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

What are your "unpopular" opinions about Civ6?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Krajzen, Feb 24, 2019.

  1. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,476
    Location:
    Poland
    This was random example, my argument was "powerful long lived well documented empires are far more interesting" and it just happened there are far more of them in Eurasia.

    (by the way, going back in time makes Eurasia-Americas comparision even more asymmetric, compare Han Dynasty or Roman Empire with states of Americas in year 100BC :p )
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  2. montalaar

    montalaar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Messages:
    61
    my unpopular opinion is that maps are bad, escpecially after last update. they are crammed with too many features. already struggling AI could not place cities in good positions already. now many cities of AI are pure abominations, sometimes with few or no usable tiles altogether.

    it is so flawed logic... devs create some civ`s for one, specific feature, like mountains for inca. what happens next? they put mountains or map generator in a way, that mountains now are crammed everywhere. same story with lakes. less and less tiles for "normal" civs to to build improvements or districts, simply too few tiles to exist.

    bad maps.
     
    Fluphen Azine likes this.
  3. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,983
    Location:
    Gingerbread Cottage
    Not really. Powerful well documented empires I'll give you but given the fiercely competitive nature of European politics their empires were generally short lived.

    Compare feudal Europe with the Arab world, India or China at the same time. Europe was a backward backwater then.
     
    MooFreaky likes this.
  4. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    That's not culture-flipping, though - that was introduced in Civ IV purely as a way to steal cities. Civ VI is the only incarnation of the game that has a 'halfway house' where the cities are independent. Older Civ games had a civil war mechanic that could create a new faction (taken from among dead civs if there were any, or civs not in the game otherwise) - that's closer to what you're asking for. Similarly, Civ IV's vassalage only worked with factions that were once full civs.

    I don't think loyalty is that bad a representation even for overseas territories, though. Most overseas colonies that were established and survived were in areas that in Civ terms would only have had city-states to contend with, not major civs exerting loyalty pressure. Where people already had established settlements in an area of interest, Europeans typically just moved in and took them, building their own cities on the land only when it was already under their control.
     
  5. Gorbles

    Gorbles Load Balanced

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2014
    Messages:
    3,164
    Location:
    UK
    I can definitely understand arguments about influence, good or bad, but the whole point of Civilisation is writing your own history to me. To be bound by already-"powerful" civilisations only perpetuates the kind of scenario you'd see in real life. It's like saying let's remove the Seluecid Empire in Rome: Total War (note, not their previous success, given the general timeline of R:TW) because it's not accurate that they went on to wipe out Egypt (well, they would if I could ever get them out of their unhappiness loop, hah).

    By dividing countries by inclusion based on how they did in our timeline, in our history . . . well, not only does that establish an uncomfortable precedent going forward (how successful is successful enough, etc), but also by the general design of Civilisation (it's not particularly hard-hitting in terms of morality or going into depth about atrocities committed - heck, SMAC got the closest in the franchise with Drone treatment, and I rarely even bothered with that as a mechanic. Much easier to Empath it up instead) this risks taking all the "influential" civilisations without any of the "bad" they actually enacted.

    Also, personally, I love learning about factions, rulers and generally times of history that I was unaware of. Civilisation has been increasingly a fun, i.e. hobbyist source for me, for that.

    To finish, particularly on the note about empires always winning, or looking at things from a different viewpoint. That's the point! In Civilisation, anyone can be an empire! It's been that way since the first game, and it's fun to act out different fictional histories in that vein. If you introduce your own personal rankings of what empires were best, or what viewpoints would apparently come out with the best philosophy, you're making a completely different game.
     
    Imaus likes this.
  6. Sotof

    Sotof Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Messages:
    66
    Alright...

    - CIV VI has a way too big focus on the modern world and not enough on the literal thousands of years before industrialization.
    - CIV VI is not Old World centric enough. We don't have important nations like the Mughal, Austria or Denmark, yet we have tribes like the Cree.
    - I don't think colonies should be civilizations (America, Canada, Australia, Brazil, and so on).
    - I wish they would stop picking bad leaders for countries purely for representation (Kristina in particular comes to mind).
    - I wish they would stop making leaders ugly just because. Why did we need that fat lady stereotype in Nubia? Couldn't we have an attractive black lady? Sorry, but I like my game to be pretty.
     
  7. Buthera

    Buthera Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2018
    Messages:
    17
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Australia
    - I love the art style and greatly prefer it to V.
    - There should be a lot more Native Anerican civs in the game. The current roster kinda reflects poorly on a North American studio like Firaxis. The Iroquois at the very least are a must.
    - I want to see more left-field and downright unpopular leaders, with dark agey twists on their gameplay. I think it would fit well with the personality focus of VI.
    - I'm so glad Napoleon isn't a leader, I'm amazed by him like everyone else but so sick of seeing the little bugger in every historical war game.
    - I hope we get an indigenous Australian civ. I hope we get more unconventional civs full stop. There are a million other games where you can live out your imperialistic fantasies, this is and always has been a game where 6000 year old avatars nuke each other over Petra. You still get Sharpe reading Shakespeare, you can live with other people enjoying the Mapuche and Zulu.
     
    Victoria likes this.
  8. Naeshar

    Naeshar Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2016
    Messages:
    188
    Gender:
    Male
    However right from this backwater rose the powers that overshadowed the mighty centralized empires held by iron fist … which conservatively stood in their values and traditional technologies. The adaptability of the Europeans (not equal European states) to new ideas and technologies was the point. However this is not possible in the game. Large empires with many inhabitants were not the most inventive ones and could not stand against those adopting superior weapons.
    Civs gather science points individually, and unrealistically. Adopting muskets, building factories and accepting driven nuclear scientists created the world as we know it. Not the glorious Divine Emperor of ten million souls.

    Good. I wouldn't know of the Cree Confederacy otherwise either. This is a unpopular opinions thread, I think I can be critical.

    If Civ lets you play a historical "nation" and gives you specific traits, how is that not referring to the timeline? How can we create a new timeline if we assign the same properties to an empire, regardless of the circumstances? Just to think about.
     
  9. Fluphen Azine

    Fluphen Azine What is Fluphen Azine?

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,142
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I like the idea of you playing as a Civ and your leader changes throughout history.
    That would be fun.
    I agree and would like to enslave the Egyptians.
    I would also like to enslave the UA as well.
     
  10. OmegaDestroyer

    OmegaDestroyer Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2018
    Messages:
    470
    Gender:
    Male
    Korea, Australia, and Nubia all need to be revamped. Korea is absolutely boring. Australia and Nubia are paid DLC but should not feel like "pay to win" with superior advantages.

    Everything about Civ 6 is superior to Civ 5. I really like the later but it feels so outdated compared to the former.
     
  11. Fluphen Azine

    Fluphen Azine What is Fluphen Azine?

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,142
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Everything?
    The AI?
     
  12. Bearmanjew

    Bearmanjew Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Score may be the least exciting win condition, but because it's the most democratic win condition it is also the best. No nation receives direct bonuses to score, and it is far more representative of the how the world acts - there is no "winning" in real life just because you launched a spaceship or whatever. You look at the world and judge who is in the best condition at a given time.

    I really like the efforts of Firaxis to find leaders that they haven't picked before, even where the civ is re-used. The fact that a leader is so famous that everyone has heard of them should be a deterrent to picking them, not a feature, since they can use their leader choice as a chance to broaden our knowledge, and this applies doubly for their efforts to find appropriate female leaders. Go Catherine and Kristina!

    Possibly my experience with Paradox games have immunized me to this, but I have no issues whatsoever with the DLC. People complaining about the size and cost and all are going to find a deaf ear from me. If anything, I would back more civ packs, which do nothing but add civilizations and/or alternate leaders to the game. Completely optional for those who don't care, but nice for those who see something they want. And I would happily see development of the game continue for quite some time in the future, rather than make a new Civ so frequently. There are years of things to improve on if they wanted to.
     
  13. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,983
    Location:
    Gingerbread Cottage
    If you want to play a game about how Europe came to dominate the world play Europa Universalis.
    Civ is an alternative history game covering 6000 years and the entire world.
    For it to be dominated by European powers that were important for a couple of centuries is ridiculous.I don't want civs put in because of their absolute power. If we did that we could replace Rome with Belgium. Modern Belgium could wipe Romes legions out easily.
    What matters is comparative power and influence at the time the civ existed. So fine, England, France, America etc deserve to be in, but so do Aztec, Maya, Inca etc.
    If we were going for longevity it could only be on the basis of a continuing culture since states tend to be short-lived but that would account for China, Persia, India.
     
    MooFreaky and Imaus like this.
  14. Fluphen Azine

    Fluphen Azine What is Fluphen Azine?

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,142
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I don't mess with mods very much.
    However, I am pretty sure those guys mod leaders all the time.
    Those are free as far as I know.
    I do not know how well they work.
    I would like to hear from the community who actually add Leader Mods to their game and how it plays.
     
  15. Jewman

    Jewman Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    487
    Location:
    maryland land of crabs
    This may actually be a popular opinion but it is lame that the core european civs are either so generalistic (barbarossa) or hyper-specific on one particular aspect of their society (catherine/peter) or bad (victoria).

    I wish I could play an interesting version of Germany/France and that England wasn't so bad and Russia wasn't so good at faith and instead was something more characteristic of Russia, it doesn't feel like russia to me i guess.

    Another unpopular opinion to kind of build on the prior ones, I think Workshop of the World was a step in the right direction. I love the idea of England being an industrial power, paving the world with their military engineers and strategic resources... it just sucks (for now), some tweaking (i know england's been tweaked to death) and it could be better and make the immersion more worth it.

    Lastly, I like that underrepresented civs were included but i would not miss them even a little bit if they weren't, for example mapuche, cree, georgia, scythia. All of those could be replaced by other civs and it wouldn't matter a bit. Inca to me are a core civ and if they weren't so darn awesome I would be upset it took this long for them to be included in game. Also, I am not upset about euro-centrism, just wish the core Asian civs were more interesting India and China are lacking a bit. China for such a large interesting society always seems to get stuck with weird bonuses in Civ.
     
    Siptah likes this.
  16. RohirrimElf

    RohirrimElf Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,036
    - there should be an option to block certain civs from appearing cause i do not like the music sountrack
    - barbs should be able to capture city states and become rogue nations. Leaders that are unpopular or controversial on world history. Like Stalin, Hitler and Mao. With their own leader animations and plenty of regular insults.
    - slavery should be a thing in civ 6
    - there should be an option to wage small scale wars to be able to expand your borders without capturing cities. This should also be an option in a peace deal (grabbing land)
    - religions and nations that are traditionally are at odds with another should have diplo hits and extra grievances
    - more epic chess quotes
    - give more tribute to Stephen Hawking in civ 6
     
  17. Ammar

    Ammar King

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Messages:
    629
    I want to go back to the blank slate model of earlier Civs. Don't limit Civilizations to only ever excel in one particular stereotyped way - if you want to distinguish Civilizations let it be through development in the game and not through the leader selection screen.

    1 UPT needs to go. Permanently. Maybe try 1 APT (army per tile composed of multiple units) instead with unlimited civilian units per tile.

    Civ 5 and Civ 6 are overloaded with game mechanics, I don't want to micromanage rock bands, archaeologist or be forced to theme museums manually. It's mostly just busy-work. Give us fewer, but much more significant boni from things like religion and districts. All pantheon boni should be closer in effect to Goddess of the Harvest, then a minor +1 or +10% bonus to some mechanic. Many more examples, like Military Engineers being a separate unit from Workers.

    Most of the Gathering Storms additions are unbalanced or do not affect the game in a meaningful way.

    Governors do not fit the game thematically. We have uniques civs, leaders, cities, wonders and religions, but somehow each Civilization has the same set of Governors? They are also badly balanced.

    For city management try out a combination of districts, tile improvements and sliders (inspired by MoO 1).

    The central production model of Civ 6 is broken.

    Civ needs much stronger catch-up mechanics and pull-down-the-leader mechanics to finally make the later eras interesting.
     
    Naeshar likes this.
  18. Bradypus

    Bradypus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2019
    Messages:
    83
    • Rock Bands shouldn't require faith to purchase. Why must faith be a requirement for a cultural victory?
    • Arabia shouldn't get more science because of a religion which historically has been very detrimental for science - particularly in Arabia.
    • I think the +era score selections following a new dark/normal/golden age are totally lackluster.
    • Colors changing depending on dark/normal/golden age is annoying. At least for that long at a time.
    • Queen Wilhelmina shouldn't be that fat.
     
  19. Bearmanjew

    Bearmanjew Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    This is unpopular? Is this not just common sense? And the same thing applies to naturalists as well.

    I play with mods on my own sometimes, but it can be a lot of hassle to find ones that aren't done by people who just want to make their home country OP and when my friends do multiplayer with me we turn off all gameplay mods anyway. They don't like them as much as me. I think some of them think that a modded experience isn't as "legitimate" as the vanilla unmodded experience. So having an officially done option would be nice for me. I realize it would not be for everyone though.
     
  20. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,983
    Location:
    Gingerbread Cottage
    I don't think so. Black Sabbath don't make me immediately think faith. It doesn't make sense for naturalists either IMO. Problem is using production or buying them with gold wouldn't make any more sense so I can live with it.
     

Share This Page