1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

This is not strategy game

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by kornelm1978, Oct 29, 2016.

  1. kornelm1978

    kornelm1978 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    119
    Gender:
    Male
    I am really dissapointed, I expected the game which will be really strategical expereince and it's not. I am not talking about tweaks to be made, exploits you can make or the lacks in interface. Those should not happen, but I belive it will be improved. I am talking about lack of strategical depth the game should have. And i believe that the game with more depth can be still done in a way to satisfy less experienced players. Thus my very strong opinion, sorry if I touched somebody, the game is not for strategy lovers but for:

    - "Sims lovers" in more historical scenery. Instead of building sofa, you can build battleship, Eifel Tower, or even spaceship

    - logical puzzle lovers - one unit per tile lovers, who love logical puzzle in historical scenery. Thus their main love is to move 20 units in a way to cicrumvent town in least turns possible, while putting the archers on the hills. It's an achievement, I admit, but it's not what I expect from strategy game.

    - new civilization lovers - seeing a number of threads on that, I believe that this is pretty strong group of people. They will be happy with new civilizations to occur, gameplay less importatnt. I am just waiting for the tread, that you should be able to change colours of Cleopatra dress. Again, for me this should not be the most important.

    I am really dissapointed that this "strategy" game satsisfies the lovers of above, instead of being strategy game. I am moreover dissapointed as I paid 80Eur (!!!!!) for the game like that.
     
  2. MyOtherName

    MyOtherName Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,526
    What, in your opinion, makes this a non-strategy game? Is it simply that the AI (currently) poses very little challenge, or is there more to it?
     
  3. Shorlin

    Shorlin Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    201
    Other than the complaints about AI how does it have less strategic depth than civ5?
     
  4. AlpsStranger

    AlpsStranger Jump jump on the tiger!

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5,820
    So how many new bashing threads are you going to start? Just curious, have to plan ahead ;)

    If you're waiting for a Civ5-launch-esque dogpile you're going to be disappointed. Most people are receiving the game well, even while acknowledging the areas that need a little work.
     
    shadowplay, Deggial, borad and 9 others like this.
  5. kornelm1978

    kornelm1978 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    119
    Gender:
    Male
    AI is just part of the problem, the other problem is 1upt. Becasue of that not only AI suffers, but the whole gameplay. The wars taking few eras being not dynamic at all and ineresting at all, just a puzzle with not strategical depth. I'd love to see sea landings, paratroopers, pillaging. With 1 upt is nearly imposible. (apart from pilaging few tiles away from your borders). I'd love to see just a little bit deeper diplomacy, which is wisely used by AI. I'd love to see something happening since mid till late game (if you are not militaristic), apart from following all the time the same tech routes and boosts and placing efectively districts.
     
    Zuizgond likes this.
  6. kornelm1978

    kornelm1978 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    119
    Gender:
    Male
    I'd really prefer to play the game:)
     
  7. MyOtherName

    MyOtherName Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,526
    That's called "tactics", and present in most strategy games.

    (and, I think this is mainly just another manifestation of the poor AI -- both in actually forming an army and using it)
     
    Fierro likes this.
  8. Resipsa

    Resipsa King

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2012
    Messages:
    998
    For me it's arbritrary diplomacy, the inconsistent results. In Civ5 you played the map and AI tenancies here it's all over the place and the AI won't try and win even on deity.
     
  9. Shorlin

    Shorlin Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    201
    You knew it was going to be 1upt, so why are you complaining about wasting your money? :crazyeye:

    This is something that concerns me, there still seems to be the handful of 'go to' techs that everyone will beeline.. I was hoping for more variance.
     
  10. kornelm1978

    kornelm1978 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    119
    Gender:
    Male
    You are right, this is actually my fault:)
     
  11. evmcmunn

    evmcmunn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2015
    Messages:
    53
    u know i just thought it woulda been cool if they would have added randomness to the tech tree like if when u researched a new tech that u say got a bonus to a pasture, instead of getting a predictable bonus of +1 procuction, the game would randomly pick +1 production, food or gold. They could have added things like that all over the tech tree making research resemble real life research more. Doesnt get to your "strategy" game point but just a thought.
     
    Reg Pither and kornelm1978 like this.
  12. Usama84

    Usama84 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    81
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mississauga, Ontario
    Gotta agree with one point, 1upt is the worst thing to happen to civ, I'm struggling to accept this, kind of kills the military aspect of the game
     
    skyclad, Zuizgond, UncleJJ and 4 others like this.
  13. nukehumvee

    nukehumvee Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Earth
    I'm beginning to wonder if you're going to troll the forums. The mods may stop me, but I have to say this.

    That wouldn't make much sense. Satellites aren't supposed to give you Faith.
     
  14. Solaxe

    Solaxe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    25
    Please tell me how deathstack spam promoted strategy in any way. 1upt is one of their best improvements ever
     
    Tw2Brick, Deggial, ERMTony and 8 others like this.
  15. Menzies

    Menzies Menzies

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,898
    Location:
    Australia
    To me it does the opposite, it is the military side of the game's greatest strength. Stacks of doom were one of the most boring mechanics in the series. This allows wars to have some level of strategy to them.

    The only concern about 1UPT that ever made sense was that the AI couldn't handle it, and arguably that's still true. That however doesn't suddenly make it "kill the military aspect".
     
  16. nukehumvee

    nukehumvee Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Earth
    I agree. Stacks of Doom only promoted zergrushing, and zergrushing hardly counts as strategy. Unstacking units makes sense, because as in real life, every soldier, horse, tank and ship takes up space: You can't just pile hundreds of tanks and think it will steamroll everything.
     
    van der Knivet and Nathair like this.
  17. kornelm1978

    kornelm1978 Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    119
    Gender:
    Male

    Stack of doom was not greatest idea, but much better than 1 upt. There is a lot of middleground between 1 and infinity. Let's say 5. I gave you the examples how it killed strategy promoting puzzle. Can you make in paratroopers drop on small island? No. Can you make praratroopers drop to on the back? No - it will be spread across being in shooting distance of few cities and amongst dozens of chartiots:). Can you have small naval landing on the flank to support army advancements? No, becasue it will be spread on huge area, again in shooting range of few cities (clifs, mountains, other units). Can you make huge naval landing? Etremelly difficult, takes barely 2 eras when on the other side of map. Before you reach the shores, your units need uprgrade. It was all possible and should be. This is strategy is missing, which is mainly killed by 1upt. Of course, we have got another thinking, but for the game on that scale I would prefer strategies of above rather than thinking of archer placement on the hill.

    I am not for stack of dooom, but just a little bit more units per tile.
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2016
  18. Menzies

    Menzies Menzies

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,898
    Location:
    Australia
    I always hear this "there's a middle ground you know" argument, but I'm yet to see a persuasive argument for how such a middle game would create any better a system. The advantage as things stand is that units are differentiated, and in war you can target particular parts of an army, creating holes and weaknesses, giving an extra layer to the combat. Multiple units per tile preclude that possibility and just make it babies first stack of doom, while not actually solving any problems. It's like not being able to decide between calling your first born Adrian or Rudolf and just deciding to take the average and call them Rurian, it solves neither problem, and serves as nothing more than a suggestion to sooth both parties.

    The simple point is that stacks of doom were a poor mechanic, and 1UPT works considerably better. The only real weaknesses that exist with it are to do with AI issues and occasional discussions about what should go on separate layers. Suggesting stacks of doom return, or even the judgement of Solomon suggestion of "Multiple Units per Tile", are as nonsensical as suggesting we drop the 3D graphics of Civ IV, V and VI (it's not like there wasn't opposition at the time).
     
    DWilson, LMT and Staal like this.
  19. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,393
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I have to agree that we should be able to have 5 units per tile. Civ4 had its flaws, but it did a halfway decent job in getting you to "diversify" your army. If you didn't diversify, that SOD would hurt you bad. It was important to have "counters" to enemy units. Now it doesn't matter, archers can do almost everything by themselves. And some civilizations UU's are enough by themselves to conquer everything.

    I want a game that allows me to make "armies". And no, not combine 3 units to make a slightly better 1 unit with expensive upgrade costs. Armies is historically won wars and conquered cities. I think it would be easier to program the ai to form a 5 unit army rather than program it to effectively utilize 1upt.
     
    Zuizgond and knightblaster like this.
  20. Baba Yetu VI

    Baba Yetu VI Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    149
    I guess OP is comparing the game with EU, Crown of Glory, Hearts of Iron and other sophisticated strategy turn-based games.
    CIV games are simpler.

    It's like an arcade flight simulation games like RED Baron, Combat ACE with hardcore flight simulation games like LOCK-ON, Falcon 4, IL-2...etc

    Each of the genre has their own market and fans.

    The simpler, easier to play gets more popular. Afterall games is for fun.
     

Share This Page