youngsteve
Prince
Considering Civ 5 is the best version, certainly with the Vox Populi mod, I have no idea what the Thread founder is on about.
1, 2, 3 and 4 are all true to the original civ gameplay. The later versions dropped unit stacking and adopted hex tiles. Civ6 even dropped workers. I dont think you can compare 1:1.
In my opinion civ4 is the best of the original civ versions, and civ5 is the best of the new versions (perhaps because it reminds me more of the old). Civ6 is a boardgame and I wanted a PC game.
I mean, you're certainly entitled to like Civ5, but I'd definitely say you're in the minority there. IMO Civ5 is by a long shot the weakest game of the franchise with the possible exception of Civ3 so OP's theory holds for me so far.Considering Civ 5 is the best version, certainly with the Vox Populi mod, I have no idea what the Thread founder is on about.
Exactly! Vox Populi is the best overall mod of any Civ version with the most contributing members.Considering Civ 5 is the best version, certainly with the Vox Populi mod, I have no idea what the Thread founder is on about.
Exactly! Vox Populi is the best overall mod of any Civ version with the most contributing members.
as well as some civ4 mods...
but I would not bet on civ6 to compete on that side, even after giving it more time to mature.
yes, but that's not the only parameter, civ6 is a good modding platform, more limited than 5 and 4 in some (important for me) ways, better on other.I cannot stand civ 6, thinking it is the weakest game in the series. That being said, all the previous versions with the exception of the 1st, were given modding tools to improve the game significantly. If Civ 6 was given the same tools, there is no reason why the game couldn't achieve alot more. Imagine if people could produce a product of the standard of Vox Populi for it. There are fans, like you, who could really expand this version if given the tools to do so.
So what you say is, Civ5 would have been the best, if they had just made it into a completely different game.Civ 5 was just one more expansion away from being one of the best, if they implemented a few features like better AI, multiple units per tile, and multiplayer mod support.
It makes it feel like a board game instead of an empire management game.
I think he did that in his next sentence.Can you explain what this means?
I think he did that in his next sentence.
For me it's a feeling, of course no one is saying that the series is not based on board game rules at the core, from civ1 to civ6, but previous versions added various layers of "lead an Empire to stand the test of time" impressions over the core rules. Civ5 started to peeled those, and now IMO civ6 is back to a naked board game, from the game's rules (1UPT, city unstacking, smaller maps) to the UI (moving cards around) or the AI behavior (simulating players instead of leaders)
I think he did that in his next sentence.
For me it's a feeling, of course no one is saying that the series is not based on board game rules at the core, from civ1 to civ6, but previous versions added various layers of "lead an Empire to stand the test of time" impressions over the core rules. Civ5 started to peeled those, and now IMO civ6 is back to a naked board game, from the game's rules (1UPT, city unstacking, smaller maps) to the UI (moving cards around) or the AI behavior (simulating players instead of leaders)
I think he did that in his next sentence.
For me it's a feeling, of course no one is saying that the series is not based on board game rules at the core, from civ1 to civ6, but previous versions added various layers of "lead an Empire to stand the test of time" impressions over the core rules. Civ5 started to peeled those, and now IMO civ6 is back to a naked board game, from the game's rules (1UPT, city unstacking, smaller maps) to the UI (moving cards around) or the AI behavior (simulating players instead of leaders)
I ask because I'm genuinely confused as I have no idea which board games are people referring to.
I understand the "board game" criticism in regards to policy cards, as this is something that is very common in board games and that I'm familiar with. Even if it's only UI, I'm not a fan of how they look in Civ 6 and I don't understand what's the point of making everything more difficult to read and reach just for the sake of looking more pleasant on the eye (which in any case, it does not).
But which board games are people referring to in regards to stacking? I've only seen districts in Endless Legend before Civ 6, and board games like Axis and Allies literally stack units, and from my (not extensive) experience with board games, it's common to throw a bunch of military units onto the same tile/region, etc.
Anyway, these are my hopes for Civ 7 in regards to armies and districts:
- Partial stacking, where the type and amount of units you can stack together are decided by military culture and other factors other than science (the Civs with the most technologically advanced militaries won't necessarily be the ones with the most effective traditions). Some types of stacking would be unique or unlocked earlier by certain cultures (e.g. a full stack of light cavalry for the Mongols) -> From Europa Universalis, Humankind and Through the Ages.
- Tone down (but do not entirely remove) the district sprawling element. Huge maps were unplayable for me in this iteration largely due to this. I don't think I've ever finished a "Huge Map" and I gave up entirely on them eventually. Adjacencies were overused. There's just too much stuff at some point and the AI is not good with district placement. If we expect another Civ game in the next two years (or even just Civ-like), there's no reason to believe the AI will be that much better. I would be happy with removing most districts but keep utilities like Dams, Bridges and Canals.
Districts I'd like:
- Dams;
- Bridges;
- Canals;
- Natural Parks / Preserves;
- Nuclear Plants;
- Spaceports;
- Airports;
- Defensive Districts like Castles/Encampments causing ZoC effects to adjacent tiles, with ranged attacks, and defensive bonuses to occupying units. Can be sieged.
I would also like some buildings to me made into tile improvements, such as the Observatory.
Everything else could be removed. I will always be able to go back to Civ 6 if I miss the district placement experience. I think it's fun for the first few cities.
Google some images of "Catan", formerly known as "Settlers of Catan". Hex grid, improvements, roads linking settlements.I ask because I'm genuinely confused as I have no idea which board games are people referring to.
I understand the "board game" criticism in regards to policy cards, as this is something that is very common in board games and that I'm familiar with. Even if it's only UI, I'm not a fan of how they look in Civ 6 and I don't understand what's the point of making everything more difficult to read and reach just for the sake of looking more pleasant on the eye (which in any case, it does not).