Brandobaris
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2018
- Messages
- 3
In my last hot-seat game with a couple of friends, I've witness one of my friends get mad after a declaration of surprise war by her hot-blooded neighbour, Alexander, who attacked from east; and having defended her own cities well (partly also due to the lack of AI's imagination when attacking cities), I've watched her in burning desire for retribution to take the small, undefended coastal city of Alexandria first, and then hopelessly attack the walls of 10 people strong Methone for what seemed to have taken an irrational 500 years, only to end up losing Alexandria because it rebelled and had to give up on Methone as it was now Viking's turn to attack her, this time from the south. When she had finally made pace with Macedon, it seemed like a stalemate – no one won in one anti-climatic ending when she started to move her units south to defend her cities for another war.
During all those turns (30+?), she was pumping out unit after unit and sending them off to attack a city that was protected by a river fork, mountains and walls. All Alexander had to do was to keep two crossbowman and a swordsman around the city and destroy any siege weapons that approached and the city was safe.
Although it is impossible to know the full effects of war, my friend ended up lacking behind in science, practically culture-less with cities underdeveloped and demanding more amenity and eventually losing loyalty.
When the battle was over, we argued, in real-life terms, who had really won that war, and in my humble opinion, she was the loser as, when the peace deal was signed Alexander, he gained back the control of Alexandria and Methone was safe, and he seemed to have lost fewer soldiers too with little difference in his rankings.
I think Civ6 offers great depth in a lot of areas and especially in war, but it all often feels dry after it's all over.
What I am trying to get at is that the game needs to make things less dry. War is one example, where the game could every few turns could report on the progress of war in terms of numbers: how many soldiers were killed by enemy units, how many cities captured, how many civilians, tiles & trade routes pillaged, roads burned, population lost, gold, faith, science plundered, etc. The cost of war for you and the enemy.. It could even give it a war score to settle arguments once and for all.
This applies to other areas as well.. Biggest cities, most wonders, richest, poorest, strongest military, cities with most artworks, most culture, most gold etc... There are tonnes of these little lists or reports CIV could offer blending into the game which would dim the dryness and inject a bit more sense of achievement or progress during the game not just at or towards the end.
I think the historical timeline tried to do just that but for some reason it doesn't feel 100% to me as it can get tedious and repetitive after a while. Any thoughts on how the game could add bit more narrative?
During all those turns (30+?), she was pumping out unit after unit and sending them off to attack a city that was protected by a river fork, mountains and walls. All Alexander had to do was to keep two crossbowman and a swordsman around the city and destroy any siege weapons that approached and the city was safe.
Although it is impossible to know the full effects of war, my friend ended up lacking behind in science, practically culture-less with cities underdeveloped and demanding more amenity and eventually losing loyalty.
When the battle was over, we argued, in real-life terms, who had really won that war, and in my humble opinion, she was the loser as, when the peace deal was signed Alexander, he gained back the control of Alexandria and Methone was safe, and he seemed to have lost fewer soldiers too with little difference in his rankings.
I think Civ6 offers great depth in a lot of areas and especially in war, but it all often feels dry after it's all over.
What I am trying to get at is that the game needs to make things less dry. War is one example, where the game could every few turns could report on the progress of war in terms of numbers: how many soldiers were killed by enemy units, how many cities captured, how many civilians, tiles & trade routes pillaged, roads burned, population lost, gold, faith, science plundered, etc. The cost of war for you and the enemy.. It could even give it a war score to settle arguments once and for all.
This applies to other areas as well.. Biggest cities, most wonders, richest, poorest, strongest military, cities with most artworks, most culture, most gold etc... There are tonnes of these little lists or reports CIV could offer blending into the game which would dim the dryness and inject a bit more sense of achievement or progress during the game not just at or towards the end.
I think the historical timeline tried to do just that but for some reason it doesn't feel 100% to me as it can get tedious and repetitive after a while. Any thoughts on how the game could add bit more narrative?
