what most annoys you about Civ 6?

[Yzman]

I find diplo quite easy myself... earn diplo points thru emergencies and save the two science/culture diplo points in the trees to trigger them at the right time... on huge maps I find there are too many emergencies making it easy to earn those points, regardless of being voted down in congress

Yeah I personally don't have an issue with it. I think most people aren't being strategic with it. If you just try to brute force, there is a chance that you will lose just because AI votes against you, but not always. I manage to still outvote them sometimes. But mostly just time things right so you sneak over the top.

 

[Yzman]

Two bazillion updates but the button for city ranged attack is still always obscured by the garrisoned unit.

It just makes no sense. At all. Never did.

Other than that I'm fine.

This drives me insane. I always have to mess around with it or wait until the end and press the button that appears to activate it. Super annoying. I was convinced I was missing something.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Honestly it’s 1 UPT plus the low movement allowance

 

[nzcamel]

The low movement allowance is brilliant. It makes movement far more tactical than it has ever been before.
And I suspect it's mostly players newer to the franchise who dislike it, as before Civ 5 it was unusual for any land unit (outside of cav) to have more than 1 base movement point.

 

[Linklite]

The low movement allowance is brilliant. It makes movement far more tactical than it has ever been before.
And I suspect it's mostly players newer to the franchise who dislike it, as before Civ 5 it was unusual for any land unit (outside of cav) to have more than 1 base movement point.

As a new player, I don't oppose the low movement allowance. I'm not keen on increasing it either - units often feel too powerful relative to cities, increasing MPs will just exaggerate that. The problem is the combined rigid 1 UPT and pathfinding that makes large unit movements micro management hell. I think more intelligent pathfinding would be better.

 

[aieeegrunt]

The low movement allowance is brilliant. It makes movement far more tactical than it has ever been before.
And I suspect it's mostly players newer to the franchise who dislike it, as before Civ 5 it was unusual for any land unit (outside of cav) to have more than 1 base movement point.

Its ridiculously tedious. There is nothing tactical about it at all, it’s basically doing a sliding tile puzzle every time you move your units

It was stupid in Civ5, and it’s stupid here too. You got much more interesting situations requiring a lot more thought in previous titles, and the AI could actually pose a credible threat.

It’s rather damning that mods that up the move allowance and/or stacking make the AI a lot tougher

Also, I’ve been playing this franchise since the original Civ 1. This game has the worse combat of the whole series

 

[nzcamel]

As a new player, I don't oppose the low movement allowance. I'm not keen on increasing it either - units often feel too powerful relative to cities, increasing MPs will just exaggerate that. The problem is the combined rigid 1 UPT and pathfinding that makes large unit movements micro management hell. I think more intelligent pathfinding would be better.

I think a simple solution that would help re pathfinding, among other things is dropping the 1UPT for Civs who aren't at war with each other. There is zero need for it in that case, and I really hope they consider that if they want to keep 1UPT in Civ 7.
i.e. I can still only have one of unit type X on hex Y, and the Dutch can likewise only have one of unit type X on hex Y, but we can both have those units on hex Y at the same time, unless we go to war.

Its ridiculously tedious. There is nothing tactical about it at all, it’s basically doing a sliding tile puzzle every time you move your units

It was stupid in Civ5, and it’s stupid here too. You got much more interesting situations requiring a lot more thought in previous titles, and the AI could actually pose a credible threat.

It’s rather damning that mods that up the move allowance and/or stacking make the AI a lot tougher

I don't know why you'd say it was stupid in 5, as Civ units have never moved faster than they do in 5. And they were all slower again pre-Civ 5, with only scouts and workers (of non-cav land units) starting with more than one movement point in 4; and less again previously. It sounds to me like you want a very different game if you want units moving even faster than they did in 5. Changing unit speeds do a few things. The faster they move the smaller the maps get, and the stronger they are as an investment vs other things as @Linklite points out. I'm not saying a different type of game shouldn't do that; but movement speed does need to be balanced carefully.

Of course it's more tactical! In Civ 5, your first move was often a freebee of sorts as you could usually move a second time onto any terrain. Which lead largely to the second move often being onto hills or woods for a more defensive position. In 6 you have to weigh up if you really want that defensive position -that should take up time to set up- or whether you want more movement. The latter is far far more tactical and interesting than the former, which was a no brainer every single time. River crossings using up a units whole movement (well, any unit with 3 or less I think?) adds yet another consideration into how and when you cross them.

 

[Aristos]

In 6 you have to weigh up if you really want that defensive position -that should take up time to set up- or whether you want more movement. The latter is far far more tactical and interesting than the former, which was a no brainer every single time. River crossings using up a units whole movement (well, any unit with 3 or less I think?) adds yet another consideration into how and when you cross them.

How can it be tactical in the complete absence of anything resembling opposition?

 

[nzcamel]

How can it be tactical in the complete absence of anything resembling opposition?

You well know that how well the AI performs is a different topic. Of course one way of managing movement can lead to a more tactical situation than the other, regardless of the ability of the AI to utilise that. That the ball is being dropped in one area should be no reason to not have better rule sets in others. Also MP is still part of this game.

 

[slavaskii]

Barbarians are my biggest annoyance in Civ VI, but is it possible for an annoyance to be just so annoying that sometimes you want to throw the entire game? Or does that make it something more than just merely annoying?

The problem with barbarians, as many have said, is that they're more of a threat than the AI. I don't know how they managed to code one right and not the other, but barbarians are always incredibly strong and know exactly how to take a city. They don't fool around like the AI, and what shocks me the most is they actually bring along the right units to siege the city. Why doesn't the AI do this? Last game, Korea surprise warred me and sent two knights right to my capital; they instantly died, and they had no backup units whatsoever. Fast forward to the late game, and here comes an onslaught of barbarians - two bombards, two field cannons, two infantry, and one battering ram. All this for a periphery city that I didn't even realize was scouted by barbs.

While I love how barbarians are actually a challenge, their spawn rate needs to be seriously adjusted to make them manageable in the early game. It is simply not fun to deal with them on turn 15; they should be unable to scout, perhaps, for a bit longer. Another idea would be to give them a combat bonus when attacking cities, because they're rather unpredictable and can level one within two turns if you hadn't prepared for them (and why would you? who would expect 5 of the most powerful units of the era showing up out of nowhere?).

I don't think we'll ever be getting more updates/fixes for this game, but if we do, barbarians should be at the very top of the list. They just make the game super RNG, and it's really frustrating when they randomly appear with the potential to absolutely ruin everything. Without anything else to worry about (districts, for example) barbarians behave the way the AI should with the added benefit of surprise.

 

[Zegangani]

Actually, the only random things about barbarians are the locations they spawn in, the regular Units they get (not the Attack forces, read below about that) and perhaps how their Technology research(/copying) work.

Barbarian Camps send Scouts to explore the Map for Cities (Potential Targets), and once they discover a City they return back to their Camp and give the info about the target (acting as real scouts), so that the Camp will spawn Mili Units (based on Era/Difficulty, between 3-6 Units with tactically balanced (not equal) number of each Unit Type - thats coded, so its not like that they decide that) that will then attack the targeted City. So Scouts are the Main cause of the Barbarian Attacks, if you kill the scout before it gets to its Camp, then there won't be an Attack from its Camp.

The Reason why Barbarians are militarily more effective than AI Civs, is that Barbarians don't have to worry about diplomacy and stuff, their only task is what I stated above, so nothing really complicated. AI Civs have a lot to consider (not to forget that they don't get their decisions hardcoded), but they really need a better tactical behavior, though.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Maybe the AI SHOULD be more hardcoded, the “natural” approach is a clear failure

 

[Zegangani]

Maybe the AI SHOULD be more hardcoded, the “natural” approach is a clear failure

Yes, at least for Battles/Attacks (not necessarily War as a whole), City Management/Infrastructure (building / placing), Government/Policies and Trade(/Deals) Routes. Diplomacy and Victory Approach have so many variables that's nearly impossible to harcode for even most of possible situations.

 

[CromulentRomulan]

On a macro level the thing that annoys me the most is that the end game of Civ being boring has been a recognised aspect of the game for a few iterations and yet no thought has gone into how to make it more compelling.
What annoys me about Civ 6 is never feeling like the difficulty is challenging, only feeling like it is brute force and cheap.
On a micro level the thing that drives me up the wall in Civ 6 are early barbarian camps spawning right beside your territory in the fog of war. The scout is within immediate line of sight of your city and so the camp begins spawning barbarians. Aside from putting units to cover line of sight of all 3 corners of your initial city there is nothing you can do about this. If the camp spawns you are dealing with a horde early. I invariably restart those games because its no fun being disadvantaged by something that you can only react to

 

[Mr_PeaCH]

I want to love Ley Lines completely and without reservation. But it annoys that I cannot build anything on top of them. Couldn't these hexes allow any of the 'unique improvements'? Not to mention that you CAN have improvements on ley line hexes so long as the improvement is down before you learn about them. So we know they CAN. How come they don't?

 

[KingPiggyXXI]

Well, it's the same reason why when you find Uranium in Woods, you can't go and build a Lumber Mill there (but previous ones will stay). So we don't know that we can, because we normally can't. I would assume that the only way to allow improvements to be built there would be to go to every single Improvement and manually allow them to be placed on Ley Lines, which is going to take a hefty amount of work.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I want to love Ley Lines completely and without reservation. But it annoys that I cannot build anything on top of them. Couldn't these hexes allow any of the 'unique improvements'? Not to mention that you CAN have improvements on ley line hexes so long as the improvement is down before you learn about them. So we know they CAN. How come they don't?

Bad design. Seriously the sheer...Boardgameyness of Civ6 is it’s biggest flaw

 

[Alexis Layton]

In my case it’s the instability of the game. It crashes, a lot. It’s particularly weird when it crashes when nothing is happening, such as when a loading screen is up and I go to the other room for half an hour.

 

[Luddify]

The idiotic World Congress, by a mile.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

The idiotic World Congress, by a mile.

Yeah, I wish I could skip the world congress.