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

Why I love Civ VI already, and other observations....

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by StinkBait, Oct 28, 2016.

  1. StinkBait

    StinkBait Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    17
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Classified
    I’ve played three games so far on Civ VI. The first one lasted maybe 30 turns, as Germany didn’t like me right next door and promptly wiped me out. The second one, as Scythia, is ongoing, as I repel constant warring nations. The third is America, where I’m winning a domination victory if only to shut up a whiny AI.

    I love this game! Here’s why, in no particular order:

    We can name units again!

    “Barbarians” are back. (WTF was up with “Brute,” anyway….)

    Sean Bean!

    Eureka moments are like mini-quests, and helps guide your tech development in unique ways.

    Automated units stop when there’s opportunity or trouble.

    Great People with unique traits!

    Builders’ instant results

    Gorgeous map – and much cleaner roads (i.e. trade routes) from Civ V

    Government policies! Very cool customization feature.

    “Linked” escort formation!

    After-battle scorch marks…nice touch.

    Melee units can attack naval units from land! Finally!

    Districts now mean some thought as to how you lay out your cities and in what form you want it to take, based on geography.


    Some other observations:

    AI is still quirky. For example, Pericles’ Greece always started wars with me, and then denounced ME for taking his cities! (You mess with the bull you get the horns, schmuck-o.) Can’t he see it’s HIS fault? I had to wipe him out - he just wouldn't shut up.

    Units sometimes hard-to-locate on map when their icons are “ghosted.”

    In an expansion pack, could we possibly transport small ships over land? I’m not talking Battleships, but Galleys surely, in order to access frozen-in seas long before submarines. It would be helpful.

    Some of the quotes are great, some expected, and some totally off-the-wall. Marie Osmond? George Carlin? (surely not the comedian, right?) But I think we can all agree the Monty Python “watery tart with a sword” line from Holy Grail was long overdue!

    It’s always interesting how at least one of the female leaders has to be hot. In IV it was Joan of Arc (if I remember correctly.) In V it was no-doubt Theodora, who just oozed sexy (although you could make the argument for Catherine, too.) And now in VI it’s a toss-up between Cleopatra or Gorgo (I’m liking the latter.)

    Expansion always means new leaders and new Civs. For America’s second leader I’d like to suggest Ronald Reagan, aka the Gipper. Traits: opposes government forms unlike his own (especially Communism,) respects a modern military (running around with bows in the Industrial era will get you mocked,) and possesses extra charisma towards other leaders. FDR, Washington, and Lincoln have all been done already.

    Please don’t do more Civs just for the sake of having more. In V the Celts were a joke. (Boadicea was a great General, no doubt, and in VI she’s where she should be.) Two Native American tribes? (Yet neither were the Cherokee, who actually had a modern form of government.) Venice?? Someone at Firaxis lost a bet, right?

    I don’t know how you keep making this game better, but I’ve lost a lot of sleep this first week, and I love it!
    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=788424497
     
    Nefelia, fatgordy, oakdragon and 2 others like this.
  2. Frostedthread2

    Frostedthread2 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2013
    Messages:
    19
    Kinda trivial reasons, really. I don't understand why people feel the need to crap on Civ V just to make Civ 6 look better in comparison. Civ V with all the expansions is a great game, and no civs were a joke imo, they were very diverse. I like Civ 6 and and all, but it still has tons of issues, and I won't justify it by crapping on Civ V. This hate for Civ V is all of a sudden too, people used to hate it Vanilla but loved it with the expansions. I think it's people trying to justify Civ 6. Also, I personally think Shepherd was a way way better narrator.
     
    idjit likes this.
  3. manu-fan

    manu-fan Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,005
    I think that a great summing up. I'm having a great time too. Just on my second game. The first was going fine, as the Aztecs, but I just moved to another Mac with more memory. Rolled Ghandi and am having trouble staying peaceful :)
     
  4. gunnerxtr

    gunnerxtr King

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2003
    Messages:
    784
    Location:
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Celts have been in Civ for as long as I've been playing (Civ2)
     
  5. Xger

    Xger Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    510
    Location:
    Denver
    Agreed until these points. More civs is better, nearly always. And Reagan is highly unlikely to be chosen (polarizing figure, impact/legacy still unknown fully, many other leaders such as FDR, Jackson, Adams, Wilson, Truman, even JFK, and the usual two).Interesting that you pick Venice as a joke, when it was one of the more unique civs in V.
     
  6. Staler87

    Staler87 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    267
    Location:
    Right now? Computer Chair.
    Your two choices of civs to mock is kinda interesting. I will admit the Iroquois were not the most historically important civ and I'm not sure if they should be in the game but it is impossible to deny that they didn't have a modern form of government. You could argue that the united states government was at least partially based off their system. I will agree that the Shoshone are fairly odd.

    Venice is also pretty odd. You know they were the largest trading power in Europe for a certain period of time (maybe the world although I don't know enough to say that without a high measure of doubt)?

    You could have picked on a nation like Brazil that really has done very little of historical significance.

    Reagan is a weird choice as he is a leader that actually did very little that was tangibly 'good'. He is accredited with ending the cold war but really just was lucky enough to be around at the time when it was going to end anyways. He is accredited with growing the economy when all he did was increase the gap between the working class and the ultra-rich and actually didn't really raise the standard of living. Plus he pumped up the national debt, despite claiming to be fiscally responsible, and probably initiated American interventionism that has become a mess today. Oh and I forgot to mention illegal slush funds although that's more of a political thing.
     
  7. coffee junkie

    coffee junkie Tech Hippie

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2006
    Messages:
    446
    Location:
    Europe
    I fully agree. Why for hell to crap on Civ V ??? I felt in love with Civ V and Brave New World and I'm not going to trash it now that Civ VI is out.

    I still feel more in immersion with Civ V than Civ VI ... I love playing with state cities in Civ V : not in Civ VI ... I enjoyed the graphics of Civ V ( except cities which are ugly ) and I hate the flashy terrains of Civ VI, even I enjoy playing Civ VI ... the list could be much much longer but crapping Civ V is not an option.
     
    idjit and Frostedthread2 like this.
  8. Staler87

    Staler87 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    267
    Location:
    Right now? Computer Chair.
    Just go onto the civ IV forums and you will realize that a lot of people dislike civ V and prefer civ IV and have been saying this for a long time. If you have just been on the civ V forums you wouldn't likely realize this but these people have also ordered civ VI and are now discussing it. A lot of people, including myself, don't think civ V is a great game and this is entirely unconnected to civ VI coming out.
     
  9. coffee junkie

    coffee junkie Tech Hippie

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2006
    Messages:
    446
    Location:
    Europe
    So what ? People love Civ VI because it reminds the good old Civ IV ? Good ! I won't argue. There are too people around who loved ( and still love ) Civ V and I don't see why crapping it. The only reason I see to prefer Civ IV to Civ V is the modding part. And it is an excellent reason. But as a long time ( Civ II ) player, I won't be ashamed to claim my love to Civ V and my perplexity in front of Civ VI ... Maybe I won't say this anymore after few months, but as already said, crapping Civ V is not an option.

    Crapping Civ V and the lack of facilities to mod Civ V is surely why I didn't come these last years on Civ Fanatics. I'm not sure it won't be the same with Civ VI .....................
     
    Frostedthread2 likes this.
  10. StinkBait

    StinkBait Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    17
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Classified
    I wasn't crapping on V. I love V! I played it up until last Wednesday and "ended" on my biggest Domination victory of all time as Casimir. VI has tweaked a lot and improved things like the government policies and Religious Victory, but of course it's not perfect.
     
    Frostedthread2 likes this.
  11. StinkBait

    StinkBait Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    17
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Classified
    I'm always amused that Ghandi is so nuke-happy...
     
  12. StinkBait

    StinkBait Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    17
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Classified
    A agree Reagan's recent enough that they're may be some hard feelings left, but none of the Civ leaders were perfect people (far from it...). I honestly can't think of another good American leader that hasn't been done yet. James Monroe? The era of Good Feelings? His life was more remarkable than his Presidency, however. Certainly not Jackson, or Grant. (Grant as a Great General - of course!) Most of the 19th century Ohio presidents were political puppets (which to this day is why it's hard to name all 6,)
    with the exception of William McKinley, who was very popular and could have gone on to be a great president if he hadn't been assassinated (which is how we got TR in the first place.)
    Woodrow Wilson, maybe? Ike? JFK? What do you think?
     
  13. Xger

    Xger Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    510
    Location:
    Denver
    It's less to do with "hard feelings" and more to do with the fact that Reagon was only 30 years ago, and he's been so idealized by conservatives that his true legacy still remains to be seen. 30 years probably isn't enough to start, then add a hyper-partisan effort to boost his image and it's just too soon.

    I listed several options: Wilson, Truman, JFK, and I could add others such as Madison and Jefferson. Eisenhower could lead a more militaristic America. Heck, even Taft as the only President to become a Supreme Court justice could have an interesting leader with the civics and policies in this game.
     
  14. Big J Money

    Big J Money Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,026
    There are lots of little 'nice touches' in Civ VI that are easy to take for granted.

    For example: the little informational toasts that pop up and say something like "Your trader told you that the Aztec..." is thematically fun and also lets you know that you are getting info from the Aztecs because you have a trade route connected there.
     
  15. Staler87

    Staler87 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    267
    Location:
    Right now? Computer Chair.
    JFK would be a better choice largly because the shroud of nostalgia has left the American public blind to his mistakes in office. He would be much less controversial than Reagan, and probably was a much better leader even if he did start the Vietnam war.
     
  16. alaric1112

    alaric1112 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    92
    Location:
    PA U.S.A.
    I love it so far And I really liked 5 also. I really think this can be the best ever they just have to balance it and fix diplomacy.
     
  17. Grotius

    Grotius Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Messages:
    409
    I liked IV and V, and I really like VI. Yes, things need work: the AI, diplomacy, the UI, religious victory, a thousand smaller things. But the new systems really appeal to me: districts, adjacency bonuses, limited-charge builders, social policy cards, two tech trees, and (for me) the map and graphical look. I can't stop playing. :)
     
    alaric1112 likes this.
  18. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    438
    One thing I really like but hasn't received much attention is the new concept of 'continents' unlike in V 'continent' does not simply mean a land-mass separated by water. Even on a pangea map there are at least two active continents!

    So now you never have to waste your ability if it is continent specific unlike in V where one roll could make your unique ability useless.
     
  19. Nefelia

    Nefelia Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    458
    Congrats on derailing the topic. The OP mentioned a couple of improvements over Civ V, but in no way was he even close to 'crapping' on Civ V. Put the pitch-fork down and relax a bit.


    @OP: I'm glad you are enjoying the game, and your enthusiasm is a breath of fresh air. Don't worry about the forum grumps. :)
     
  20. orasis

    orasis Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    438
    I want Pierce to be the leader of the Americans.
     

Share This Page