Tall, wide & rex

[anandus]

I wanted to ponder on the different playstyles.

I assume (just speculation), as there's a LOT more city micro, that the game will be geared towards tall empires and that this will be reflected in the game balancing.

What are your thought about different playstyles based on the info we have now (and especially the city unstacking)?

 

[cazaderonus]

I'd have to agree that the first elements and screenshots tend to scream TALL.

The district system and city spanning over multiple tiles do not necessarily imply that but the scale of the terrain from what we saw so far doesnt suggest bigger maps than civ V.

So with those two thing combined, i admit i have a hard time considering wide empires being the norm.

 

[stealth_nsk]

1. I don't see more city micro than before. Actually with all buildings visible on the map it's easier to control cities.

2. IMHO, with BtS Civ5 came way too far in supporting tall empires. Tall should be possible, but should have disadvantages over wide. You shouldn't be able to ignore 2 Xes in 4X without consequences.

3. Civ6 seem to have several city specializations, plus it's not possible to build many wonders in 1-2 cities, plus it was stated to have more bonuses from different lands. All this points to better wide development support.

 

[cazaderonus]

1. I don't see more city micro than before. Actually with all buildings visible on the map it's easier to control cities.

2. IMHO, with BtS Civ5 came way too far in supporting tall empires. Tall should be possible, but should have disadvantages over wide. You shouldn't be able to ignore 2 Xes in 4X without consequences.

3. Civ6 seem to have several city specializations, plus it's not possible to build many wonders in 1-2 cities, plus it was stated to have more bonuses from different lands. All this points to better wide development support.

Your 3 makes sense. I just expected wider terrain on the first screenshots tbh. planting a city that will work 36 tiles seems to cover a solid piece of land. Now, we havent seen full maps or zoomed out screenshots so i might be jumping the gun.

But yeah, specialization would obviously favor wide. Though you could achieve enough specialization with 4 cities. I guess it all depends on how much technological advances will mitigate the need to specialize cities.

 

[spfun]

personally I prefer Tall, i find going wide to be pretty boring. Ideally though I would like to see balance with either playstyle.

 

[anandus]

1. I don't see more city micro than before. Actually with all buildings visible on the map it's easier to control cities.

Well, next to choosing what to build, you also need to choose where you want to build it.

 

[Hakan-i Cihan]

I see with the new district system and thus more city specialization more incentive towards wide play for me. But at the moment I could not speculate if it would be balanced towards wide or tall or that it wouldn't matter that much after all.

 

[Louis XXIV]

The absence of global happiness will help wide empires. Also, you'll probably need many cities since a wonder hogging city is next to impossible. I wrote this in a different thread, but I think ICS has been significantly weakened. Once you do that, wide empires start to become more viable since the limits are natural limits - map space, dedication to other aspects, etc.

I think the question is whether the rapid in REX is viable. If it's a question of tall vs. wide, I don't think wide will suffer.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Well, next to choosing what to build, you also need to choose where you want to build it.

You mean which city? That's the same as Civ4 with its specializations.

 

[gcm4738]

What would be really good is if either wide or tall were optimal depending on the map and other factors.

I like the linking of the tech to the map - the map is the most variable set of initial conditions and to my mind that's where V went wrong. Not enough impetus to spread intelligently.

Now one can imagine that getting on different terrain types will be a real carrot.

Possibly resources will be significantly asymmetric as well? or is that too much to hope for in these days...

 

[anandus]

You mean which city? That's the same as Civ4 with its specializations.

No, I mean what tile you'll use for your production/science/cultural/military/gold/religious/etc buildings.

 

[stealth_nsk]

No, I mean what tile you'll use for your production/science/cultural/military/gold/religious/etc buildings.

You only have to choose a place for district itself. Say you want to build a library. Initially you just can't. Then you build a district and you can. You don't choose where to build it - you just build it in the city and it's shown in the district.

 

[anandus]

You only have to choose a place for district itself. Say you want to build a library. Initially you just can't. Then you build a district and you can. You don't choose where to build it - you just build it in the city and it's shown in the district.

Of course, but you'll still need to choose a spot for the district (of which there are ultimately 12).
Of course, when most districts are placed it's a lot easier, but especially in the beginning a city requires more thought.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Of course, but you'll still need to choose a spot for the district (of which there are ultimately 12).
Of course, when most districts are placed it's a lot easier, but especially in the beginning a city requires more thought.

You'll not be building all 12 districts. I'd say 5-6 maximum. And choosing placements for them generally occurs when you plan where to build your city. For example, you plan to build religious city and you want it to be built not far from mountain, so religious district could benefit from it. Planning so you generally already know where your district will be.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

You can only have as many district as you have population and from one screenshot it look like you can have several district of the same type in one city.

5-6 feels a bit low given a city can cover up to 36 tiles, even with 10 district there is still room for normal improvements as well.

Maybe each citizen live in the district and can only gather resources from nearby improvements as it do look like all improvements are built next to district and the city. In that case the micro would be quite low.

 

[stealth_nsk]

You can only have as many district as you have population and from one screenshot it look like you can have several district of the same type in one city.

5-6 feels a bit low given a city can cover up to 36 tiles, even with 10 district there is still room for normal improvements as well.

Maybe each citizen live in the district and can only gather resources from nearby improvements as it do look like all improvements are built next to district and the city. In that case the micro would be quite low.

City could have 36 tiles, but you need to build them far away from each other for this. Plus any wonders take tiles too. And you still need regular tiles. Also, population supporting the tiles requires food and growth.

Developers seem to focus a lot on city specialization this time.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Well, we know terrain will be more important now since it will give bonuses to research and districts. So I think expansion will be important since players will want to grab enough territory to get bonuses in different areas as well as enough space for districts and wonders. So going wide will be advantageous.