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

Will Civ6 punish players for expansion?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by historix69, Jun 23, 2016.

  1. Magil

    Magil Monarch

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,618
    It was really only like that in BNW, and I think the tech cost for each city was a way of them throwing up their hands and giving up on trying to balance ICS any other way. Culture costs have increased with empire size since vanilla, and before tourism tall was better at all times for culture. It's only even slightly debatable because of great works.
     
  2. Socrates99

    Socrates99 Bottoms up!

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Messages:
    986
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Michigan
    Sure for unlocking sopols but if you're able to keep up with wonders wide definitely can churn out tourism like mad. Especially once archeology hits. I think that'd be the route to go if they truly want to balance it. Use culture for one and science for the other.
     
  3. Felis Renidens

    Felis Renidens Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Messages:
    542
    Location:
    Israel
    They hinted something like this in one of the talks. I think science wide\ culture tall rather than the other way around is more intuitive but perhaps it's a necessity because:
    a) wide + science will lead to snowballing because conquest will lead to more science, better units and more conquest and with tall science\wide culture tall will be able to defend itself with a smaller more advanced army against well-organized hordes that will still have a chance because of civics.
    b) wide will need more advanced governments just to manage itself and will benefit more from civic bonuses and will probably be able to get more great works\ archaeology\ tourism.

    Perhaps I'm just used to science coming from trade and culture related to big shiny cities. I think one of the problems with BNW was changing from wide science tall culture to wide culture (or at least tourism) tall science without warning (and without a good civics system to support it).
     
  4. Ikael

    Ikael Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2005
    Messages:
    873
    I always considered that "reversal" a little tad weird. I mean, I do get where the developers are coming from: You need to make both tall and wide strategies viable, you need to put some anti snowball mechanism on place, and ideally, you would need to make different flavours for each type of gameplay style.

    Perhaps is just me, but I always related cultural gameplay with megacities and wonder collectathons, not with widespread empires with small cities inside their frontiers. Culture has always been, afterall, about cities that everyone wanted to emulate (Rome, Athens, Mecca, New York, Shangai, etc) rather than about having the biggest frontiers (Uzbekistan, Canada or Nigeria are not exactly known for their big cultural influence, afterall).
     
  5. Socrates99

    Socrates99 Bottoms up!

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Messages:
    986
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Michigan
    But if you notice, most of those cities you named have been part or even capitals of large empires. I mean, sure its possible to think of tourism bases from small nations but the really well known ones with long history are or were major components of big empires.
     
  6. Felis Renidens

    Felis Renidens Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Messages:
    542
    Location:
    Israel
    Well, even in BNW a huge empire by itself won't be enough. You'll have placeholders and multipliers but if your museums are empty and your broadcast towers only broadcasting soap operas nobody will come to your hotel. On the other hand if you manage to dig or loot artwork people will come to see it. Either that or getting Great People. Having many cities is not enough. Having many cities each with it's own unique cathedral or a art display or great work + touristic facilities can work.

    Still, I'm not fond of tourism as a way to victory. It makes culture a passive victory where you just sit back and build your cities and you'll get it eventually. I hope that in 6 I'll have to work to get it like in Civ4 and 5 before BNW.
     
  7. Minor Annoyance

    Minor Annoyance Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,247
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario
    I we assume wide has a higher total population I can see why wide would be cultural and tall scientific.
    Do advances scientifically you only need a few geniuses to understand and create new things and the rest of society can just use them. Everyone can use a radio, a gun and read a newspaper, but without having any idea how a radio works, aerodynamic or ballistics, or how to build a printing press.
    Culture is hard to quantify though, but it's more shared ideas so you need many people behind it for it to transform a society. Meanwhile there are people who hate science but are talking about the evils of science from an iPhone that exists from science.
     
  8. Socrates99

    Socrates99 Bottoms up!

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Messages:
    986
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Michigan
    Hasnt culture pretty much always been a "build this stuff and wait" victory? I mean the tourism mechanic was definitely more interesting than just collecting SoPols.
     
  9. Magil

    Magil Monarch

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,618
    While I think BNW's culture victory is probably the most interesting take on it, in IV a large part of getting a quick cultural victory was collecting religions so you could build as many of the +50% culture mega-temples as possible. There was some empire management to it. But again, I think BNW's tourism take is more interactive and less turtling.

    I will again emphasize that I still think wide versus tall is a load of crap though, you should always be rewarded for expanding your empire so long as you have the economy to support it. The trick should be getting the economy to support it (whatever aspect of your economy you're paying to support it).

    I think using cultural progression as a check to expansion can work so long as it's possible to overcome it. The problem with V's system is that it was nearly impossible to make cities that were conquered or settled past a certain date produce enough science to overcome the % increase in tech costs. It simply takes too long to grow and build in V.
     
  10. Felis Renidens

    Felis Renidens Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Messages:
    542
    Location:
    Israel
    Before BNW to have enough policies before going to space I usually needed to take piety instead of rationalism and focus on culture rather than science buildings - And then I had to build a project and if I wanted I could still try to win some other way by not building it. With BNW I have to hold myself and not build hotels or not get theming bonuses. If I do all the stuff I enjoy doing I'll have a cultural victory (or diplomatic).

    It was even worse in 3 where having all wonders meant culture victory. It was better in 4 because I had to spread wonders and religious buildings between 3 cities. Too spread or too centralized wouldn't work.
     
  11. Minor Annoyance

    Minor Annoyance Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,247
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario
    Wide vs tall would have worked if it was a choice of building great cities in the best locations vs building many cities in any location instead of the best choice being to build 4 and no more with the last update and spam cities with the initial release.
     
  12. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    24,732
    No, you need something to create a disincentive to unchecked expansion. That does not implicate "tall needs to be viable". More stuff should always be better in a vacuum, though getting there not necessarily so easy.
     
  13. stiiknafuulia

    stiiknafuulia Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2016
    Messages:
    603
    Just no science or culture penalty per city this time around, pretty please! It's such a ham-fisted way of adding balance; it basically spells out 'we couldn't figure out a proper mechanic, so have a dull punishment instead'. :sad::mad: Even if the penalty is modest enough that it's still worth it to found a new city, it just feels like shooting yourself in the foot after hitting the target. It needs to go and if it's included in Civ VI, I will mod it out as a first thing, balance schmalance! ;)
     
  14. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,229
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    I still think that a Stability counter a la RFC is a good way to go.

    Instead of slowing you down you lose control and cities gain independence (which opens up door for others to conquer them and you to gain warmonger penalties as a reuslt of your negligence).

    You could also re-implement buildings such as Courthhouse that increase stability and bring back the function of Forbidden Palace that raise Stability in nearby cities...

    Or.. something along those lines.
     
  15. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    You are on these forums precisely because of a Canadian. ;)

    Nothing is more cultured than Civ. :D
     
  16. sugerdady87

    sugerdady87 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2006
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    That disincentives should be other Civs getting mad and declaring war. Nothing else. If I have a bigger army, then I can claim more land. Might should make right.
     
  17. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,504
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    I believe Civ5 proved what making tall empires viable is a wrong way to go. Tall empires ignore expansion and conquest completely, which could lead to quite boring things.

    I'd say some other things need limitations - like too early expansion or military snowballing.
     
  18. spfun

    spfun Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    655
    I consider no war Tall to be fun though and wide/war to be extremely boring. Each to there own.

    I will be disappointed if Tall isn't viable in Civ 6. I would like 4 cities to be fine but should need some military units now. I rarely ever built military in Civ 5.
     
  19. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,504
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    I'd say it should be possible to win, but more difficult than with more cities.

    Expansion and conquest require effort, settling minimal amount of cities don't require any effort. This should be compensated.
     
  20. qwerty25

    qwerty25 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    399
    I think we need to change our minds of what "tall" and "wide" could mean. As stealth_nsk said, you can't have a few cities be more powerful than more cities. As that provides a disincentive to grow and capture cities in the first place.

    But, I mean they've made religion a lot more powerful right?

    Why can't there be a religious civilization that only owes a four cities. But has religious influence over 30 cities. Even if another civilization has plenty of military production, they won't be able to remove the religious effect.(like vatican in the 1200s or something? idk history) And we've heard firaxis trying to add in more religious variety with apostles and missionaries etc. Or perhaps something similar with culture or money could be done. Like america's current cultural output or swiss banks/panama tax havens. (I know the culture and money dominance probably isn't in civ 6)

    Basically I'm saying that generally "wide" as in more cities should be better. But "more cities" shouldn't only be from militarily controlling cities. It could be from culture, religion, commerce, etc..
     

Share This Page