What does OT think of CIV VI?

[Mechanicalsalvation]

probably never going to get it:

 

[Paul in Saudi]

I think I may give up on Civ VI. I still have no idea what I am doing. I get warnings that some city needs more housing, I have no idea what to do. I miss knowing my relative ranking (#1 in Science or whatever). I don't like the map.

I got the latest Call of Duty and that is holding my attention. "See something, shoot at it." I got it.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that one of the first custom/community made CivVI leaderheads will be the duke of Orange (US LH).

 

[shadowplay]

The AI sends settlers across the map and settles them next to your capital. Shades of Civ3.

I'm disappointed we haven't seen a patch yet. I've gone back to Civ5 in the meantime.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I hate you.

Moderator Action: I'm choosing to see this as spam instead of flaming. Please don't prove me wrong on that front. One point infraction. - Vincour
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I played it a ton when it came out, made a detailed thread about space victories where we (iirc) broke all the records I had before that seen on the internet. the people rly did great work. There were a few t140 wins or smth ridic like that without Horse economy or just beyond broken strats.

Waiting for my new computer so I can play Civ VI without it taking 15 minutes to load up a game. I will probably waste a lot of hours on this game.

Shame the CFC community isn't as active with Civ Vi, CFC was one of the reasons I enjoyed playing Civ V as much as I did after all. Would love to see more challenge threads/community games, just any competitive or community aspects are needed, because this game is way too fking easy.

Where is @Acken when you need him.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

I am currently having trouble with Steam due to a recent Windows 10 update. I may return to Civ VI when things are shipshape. Or maybe not. Like Monopoly, Civ takes a long time to play. Lots of that time is the computer considering its options. Would turns be faster with an option to dumb-down the graphics? My computer is less than a year old. I need a weekend to play a game.

Like all other Civ generations, it tends to get in a rut. I tend to win by a space race victory in about 2010 while leading in all four areas. When I fire up the game I wonder why I bother. What I do like about it is I can do other things while the machine is processing. I tend to play while doing something else.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Graphics settings dont do much, but map size and # of AI affects turn-rollover speed like nothing else. It is a huge deal. Try playing on a small map instead of standard or large.

 

[Acken]

Shame the CFC community isn't as active with Civ Vi, CFC was one of the reasons I enjoyed playing Civ V as much as I did after all. Would love to see more challenge threads/community games, just any competitive or community aspects are needed, because this game is way too fking easy.

Where is @Acken when you need him.

A game needs a community to interest enough people to run challenges etc. A game needs to have a solid fundation to create that community. Right now civ6 is in that limbo where the fundation is way too shaky to interest (many) hardcore players. Like CivBE was/is. This means that exploit have to be tackled, AI improved (especially diplomacy) and a lot of little things reworked (district cost/benefits, tall vs wide, more interesting policies/techs) etc. Good gameplay is so backward in civ6 that it just hurt my soul trying to do it.

Like I said in another thread, we'll see at the expansion but for now I haven't played for a few months and don't miss it. But well... there's hope considering I shelved Civ5 after 50 hours until GK came out and Civ6 is at least a bit more interesting.

But what I worry about is that Civ6 don't need extra content like Civ5 did. It needs careful polish of everything in it more than anything and Firaxis is just terrible at doing that. Hell at this point I'd pay for an expansion bringing a good AI, good balance and just extra Civs...

At least fix the AI and let us mod the rest please...

 

[Snerk]

I played a game a month ago or so and the patching has improved the game significantly since the early build. Overall I think it's a pretty great instalment of a vanilla civ. I dislike the move to loads more various tiny boosts of all kinds available to you if you memorise them. It's the kind of microing I find boring. You can ignore it but then you're missing out so yeah.
I guess my main issue with the game is an unengaging late game. Civ5 vanilla had similar issues. But with the ideology/UN/tourism minigame, the late-game improved a lot. I hope civ6 will see something similar. The AI has issues but that's a constant in the civ series.
I'm probably keeping civ6 shelved until there's an substantial x-pack of some kind. Then we'll see.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

A game needs a community to interest enough people to run challenges etc. A game needs to have a solid fundation to create that community. Right now civ6 is in that limbo where the fundation is way too shaky to interest (many) hardcore players. Like CivBE was/is. This means that exploit have to be tackled, AI improved (especially diplomacy) and a lot of little things reworked (district cost/benefits, tall vs wide, more interesting policies/techs) etc. Good gameplay is so backward in civ6 that it just hurt my soul trying to do it.

just do your thing man, you owe the community nothing. civ 5, as you said, had so many great contributors like @consentient that are now gone with civ 6..

I personally hate the civ 6 boards. maybe because i'm a little elitist piece of.. but none of the discussion are really as in-depth as threads we had like "fastest science victory" on the civ 5 board.

just know that if you ever touch civ 6 I will play your mod and nothing but your mod, as I did in gen 5. haven't touched the vanilla game ever since the first version of ABM

 

[Kozmos]

The AI will never be fixed by the devs. They'll double down on graphical assets and move on. It's a pretty consistent industry pattern.

 

[Lexicus]

Still haven't played 6 at all. Started up a game of Civ IV on Emperor this weekend and roflstomped the AI with no challenge so thinking of moving up to Immortal, it would probably take a while to get comfortable at that level.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I picked it up mid May. I'm in my third game. Some of you might remember me posting about a challenge I've set myself. I'm going to play up through the levels, one randomly-rolled game at each level, and if i win all of the games, I will count myself as having beat the game. In other words, learn enough about the game to beat it on deity by my eighth game. I'm not allowed to consult the Strategy and Tactics board; I have to learn it all myself through trial and error. No replaying turns, also. I roll two starts at each level and have to choose between them which one I want to play at the end of turn one. (I hope this means I'll be able to avoid absolute dog starts at the higher levels; but if I roll two bad starts, I have to find a way to play out of one of them).

I won at settler. Germany spread Judaism throughout the world. I won at chieftan. I was going to try to learn the dynamics of a science victory, but Japan got enough tourism for a culture victory before really reaching that late era (it's okay, I learned the dynamics of a cultural victory). I'm now playing as Greece on warlord and am an age ahead of everyone else by mid game, so I'll win this game too, probably by science. These low-level victories are meaningless in themselves, of course. But I do think I'm learning the ins and outs of the game that will help me succeed once I reach the higher levels.

I like it pretty well. Unlike Snerk, I like the constant shuffling of civics cards. It's the kind of micro-ing that keeps me engaged. I think I'm getting the hang of districts and terrain development.

I don't experience one-more-turn-itis. Maybe because I'm being so deliberate with each turn I play that I've really slowed the game-play down. None of the three games has much lent itself to my exploring combat. Island starts in the first and third and a huge island continent with Germany far to the south in number 2.

 

[Snerk]

My general impression is that most people like the civics cards and trying to maximise various district bonuses and tech boosts and so forth. I just find it way too fiddly. Though not game breaking by any means. It has it's charms after all.

I feel I've mastered emperor pretty well so my next game will be immortal for sure. Although I fear I might be in trouble on that level unless learn to min/max quite a bit better. We'll see, like I said, might hold for a new game until there's some interesting DLC content or patch.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

(post)

I know I'm going to sound like such a condescending prick, but I honestly played my first game on Emperor, quit midway through because it the AI was a joke and then moved on to Deity where the AI is also a joke. Militarily it sucks and it simply does not execute any victory condition before turn 300. Of course this was like half a year ago, haven't played with all the new patches!

Your way of playing sounds like much more fun/rp'ing than mine though. Not trying to make you abandon it or smth.

 

[warpus]

Civ AI has always been a joke though.

The best AI I ever saw in a Civ game was a mod that made the barbarians into zombies. They would conquer islands and then send large invasion fleets around. Not always, but from time to time. They still didn't have invasion strategies down, but they were a lot better at military strategy than any computer player I've seen in a vanilla civ game.

I think what happens each time they make a new civ version is they hire an intern and ask him to just copy the AI code from the last game and sort out the kinks on the fly

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Civ IV AI is decent, way ahead of its time. Civ V with Acken Mod on Deity is brutal and probably only like three or four people in the entire world have beat it. Definitely the single most challenging Civ game out there imo.

 

[innonimatu]

The AI will never be fixed by the devs. They'll double down on graphical assets and move on. It's a pretty consistent industry pattern.

If civ VI is anything like the oh-pretty-graphics bog-slow Beyond Earth, I'll never even try it. Was very much disappointed with how crappy the trade-off performance >-> fancy graphics made that game.

 

[Akka]

Civ AI has always been a joke though.

I found Civ4 AI pretty good for an AI, all the while managing to the rather "role-playish" and understandable.

From this thread, I get the feeling that Civ6 is simply "meh", but long-time fans are trying very hard to like it.
Still not feeling any desire to try it. I think hat Civ5 really killed my interest of the franchise, and any game which is based on it can't lit the flame of my interest.