and an interesting compromize.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 6, 2018
    Jackanape and nzcamel like this.
  7. criZp

    criZp Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    Messages:
    690
    Location:
    Nidaros, Norway
    That also means you can't actually attack the ranged units no matter what direction you attack from, without killing the melee unit first. Sounds rather dumb if you ask me.
     
  8. Kruos

    Kruos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2014
    Messages:
    73
    Yes! And it's exactly what make a lot of sense in term of scale also, it's why I think it's a very interesting solution. What sounds dumb is the possibility to do it if you ask me (as it is now with no stack 1UPT). But it's another debate, let's do not pollute the thread with off topic discussions.
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  9. V. Soma

    V. Soma CFC Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,546
    Location:
    Hungary
    here:
    https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/combat-and-stacking-overhaul.25827/
     
  10. Turrdy

    Turrdy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2016
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    CH
    a also played all the civs, from civ I to civ VI (although i was a little child when i played civ I and civ II). I remember that civ III was the first civ where you needed strategic ressources and in civ IV i even modded my own civ (well mostly custom flag / colors, but still). I liked civ V but only in civ VI i was able to convince my friends to try out multiplayer. which is a blast imo.
    Civ VI is superior to any other civ, it feels like it even has more features now than civ iv had in its glory days (i really miss the companies that worked like religion in civ iv though).

    The good thing: I feel like civ VI has still potential to have even more features, it doesn't feel "complete" or even overloaded yet.
    I'm really looking forward to the next DLCs/expansion(s)
     
    King Rad and nzcamel like this.
  11. RealHuhn

    RealHuhn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,022
    Location:
    Germany
    It's interesting that player numbers on steam are almost identical now for Civ5 and 6. Civ5 has been the leader for a long time.
    I think after a few more patches, Civ 6 will finally take over. I like both games but couldn't go back to 5 because it doesn't promote settling cities after the early game. Just doesn't feel right historically and it's quite limiting for the gameplay variety.
     
    sonicmyst, nzcamel and Ferocitus like this.
  12. Softly

    Softly Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2017
    Messages:
    189
    I think R&F was def an improvement but honestly feels a little underwhelming. The new civs and wonders are cool but if you were to list your top 10 "mechanics" in the game would loyalty, alliances, emergencies, ages or governors make the list?
     
  13. nzcamel

    nzcamel Nahtanoj the Magnificent

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,294
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Loyalty absolutely would make my top 10.
     
  14. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,577
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    the question is: are there even more than 10 features in Civ6? I wouldn't bet.


    FYI, I was replying to this OP statement "Civ 6 when it came out was a hot mess". Hence, my points still stand.

    I'm not making any mistake. Civ4 AI was much easier to beat for a good player than Civ5 and Civ6. You can read the veteran posts through the years and notice that most of them publicly stated they had to lower their average level of difficulty.
    Civ4 AI had a ridiculous parthfinding algorithm, you could trick the AI to move when you wanted to, just like its predecessors anyways, like the typical Civ3 spearman that could "pierce" into an atomic age armor... aka tank, with proper preparation. The only difficulty involved in Civ4 was determining how big was the SoD of the AI and when it would try to hit you... trivial. And once that was gone, it was game over for the AI. The management of the economy aspect of the AI in Civ4 was terrible. Terrible.
    In fact, the most famous and most played mods in the history of the Civ series are for Civ4. This is not only because there was a huge step forward in modding compared to Civ3, but also because the vanilla game had really low replayability. It took 2 serious (not anything like R&F for Civ6) expansions to make it decent and still, I would personally only play Rhye's and Fall and FFH.


    if you say so... but you said what, exactly? Fine tuning, greatly executed... care to go in depth, like Civ4 "strategy"?
     
  15. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    862
    Gender:
    Male
    That may be a fact, I'm not sure how one would acquire the stats to prove it, but even if true, is hardly a universal belief.

    I played a ton of Civ 1, a lot of Civ 2, and a bit of Civ 3. I tried Civ 4 and it found it boring. Tried the expansions: still boring.

    I figured I'd simply outgrown the Civ series. Then one day I saw Civ 5 on sale and decided to give Civ one more chance. Loved it. Bought the expansions. Loved it even more. I've played more Civ 5 than any other game in my life and found it everything that Civ 4 was not: engaging and enjoyable.

    Take away: taste is a personal thing. People can discuss whether they prefer Civ 4 vs Civ 5 vs whatever, but debating which is "best" is pointless. They're different games, and appeal to different people. One might as well argue that apple pie is the masterpiece of all fruit pies, and strawberry rhubard pie was a step backwards with poor design choices.

    I like most of the innovations introduced in Civ 6. For me it isn't yet quite as enjoyable as Civ 5, but it's a lot closer after R&F.
     
    Civrinn likes this.
  16. Softly

    Softly Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2017
    Messages:
    189
    For sure. Trade routes, Eurekas/Inspirations, Districts, Great People, Tile Improvements, Strategic Resources, Great Works, City States, Religion, Warmongering/Casus Belli, Governments, Social Policies, Appeal, Border Expansion, City Growth etc.... Depending on your definition of what constitutes a feature there are probably at least 50-100.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 11, 2018
  17. MarigoldRan

    MarigoldRan WARLORD

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,687
    No, now that I'm playing both Civ 4 is SIGNIFICANTLY harder, especially with KMod.

    The AI in Civ 6 in the early game simply don't know what to do against masses of archers.
     
    ZubieMaster and nzcamel like this.
  18. Kruos

    Kruos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2014
    Messages:
    73
    I dont want to hack the topic of the thread further but as you insist :

    Claiming that "Civ4 AI was much easier to beat for a good player than Civ5 and Civ6." is a big mistake, sorry. It's not even debattable. You loose all credibility by trying to argue the contrary. As someone told in a post around, in Civ5 or Civ6 you know you will win at the end, the question is more about the "How?" and "When?", whereas in Civ4 depending of the configuration of the game you are not at all sure to win because the AIs are more efficients at their job. Since Civ5 I play at Deity level, I was 2 levels down at Civ4.

    By the way, please do not take the pathfinding as an example to illustrate your erroneous claim. If there is domain where the 1UPT nucked the AI, it is indeed the pathfinding. It is so ridiculous that I am now wondering if you are not just a little troll.

    Moderator Action: Please don't accuse other people of being trolls - if you have an issue with a post, report it and let us deal with it. --Noble Zarkon
    Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 11, 2018
    lp60068, ZubieMaster and nzcamel like this.
  19. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,368
    If it's "not even debatable" then why are we still debating it?

    I feel like 4 was much more forgiving, in that you can undo/minimize any mistakes you made via slider etc. Also, while they're still (and always will be) around, it felt the exploits in Civ 4 were much more . . . well, "exploity." Chop/plant/chop, tech trading to an oblivious AI, hammer overlow, etc. Once you learned the tricks of the AI in 4 it wasn't so mysterious. I probably played a lot more too, but I can say that I could beat CivIV on Deity but haven't even tried with 6.
     
  20. MarigoldRan

    MarigoldRan WARLORD

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,687
    I dunno Sammy. Civ 4 never had the Magnus Chop.

    After R&F and the addition of Magnus I settle exclusively based on # of forests. I couldn't care less about potential district placement.

    Magnus Chop + Montezuma Slave Ability + Lots of Forests = Very Very Dead AI Very Very Quickly.

    Magnus Chop + Scythia + Horsemen = Very Very Dead AI Very Very Quickly.

    With some good planning and an area with lots of forests, a city can spam out 12-20 Horsemen in a single turn in the Classical Era. My neighbors don't last long after that.

    Moderator Action: Post edited to remove offensive language -- Noble Zarkon
    Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 11, 2018

Share This Page