Tips for someone who has only played Civ 6 coming into 5

Ranger0001

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 3, 2021
Messages
39
Hello, so as the title says I have only played Civ 6 before and just bought Civ 5. So what things would I have learned to do in civ 6 that will be detrimental or a strategy that works in one and needs to be avoided in the other. Thanks!

And I have both G&K and BNW.
 

Diktaattori

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
79
One thing is that internal trade routes work in different direction. In civ V trade route origin city sends food/hammer to destination city whereas in Civ VI it is reversed.

And internal trade routes (cargo ship and food) are almost always better than external trade routes at least in early game
 

Browd

Dilettante
Administrator
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
11,994
Location
Rural Vermont
You will experience this as soon as you get started with the game, but movement points essentially get “rounded up”, rather than getting truncated, so exploration, army movement, etc. will be a bit quicker.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
448
Hello, so as the title says I have only played Civ 6 before and just bought Civ 5. So what things would I have learned to do in civ 6 that will be detrimental or a strategy that works in one and needs to be avoided in the other. Thanks!

And I have both G&K and BNW.

Too many things to list them all, as they are quite different games even if they look very similar on the surface.
I'll list a few major ones though:
- Openers. You "need" certain specific build orders in the early game in 5, that are unlike civ 6. Early monument being a big one, unless you happen to get early culture from a ruin. You almost never open monument in 6, but its near mandatory in 5. This because of the early culture, which bring me to...
- Policies. They are nothing alike civ 6, as they are set in stone once you invest into them. This forces you to plan out your game early, and unfortunately 5 has some rather unbalanced early choices which makes Tradition 9/10 times the best choice to open over Liberty and Honour. In 6 you can go whatever for the first government, and just swap cards around as needed. And since Tradition in 5 is so much better than the other choices...
- You get shoehorned into playing tall, over playing wide. Forget about settling 20 cities, 4 cities is often the gold standard as you open tradition. Settling too many cities causes a plethora of problems, the big ones being: Increased science/culture costs and....
- Happiness, gold and inability to build national wonders. 5 will have you struggle hard for happiness and gold income, and if you dont pay attention to it you will have riots and run bankrupt frequently. Global happiness is a real showstopper if you settle too many cities, but Tradition boosts happiness for tall play. Civ 6 amenities are essentially a non-factor in how inconsequential they are, and gold ceases to be an issue once you get your first comm hub(s) up. Another benefit of tall play with few cities is that national wonders become available to build, which are very important especially on the higher difficulties.

As you see, the "problems" of civ 5 are all related in that they follow from a core design difference in the game.
It can be viewed as a good thing as well though, as it changes up the game a lot from civ 6, and makes the race against the AI more of a struggle than it currently is in civ 6, especially if you want to experiment with other policy choices like Liberty and Honour (which essentially is like adding 1-2 difficulty levels).
The civ 5 AI is also a lot more bloodthirsty, and having a single AI completely wipe out all his neighbours (including you) is common, which creates for some really interesting late games where your existence is threatened at all times.
In civ 6 you tend to snowball past the AI and just get exponentially stronger as the AI tends to plateau somewhere around the late Renaissance/early Industrial era, and unfortunately this really creates for some stale late game in civ 6 where you can essentially do whatever you want.
In my current game on Deity in civ 6 for example, I have about 2300 science, 1500 culture, 2300 gold per turn and 1700 faith per turn, while the AIs are stuck between 50-500 science and 50-180 culture each, and is obviously super boring to play at this stage.
This will essentially never be a thing in civ 5.

All in all, I'd sum it up as civ 6 having the superior early game with plenty of viable playstyles that allow you to catch up to the AI, whereas civ 5 has the superior late game.
The AI is a real threat at all stages of the game, and diplomacy similarly becomes a big part of the game to try to navigate these treacherous waters.
 
Last edited:

Tiberiu

Prince
Joined
Feb 29, 2020
Messages
443
Location
Bucharest
Too many things to list them all, as they are quite different games even if they look very similar on the surface.
I'll list a few major ones though:
- Openers. You "need" certain specific build orders in the early game in 5, that are unlike civ 6. Early monument being a big one, unless you happen to get early culture from a ruin. You almost never open monument in 6, but its near mandatory in 5. This because of the early culture, which bring me to...

I'm sorry to contradict you but I think that's not true. Pretty much everybody starts with one or two scouts first at least in Single Player since scouting is so very important. And after that there are a few other options besides the monument, like building a shrine, or even temple of artemis which is a doable wonder even on Deity. Or building more units even, in order to rush some opponent. And somebody might not build Monuments at all if he picks Tradition and Legalism.

It can be viewed as a good thing as well though, as it changes up the game a lot from civ 6, and makes the race against the AI more of a struggle than it currently is in civ 6, especially if you want to experiment with other policy choices like Liberty and Honour (which essentially is like adding 1-2 difficulty levels).

Again this is simply a gross exaggeration. I think it is pretty much a consensus in the community that the only policy tree which is too weak in comparison to the others is Piety, which is only viable in special circumstances or with a few religious civs like Maya.

Tradition is a cookie cutter yes, in the sense you can't go wrong with it. That's because you can get to Education and also have Aqueducts at the same time.
And while the game does tend to punish wide vs tall in a few ways that you mentioned, there are too many nuances to state that playing wide or playing Non-tradition is like adding extra difficulty. I think any number of city is good as long as you have good reasons for putting up those cities. And obviously the later you found a city, the less time it has to become a net-positive in some aspects like science or culture, but there are other possible reasons for why you might want to found a city, like gaining some luxury or some strategic resource, blocking the way for the enemies in some area. Also in some cases where you have religious beliefs with buildings like Pagoda and Mosque which make it much easier to go wide.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
448
I'm sorry to contradict you but I think that's not true. Pretty much everybody starts with one or two scouts first at least in Single Player since scouting is so very important. And after that there are a few other options besides the monument, like building a shrine, or even temple of artemis which is a doable wonder even on Deity. Or building more units even, in order to rush some opponent. And somebody might not build Monuments at all if he picks Tradition and Legalism.



Again this is simply a gross exaggeration. I think it is pretty much a consensus in the community that the only policy tree which is too weak in comparison to the others is Piety, which is only viable in special circumstances or with a few religious civs like Maya.

Tradition is a cookie cutter yes, in the sense you can't go wrong with it. That's because you can get to Education and also have Aqueducts at the same time.
And while the game does tend to punish wide vs tall in a few ways that you mentioned, there are too many nuances to state that playing wide or playing Non-tradition is like adding extra difficulty. I think any number of city is good as long as you have good reasons for putting up those cities. And obviously the later you found a city, the less time it has to become a net-positive in some aspects like science or culture, but there are other possible reasons for why you might want to found a city, like gaining some luxury or some strategic resource, blocking the way for the enemies in some area. Also in some cases where you have religious beliefs with buildings like Pagoda and Mosque which make it much easier to go wide.

I wasn't saying that Monument is the very first thing you build, but its a thing you should have in your opener regardless because you want to reach the first policies asap.
And do note, I clearly said that you might want to skip on the Monument in the off case that you get early culture from ruins (for Tradition), which is the one exception to the rule.
Other than that you really should get a Monument early, which is not the case for civ 6 which allows for a lot more deviation in the opener.
This is a difference between 5 and 6, which is the point of this topic.

In the base game BNW (unmodded), Honour and Liberty are quite lacking to Tradition.
You might enjoy playing with them, but I think you would be hard pressed to find someone saying with a straight face that Honour and Liberty are just as strong or stronger than Tradition.
My last domination game in 5 for instance, was a real uphill battle as Honour just doesnt solve the big problems that warmongers have with happiness and gold income.
I ended up having to raze most cities while selling off their buildings and pillaging as much as I could, while being forced to beeline any kind of happiness wonder (and raging if it got sniped) as even puppeted cities that actually do produce happiness buildings start dragging you down shortly after.
This is very different to civ 6, where you can essentially hold any crap city you want to and still be net positive (heck, you are often better off even).
 

Tiberiu

Prince
Joined
Feb 29, 2020
Messages
443
Location
Bucharest
It depends on the map settings and yes Liberty and Honor are just as strong as Tradition in some of those settings and in some settings they are stronger. For example what do you think the players who do records for fastest Domination victory on a Pangaea use? Tradition? That would be suboptimal since tradition isn't as useful for the objective like the other two. We could go back and forth forever but I'll just leave it at that. You can surely have your subjective opinion on the matter.
And it's not only about Domination Victory. It is known some very quick players have used Liberty instead of Tradition for quick Science victories so it all boils down to simple math. Liberty = more cities, faster, = more science output = more bulb value. which compensates for the 15% growth and the quick aqueducts.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
448
It depends on the map settings and yes Liberty and Honor are just as strong as Tradition in some of those settings and in some settings they are stronger. For example what do you think the players who do records for fastest Domination victory on a Pangaea use? Tradition? That would be suboptimal since tradition isn't as useful for the objective like the other two. We could go back and forth forever but I'll just leave it at that. You can surely have your subjective opinion on the matter.
And it's not only about Domination Victory. It is known some very quick players have used Liberty instead of Tradition for quick Science victories so it all boils down to simple math. Liberty = more cities, faster, = more science output = more bulb value. which compensates for the 15% growth and the quick aqueducts.

Its not about them not being able to be used, but for the majority of players Tradition is just a lot more comfortable to use, so that it's perfectly reasonable to compare it to playing on an easier difficulty (Tradition) compared to the alternatives.
And since this is a new player, Tradition is the easiest and most solid policy opener to go for on the first run(s) as it is very straight forward and requires a lot less micromanaging.
I assume that you are a deity level player, so I ask you to keep this in mind - this guy is new, whatever policy choices players do when speedrunning on deity is completely irrelevant to a new player.

Ditto, you are allowed to have your own subjective opinion on the matter of course.
 
Last edited:

Sherlock

Just one more turn...
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
1,321
Location
Eagle, Idaho
Ok, coming from VI to V? To start with be prepared to have fun. Be prepared to have resources available to you, and tile yields. And production. And not a ridiculous amount of barbs.

You'll be building more cities because you'll have decent sites to build them. You'll be building more of everything and having more fun doing it.

You can declare war on someone without waiting ten turns. Your workers don't spontaneously explode after three actions. You can build roads wherever you want to.

It's an altogether better experience than VI. PS: If you want a good start play as Babylon, Korea, or Arabia.
 
Top Bottom