Some issues that mildly concern me...

SJSerio

Centurion
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
1,453
Location
Carney, MD
OK... I have been soaking up a lot of info regarding Civilization 6 and I have to say that I love what I see so far. I am at a much better place with the transition from V to VI than I was from IV to V. When they announced unstacking the cities, I did take pause, but I quickly adapted my mind to it and look forward to this new system, among others. I'm fine with how builders work and I am also fine with the looks (a sore spot for some, which I don't quite understand)

Having said that, there are a few things that kind of have me scratching my head or even writhing a bit on the inside. Though, I must admit, they are minor compared to the overall game. One of the first actually has to do with roads. Actually, I don't mind so much that roads are initially created by trade routes. The only problem that I could see is that it would mean trade route juggling in the early game while building up road networks. My problem is that the military engineer doesn't even come until the middle ages (I believe). This doesn't make too much sense to me as road networks were prominent in the Roman period. Perhaps one of Rome's abilities would be that they get access to this feature early. Perhaps their UU's (which I presume to be the Legion) would have the ability of the Military Engineer. Of course, we don't exactly know how that function works yet... is it like builders where the Engineers have a limited charge for road construction or can they just walk around building roads willy-nilly?

Related to this is bridges and forts. Both of these come much later in the game than I would like (medieval or later... Fort improvement comes with Siege Tactics which is a Renaissance Era tech). These, again, are things that IMO should be available much earlier... around classical era.

It seems that my gripes are due to certain things being available so late in the game. Another one for me is the fact that combined arms and armies happen so late in the game. I understand that the reason for it is to lesson the late game burden of unit management. It just seems a function that should be available much earlier... maybe starting in medieval for combined arms.

Those are my biggest gripes with Civilization VI so far. At that, they are not that big and, overall, I am looking forward to playing this installment. Of course, we still have a lot more to learn about the game. The next two and a half months can't go by any faster.
 
Actually, roads have been created (and greatly improved by Romans) because of trade routes (and a little bit because of moving armies), so it's not a non-sense in my opinion.

However, bridges that depend on the road type instead of a single tech as in CiV (so ancient roads don't have bridges) really bother me.

And I have to admit that I also want forts to come a little earlier (in middle age).
 
Civ is not a history simulator, things are introduces when they make sense gameplay-wise, not at the historically accurate date.
 
I'm 90% sure Rome will fet something enabling them to build roads early, for example Legion ability.
 
Civ is not a history simulator, things are introduces when they make sense gameplay-wise, not at the historically accurate date.
It doesn't make sense to me gameplay wise. Civ V had diets and bridges starting during the classical age. I believe 4 did as well. I don't see a justification for the delay in game. The only possibility I can think of outs that becomes one of Rome's key abilities... Early access to advanced roads. If that is the case, then I am fine. And as far as that being too much of an advantage for Rome, remember... Historically, their road network aided in their "downfall" as it gave the barbarians an express lane through the empire.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk
 
I'm 90% sure Rome will fet something enabling them to build roads early, for example Legion ability.

This. I think with the current timing of military engineer, and Rome getting it earlier, it'll make Rome's ability that much more pronounced which I like!

For forts it looks like the same scenario but China is the beneficiary with their great wall?


Maybe that's why every improvement seems to come much later than usual? To make the unique civ abilities more powerful?
 
We'll have to wait and see, I suppose. I guess that is why they haven't officially confirmed Rome yet... They have to be ready to give more details about how military engineers work first. Hopefully that will be soon.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk
 
It doesn't make sense to me gameplay wise. Civ V had diets and bridges starting during the classical age. I believe 4 did as well. I don't see a justification for the delay in game. The only possibility I can think of outs that becomes one of Rome's key abilities... Early access to advanced roads. If that is the case, then I am fine. And as far as that being too much of an advantage for Rome, remember... Historically, their road network aided in their "downfall" as it gave the barbarians an express lane through the empire.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk

I dunno, it doesn't seem to be that weird, they're just roads that affect your movement.

As far as I know, we actually no longer have the need to connect our cities together. I don't think you get a City Connection/Trade Route anymore like you do in Civ 5 if cities are connected.

Also, as far as I know You got Bridges pretty late in the Classical Era, because I recall that it is in Engineering which is in the tier right before Medieval era.
 
I dunno, it doesn't seem to be that weird, they're just roads that affect your movement.

As far as I know, we actually no longer have the need to connect our cities together. I don't think you get a City Connection/Trade Route anymore like you do in Civ 5 if cities are connected.

Also, as far as I know You got Bridges pretty late in the Classical Era, because I recall that it is in Engineering which is in the tier right before Medieval era.

I'm not sure about the bonuses either, though I am sure there would be something. The movement is important to me, especially as an expansionist. I like being able to move my units quickly through my empire as needed. Establishing a road network is often one of my early priorities.

As far as bridges, yes, it was late, but it was still in the classical period. And it made a world of difference with movement. I am willing to bet even more so in Civ VI due to the new movement rules.
 
Civ is not a history simulator, things are introduces when they make sense gameplay-wise, not at the historically accurate date.

What about his proposition of moving then to classical era doesn't make sense gameplay wise? And BTW, is not a history simulation but it is based on history not only on gameplay decision.
 
What about his proposition of moving then to classical era doesn't make sense gameplay wise?
You're swapping the argument. When I say that gameplay comes first that does not mean that I think a specific decision makes sense gameplay-wise, but instead only that a historical argument such as "This doesn't make too much sense to me as road networks were prominent in the Roman period." doesn't make sense.

However, after re-reading his post, I see that this historical argument was way less the focus of his post than I had originally understood it to be so my post wasn't really on point. :think:

And BTW, is not a history simulation but it is based on history not only on gameplay decision.
Gameplay comes first. Historical accuracy is an afterthought.
 
Civ is not a history simulator, things are introduces when they make sense gameplay-wise, not at the historically accurate date.

Well, it should be. Otherwise call it World of Magic, not Civilization. Things have to make historical and common sense.
 
Well, it should be. Otherwise call it World of Magic, not Civilization. Things have to make historical and common sense.
You better be more than a dozen Centuries old, otherwise your username doesn't make sense. :crazyeye:
 
Back
Top Bottom