The district system

[rastak]

Wonder-spamming is a play style some people enjoy. Don't see why we should absolutely prevent it.

How is it being prevented?

 

[Thormodr]

How is it being prevented?

Well, you won't be able to build 10 wonders in your capital, for example.
There simply isn't enough space. You'll want to build districts, farms and other tile improvements.

 

[rastak]

Well, you won't be able to build 10 wonders in your capital, for example.
There simply isn't enough space. You'll want to build districts, farms and other tile improvements.

So spam 'em in multiple cities if you are dead set to do it.


By the way, I am a wonder spammer......I have to adjust if I want to continue....and yes, I realize it's a bad strategy.

 

[Thormodr]

So spam 'em in multiple cities if you are dead set to do it.


By the way, I am a wonder spammer......I have to adjust if I want to continue....and yes, I realize it's a bad strategy.

Yes, you could do that. However, as you said, that would be a bad strategy.

 

[dexters]

One thing I noticed and sort of felt is production don't seem as terrain dependent in the early game as in older Civs where people rerolled for the 5 cow, 3 wheat start or some such insanity.

But they did not really focus on the production side of the map. The preview video played on the same map as everyone else showed significant number of improvements and wonders by Turn 30+, granted it's a cooked start to preview features, and they were playing China, but it does mean waiting 20 turns for the library to finish is probably not a thing.

 

[rastak]

One thing I noticed and sort of felt is production don't seem as terrain dependent in the early game as in older Civs where people rerolled for the 5 cow, 3 wheat start or some such insanity.

But they did not really focus on the production side of the map. The preview video played on the same map as everyone else showed significant number of improvements and wonders by Turn 30+, granted it's a cooked start to preview features, and they were playing China, but it does mean waiting 20 turns for the library to finish is probably not a thing.

I've never re-rolled a game that I recall since 1991.

 

[historix69]

Instant improvements and discount wonders from the new builders might speed up early game a bit ...

 

[Heinage]

Regarding how to deal with new strategic resources (such as coal and uranium) popping up on hexes where you have already built a district, I wouldn't mind either of these solutions:

A) The harsh approach. Too bad. Either demolish the district and connect your new resource, or deal living without that one. Make the decision. Rebuild your district if you need to. That's what happens in real cities.

B) Builders can "relocate" districts at the cost of x charges. Then you hook up the resource after relocating your district.



Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[Cyon]

Or ju will get the strategic resources automatically like you do now with GP improvements and cities. Or the don't spawn under districts bit instead ate spawn nearby.

But currently in Kiruna in Sweden they are moving the entire city to be able to mine more iron ore so moving a district could be a possibility.

Skickat från min GT-I9195 via Tapatalk

 

[Thormodr]

I've never re-rolled a game that I recall since 1991.

Impressive. I suppose I have re-rolled from time to time. Can't say I haven't given in to the temptation occasionally.

 

[m15a]

Even if it is not visually shown, there could be a counter next to each building in the city management screen telling you how much of each building there is.

Make up your own values and write them on a piece of paper or in a spreadsheet. Since there is no gameplay effect, this should be almost as good.

It seems that Civilization's arcade mode is going backwards though. Civilization is becoming a casual game you play on the bus on the way to work and is no longer the deep thinking game it once was.

Please list some arcade games similar to how you expect Civ VI to play. Or non-arcade games with an arcade mode that plays anything like you expect Civ VI to play.

 

[nyyfootball]

Make up your own values and write them on a piece of paper or in a spreadsheet. Since there is no gameplay effect, this should be almost as good.

Why can't there be a gameplay effect? The economic, social and political stability of a city should be influenced by its amenities.

Please list some arcade games similar to how you expect Civ VI to play. Or non-arcade games with an arcade mode that plays anything like you expect Civ VI to play.

Why?

 

[Haig]

nyyfootball:

They are having 64-bit system and multithreaded AI for Civ 6, pretty much ALL the reviews confirm that there's much more mechanics and details to the game than Civ 5, forums and reddit are excited about the features and like the graphics on gameplay video.. and you are still having your "dumbed down iPhone game" -mantra.

War weariness, goverments and civics, no global happiness, canals(pretty likely).. so much more details and features. I already feel that Civ V is obsolete.

You didn't like the art style and now based on that you keep bashing the game and writing stuff like "CivRev and CivRev2" are the biggest sellers (it's Civ 5).

I bet there is literally nothing that will make you like the game, as you have already decided so.

 

[nyyfootball]

nyyfootball:

They are having 64-bit system and multithreaded AI for Civ 6, pretty much ALL the reviews confirm that there's much more mechanics and details to the game than Civ 5, forums and reddit are excited about the features and like the graphics on gameplay video.. and you are still having your "dumbed down iPhone game" -mantra.

I don't want more mechanics. I want better mechanics. Arbitrarily adding more and more and more is just lazy. I like the core idea of districts, they just appear to have been poorly executed. it makes not sense to have things like universities and theaters so far away from my city, especially without penalties. There should be a penalty for building districts further away from your cities.

War weariness, goverments and civics, no global happiness, canals(pretty likely).. so much more details and features. I already feel that Civ V is obsolete.

Civ IV had all of that except canals and even then it had canal cities. Civ V was obsolete from day 1.

You didn't like the art style and now based on that you keep bashing the game and writing stuff like "CivRev and CivRev2" are the biggest sellers (it's Civ 5).

I never denied that Civ V was the top seller. I said that the Revolution series are among the most commonly played Civilization games and are often people's first exposure to Civilization. It makes complete sense that the developers are trying to make Civ VI more like Civ Revolution.

I bet there is literally nothing that will make you like the game, as you have already decided so.

There is much that I would like to see included into the Civilization games. I have written several threads detailing what I would like to see included. Organic urban sprawl is something which I would very much like to see in Civ.

 

[m15a]

Why can't there be a gameplay effect? The economic, social and political stability of a city should be influenced by its amenities.

There is a gameplay effect of those buildings - they're just represented by a single value/modifier.

Of course there could be a specific effect for each specific building in the town. There could even be gameplay effects resulting from specific households or even the relationships between the people in a household and how their productivity is affected by whether their basic needs are fulfilled. Or instead of modeling combat as random outcomes, the player can actually control individual members of the military and control the combat of that single person in real-time.

Those are other more complex gameplay systems that could be potentially implemented in a game that someone calls Civilization. Should Civ VI implemented those also to ensure that it doesn't become a game preferred casual gamers?

Why?

So that us regular folk can understand what you actually mean.

 

[nyyfootball]

There is a gameplay effect of those buildings - they're just represented by a single value/modifier.

That is completely unrealistic and illogical. Why would a city with millions of residents only have one library and one supermarket?

Of course there could be a specific effect for each specific building in the town. There could even be gameplay effects resulting from specific households or even the relationships between the people in a household and how their productivity is affected by whether their basic needs are fulfilled. Or instead of modeling combat as random outcomes, the player can actually control individual members of the military and control the combat of that single person in real-time.

I have been suggesting total-war style combat for a long time now.

Those are other more complex gameplay systems that could be potentially implemented in a game that someone calls Civilization. Should Civ VI implemented those also to ensure that it doesn't become a game preferred casual gamers?

Civilization should seek to educate those who play it. There is so much potential to teach about history and sociology and economics and politics and environmental science and geography, etc. Civilization should not be a casual game. It should require that the player partake in active creative problem solving.

So that us regular folk can understand what you actually mean.

Who's "us"? Are you more than one person?

 

[m15a]

That is completely unrealistic and illogical. Why would a city with millions of residents only have one library and one supermarket?

Yes, that is illogical. But that is not actually what exists in the conceptual world of the game. It's a representation. The same way some Civ games show a small number of citizens in your city screen although a metropolis with 20 people is completely unrealistic. The same way some tiles only show a couple fish even though those few fish could not have an impact on feeding a city (and should be gone if they are ever eaten by one of those 20 citizens).

Civilization should seek to educate those who play it...

That's a fine goal, but Civ has never been the type of game you are describing. So you can't use that as an argument for the game becoming dumbed down.

 

[nyyfootball]

Yes, that is illogical. But that is not actually what exists in the conceptual world of the game. It's a representation. The same way some Civ games show a small number of citizens in your city screen although a metropolis with 20 people is completely unrealistic. The same way some tiles only show a couple fish even though those few fish could not have an impact on feeding a city (and should be gone if they are ever eaten by one of those 20 citizens).

Civ IV gives a literal, exact number of how many residents live in your city. If my city has 20 million people, it serves to reason that my city would have more than one library and most certainly more than one supermarket. Would gameplay not be enhanced by requiring more of the player?

That's a fine goal, but Civ has never been the type of game you are describing. So you can't use that as an argument for the game becoming dumbed down.

As Civ has become more and more popular, its demographics have changed significantly. Civilization is, by definition, now a casual game. It has been optimized to be able to take a short amount of time to play and for a successful end game to take minimal effort.

Civ seems to be purging any and all emergent gameplay in favor of short term enjoyment. The freemium effect. Civilization is now a game you can play on your tablet on the bus while your commuting to work or while your sitting in a waiting room and have ran out of magazines to read. It makes complete sense that the developers are trying to make CIV VI more like Civ Revolution and thus more accessible to more people.

 

[Plus Ultra]

Civ IV gives a literal, exact number of how many residents live in your city. If my city has 20 million people, it serves to reason that my city would have more than one library and most certainly more than one supermarket. Would gameplay not be enhanced by requiring more of the player?

As Civ has become more and more popular, its demographics have changed significantly. Civilization is, by definition, now a casual game. It has been optimized to be able to take a short amount of time to play and for a successful end game to take minimal effort.

Civ seems to be purging any and all emergent gameplay in favor of short term enjoyment. The freemium effect. Civilization is now a game you can play on your tablet on the bus while your commuting to work or while your sitting in a waiting room and have ran out of magazines to read. It makes complete sense that the developers are trying to make CIV VI more like Civ Revolution and thus more accessible to more people.

First of all, sorry for my english, non-native speaker joining the forum, beware

I've read most of the Threads.
You have been repeating the same three things over and over again without acepting any of the answers or explanations given to you.
Sorry for the oversimplification, but this three things are, esentially:

-Civilization VI is a dumbed down game
-Graphics are similar to a freemium game
-Districts are badly implemented

Regarding the dumbing-down of the game, as many other posters have already explained, I belive we don't have enough information to reach a conclusion yet.
Anyhow, dumbing-down is complex concept, since it involves subjective opinons on what a 4X game, or Civilization as a franchise should be and whether reducing options always means less complexity.

Regarding the graphics, the current art direction might not be to your liking, and that's fine.
I don't think extrapolating conclusions as "this is game is for kids" or "they are going the freemium route", or "this is a game you can play on a tablet when you have run out of magazines" is fair, or justified, and to be honest, seems like a way to generate controversy and provoque other forum members just for the sake of it.

Regarding districts, I certainly agree with the fact that this new sistem seems to generate a somewhat unnatural city growth.
There are some things that might help, and we don't really know how they work yet:

-Neighbourhoods (+housing) seem to appear later in the game, replacing farms. They could have adjacency bonuses (city centre-district), creating big sprawling cities.

-Adjacency bonuses for all 12 districts are still unkown. Since it has been confirmed encampment can't be adjacent to the city centre (and we have seen the airbase wierdly placed out of the borders), we could conclude some other districts would require adjacency to the city centre. Anyway, we need more info on this to see the whole picture.

-City centres still seem to grow with time (see screenshot with piramid, the city is merging with the market district), and cover/blend with parts of the adjacent tiles.

Last, but not least, you seem fixated on the fact that It makes no sense for cities to have only one library or bank.

The current Civilization games use this sort of reductionist aproach to avoid overcomplicating things, as you are perfectly aware.
1 warrior unit is not composed of 5 soldiers, a city of 5 pop has not a total population of 5 citizens, 1 unit of food in a wheat farm doesn't represent one loaf of bread... I could go on forever (luxury resources, votes on the world congress, workers, trade routes...)

The reductionist approach is certainly not totally realistic, but enables us to make interesting decisions without an impossible amount of micromanagement. You have to try and focus on the abstract concept rather than just the number.

Sorry for the long post

 

[Deggial]

I like the idea, but I must say also that I don't get a graphical sense of a city spanning multiple tiles from these screenshots. The improvements on each tile looks distinct and unique and doesn't really "connect" to the tiles next to them. I'm hoping that when they say cities span multiple tiles, it will actually look like a single coherent city spanning multiple tiles, not a bunch of atomistic, unconnected tiles which are "part of the same city" in text description only.

Thank you, damnyankees!
I just came here to the civfanatics to raise exactly this concern... and *blam!* the second post in this thread mentions exactly this!

The districts are visually very distinct due to unique models and typical colorization.
I REALLY think (and hope!), that some overlapping city-houses should be introduced in order to "glue" them together (just like forests blending over adjacent tiles) - they definitely wouldn't harm the readability!

This expands to city walls. As far as I know, we haven't learned in detail, how deffensive structures will work.
But in my thinking, city walls definitely should surround the whole city area. Or at least those areas where they are built (which would be a - completely hypothetical - new game concept just invented by me at this moment ).