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

[GS] Two lovely features from CivIV still missing. Why?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Vasire, Mar 11, 2019.

  1. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,573
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    Vassals were truly the "hidden" Conquest/Domination VC accelerator. That was the true intention of the mechanic, and it succeeded at that. No "capture all capitals and ONLY the capitals" nonsense.

    Emerging nations was not part of civ 4, but became a fun part of one of the (many) best mods: Legends of Revolution. If you leave barbarian cities alone or unconquered long enough, they would emerge as a new civ after some time. Amazing! Also, civs could split into two when revolutions hit, due to many factors that made your pops unhappy.
     
    Kjimmet, Elhoim, glider1 and 2 others like this.
  2. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,791
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Could your allies attack your vassals in IV? If not, that's a key difference between vassals in IV and suzerain in VI.
     
  3. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,573
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    There is no "ally" in civ 4, only Def Pacts. If your DP partner attacks your vassal, DP is cancelled and your partner is now your enemy.
     
    WillowBrook likes this.
  4. glider1

    glider1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    2,772
    Location:
    Where animals hop not run
    There isn't much point comparing vassalage in civ4 to civ6 because the games are very different. The real comparison is Civ5 VP which has both citystates and vassalage and it works very well there.

    I think vassalage is an essential feature for 1UPT games that make conquest more tedious. Ironically it is more necessary for Civ6 than it was for Civ4 because civ4 had stacks that made conquest much less tedious.
     
    Vasire likes this.
  5. AriochIV

    AriochIV Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,617
    Location:
    San Jose, California
    I liked the vassal system in Civ IV, but I have the feeling mine is the minority view.

    What I miss more from Civ IV is the "domination" victory condition that was triggered when you had something like 2/3 of the world's territory and population. Having to capture every capital is lame; dragging the game on after you're clearly dominating is boring, and having to declare war on your allies to end the game is stupid.
     
    Kjimmet, cvb, TheMeInTeam and 6 others like this.
  6. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,791
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Totally agree! I don't mind having the current version as a victory option, but I would love to be able to win simply by having enough land and population; it was my favorite victory in III (I didn't play IV).
     
  7. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,573
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    And that is exactly where the Vassal system fit in: each Vassal counted for the Domination percentage, in a proportion of the whole country if it were free (I think it's 50%).
     
  8. cvb

    cvb Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2017
    Messages:
    239
    Yes, that was the perfect deal: vassals counted only half for the territory and population target, but on the other hand you had to bring them just to the point of capitulation rather then to conquer every single city (and babysit them afterwards - the most annoying part).
     
  9. kaltorak

    kaltorak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,520
    Location:
    Madrid
    And this is the reason why. Since civ5 they are moving into a direction of chess game, of "are you able to beat the game in higher difficulties/less turns". Instead of an empire simulator.

    I dont care about winning conditions, I want vassals, colonies, and such fun things.
     
    Banazir864 and Elhoim like this.
  10. Kruos

    Kruos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2014
    Messages:
    110
    I agree with your statement, but I think the chess comparison is too elogious, I would call it more a 'gamey' direction.
     
    Elhoim likes this.
  11. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    24,400
    Civ 5 and 6 do no such thing. There is no evidence of such an effort and the disjointed nature of the game's VCs vs mechanics vs AI does not imply a chess-like game.
     
  12. kaltorak

    kaltorak Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,520
    Location:
    Madrid
    I love you man, since I learnt civ5 from your videos, but I disagree. Many mechanics in civ6 and even 5 feel gamey towards winning or losing the game. From leader behaviours, to the removal of empire management aspects, to war beeing only worth if you go full out instead of just grabbing a key city, to tourism beeing just a score for winning... many small details that add up. I felt much more freedom in civ4. I want that city bc it has a lot of floodplains and with cottages it will be a powerhouse. And I declared war just bc of that city. now I just declare war if I want to eliminate a game rival. And they add loyalty which sounded awesome bc I thought it would be like civ4 culture. And it's the opposite, it makes capturing a single city even less desirable and going for full war or full peace even more important. Leader had also much more personality in civ4 IMO. You knew for sure isabel would be your friend as long as you had her religion. You know for sure mansa musa would be an awesome trade partner. you know for sure montezuma would attack you like crazy even if you were stronger. Leader agendas try to do that now, but I dont see it working like it did in civ4. And in civ5 it was worse, leaders were just trying to win the game.
    Another thing that takes away from the cool empire for me, is that building ANY city in civ6 is always good. Any crap city as long as you can place some disctricts is worth it. I loved to care about the land in civ4. I tried to take as many resources with each city as I could, creating good cities. Now its just about spamming any crap city.

    Like I said, just a lot of small things that add up, not a conspirancy or effort like you say to do it on purpose.

    I had much more fun with the empire game of civ4. While I like 1upt much more than stacks of doom and wouldnt go back to civ4.
     
    Elhoim likes this.
  13. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    Man, this just reminds me of how like every change Civ 5 made to the series was terrible. At least until expansions, but conceptually speaking it was such a regression. Ironically, 1upt is the only good thing....

    OTOH, vassals while a good concept, were also very badly implemented in 4. A very buggy mess, and proof that 2 expansions is never enough.
     
  14. bas1

    bas1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010
    Messages:
    8
    I believe Civ6 (with GS) is the best civ yet but still far from perfect; the implementation of new features is sloppy on some points

    *Districts - great feature but now the map looks to cluttered also with wonders on tiles. Also there you hardly have to build farms now as there is no place for them. In civ7 players need more space so they can place cities futher apart.
    *Alliances - what is the point if the entire world always hates you (fixed in GS)
    *Emergencies - very gamey (it feels much better with world congress in GS though)
    *Loyalty - I like the fact that AI no longer can build a city in the middle of your realm; but I don't like the idea that core cities can flip
    *Ages - needs more drawbacks; also it's to easy to get into a golden age
    *Climate change - same as above, needs to be more devastating. Also needs more interaction for example the option to force a player to lower emission
    *Tunnels - the fact that they are teleporters feels cheap
    *Future age - it's basically only GDR and science victory. The could just have skipped it.
     
  15. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,573
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    What? You learned civ 5 from TMIT? That is... impossible.

    You sure meant civ 4, or is there some Mr. HideTMIT?

    Always remember to put THE name responsible. Lest we forget...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 13, 2019
  16. Red_warning

    Red_warning Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2013
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    Lappland, Sweden
    Forcing an enemy civilization into becoming a puppet and also having it count towards your domination victory checklist seems like a very good way of reducing some of the tedium of prolonged warring, while also adding an interesting mechanic to use even if you got other victory types in mind.
     
  17. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    24,400
    What you feel and what is mechanically incentivized/actually occurs don't always align. AI leader behaviors in all of civ 4-6 *do not try to win*. It's not even kind of close. Just as predecessors threw with peace vassaling and handing away their tech for free, current AIs throw with arbitrary emergency choices and agendas that can cost them the game. It's the same stuff. Non-military victories remain pseudo victory conditions since any civ actually trying would just go to war to prevent someone winning another way...but the AI doesn't do this in SP and never did, not even in Civ 5 did it make choices consistently aligned with trying to win.

    Civ 4 culture is a pretty close parallel to loyalty. If you took one culturally developed city in Civ 4 you could be expected to either stuff a cost-prohibitive unit count into it or have it spend many turns in revolt being unproductive. If you wiped a nation out, no more of their culture existed. Very familiar to Civ 6.

    That statement just isn't consistent with the evidence of what happened in Civ 5 :p.

    Yeah Civ 4's expansion constraints were never decently matched from a variability/importance of decisions perspective.

    I did run a few Civ 5 LPs before abandoning it for years. I'm happy if people learned from that, but I was quickly surpassed by better players who kept at it longer in terms of stuff to learn. I even recommended Maddjinn at the time after abandoning doing videos of that game. It was a sad moment for me, but the game had just gotten too slow and frustrating. On the bright side, that's around when I started doing HOMM, and I suppose I have some HOMM 5 expansion content to restart and finish.

    Civ has never been the same since, and these days I just inch closer to something resembling a good DCSS player.
     
  18. Tiger Genocide

    Tiger Genocide Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2016
    Messages:
    244
    Gender:
    Male
    I have not played Civ4, but the vassalage system in Civ5 Vox Populi Mod is freaking amazing! Seeing my conquered foes getting salty with me over their taxes or doing dirty things behind my back makes the game super interesting and fun. Harold and Hiawatha are the worst vassals. :nono: sometimes I have to regulate!

    I love telling them to get over it and they usually get humbled but sometimes they don't.

    God bless the guys that made the Vox Populi Mod. Someday hopefully we will get a Civ6 version.
     
  19. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,275
    Gender:
    Male
    I have no idea who that is.
     
  20. Aristos

    Aristos Lightseeker

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,573
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Deep inside...
    Jon Shafer.
     

Share This Page