since Civ 4 the games have gone from macro strategy to more and more micromanagement. Civ 5 they went to one unit per tile, which was in many ways a nice change, even though the AI was less adept at it than at the simpler doomstack combat
Civ 6 they went further and made city management / tile management much more involved, taking a board game-inspired approach that made city management much more complex without adding a significant amount of depth at the macro level. in my opinion, counting tiles to figure out where to put your factory is not strategy... district placement is at the heart of the game, but Civ 6 is full of these solvable puzzles in which there is a concrete, mathematical best answer
but this micro approach to tile yields is cooked into the rest of the game. just a few examples...
- instead of big government changes you need to consider carefully, you change your civics every time you research a culture (unless, god help you, you forget). and in the endgame you will have 12+ civics active at a given time that you must change out to make the most of things like unit upgrades & worker construction
- instead of trade routes being automatic, you have to sift through a list of literally hundreds of possibilities to find the one that has the biggest number. this is not strategy, it's simple arithmetic
- diplo alliances do not function as alliances, they're just there to get bonus tile yield points on trade routes on such. in Civ 4, you would have pretty serious alliance/vassal networks by the endgame, which would lead to massive world wars involving most of the world split between 2-3 factions. doesn't happen in Civ 6
overall, there is little meaningful macro strategy in Civ 6, it's all just micro. once you understand the systems and how to do them the right way, the game becomes a simple matter of rinse & repeat. not much thinking involved, beyond the simple & repetitive math of how your going to maximize your yields