Wow. Postman Pat comes to Civ

Civ 5 is terrible in that it punishes you when you actually try to build an "empire", it's why I can never go back.
 
Civ as a series is about immersion.

Civ has always been about gameplay first. I don't really care about the graphics either way but they are not why I play. There are still issues with the AI but overall I'm pretty happy with it.
You sound like someone who refuses to play Checkers or Go because the pieces are boring.
 
Well, now I am disappointed. I was hoping someone had actually made a Postman Pat mod. Speaking of mods, there is a great one released by a Firaxis dev which makes Civ 6 look a lot more like Civ 5:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1702339134
The colours might be a little bit too washed out, but I do turn it on from time to time for variety.

While I don't think Civ 6 looks bad by any stretch of the imagination, I personally would have preferred a more "realistic" artstyle, more akin to that of Civ 5. I don't think it's a major drawback to the game, though, which I think is almost on par with Civ 5 at this point. I am one of the weirdos who like Civ 5 even better than 4, though.
 
Civ 5 is terrible in that it punishes you when you actually try to build an "empire", it's why I can never go back.
I didn't play Civ 5 a whole lot, but for me what I hated the most was the race to grab land. If you didn't grab enough amenities and strategic resources, it was highly penalizing as I recall. Combined with the fact that if you had a single tile valid for settling in the middle of all your cities, the AI would go and settle that tile. It drove me nuts because it meant I had to seettle places I didn't want to just to border-lock my part of the map. This was an issue before R&F too which to me is the best expansion ever with it's loyalty system. It just fixed so much that I disliked about the game.

What I do miss about Civ 5 is the traumatizing fear of an AI going for a domination victory. I remember Russia in particular would build a massive army with no end in sight and attack my empire whenever they were in the game (I didn't randomize leader agendas). The AI felt a lot more tactical as well, it never felt like they'd simply choose whether to attack or not based on military might alone. If I had my army attacking a neighbor to the west and left my eastern cities undefended, well then my eastern neighbor might seize the opportunity to capture a city or two. Now, I never got particularly good at Civ 5, I think King was the highest difficulty I played at the time (8 years ago?) so I don't know if better players also felt this way or if I just hadn't gotten the hang of the game yet. I do remember when I first started Civ 6 that it felt distinctly easier than 5.
 
Last edited:
To the OP, I completely understand your position. I don't see somebody who is desperately trying to hate on the game just for attention. More that you are genuinely upset/disappointed, after spending all your money that Civ6 has not lived up to your expectations of the franchise.

I have to say that I agree with the points you make, I had a similar initial reaction to the game as you. However, for me just graphics/UI issues are not enough to stop me enjoying a game. The good news is, I got used to the graphics/UI. I also got used to the complexity of the game, which as others have already said, it is the most complex game in the franchise so far.

The bad news...for all its extra complexity, Civ6 lacks so much in variety and strategic depth (if you understand the systems in place, which most don't). If you are not looking to delve too deep into the strategy, like probably 95% of players, I think you should give Civ6 more of a shot.

Civ 5 is terrible in that it punishes you when you actually try to build an "empire", it's why I can never go back.

Civ 6 actually punishes you in almost the exact same way, if not even more so. However I get the impression most players don't fully understand or notice how happiness(civ5) or amenities/housing(civ6) systems actually work. Both games are actually very similar in that regard, civ6 just made happiness less noticeable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Civ as a series is about immersion. This game reminds me of 80s quest games and it is not a worthy successor to Civ V unless you’re playing games on your phone and have little history with the franchise.

You just insulted quite a lot of us, who have played since civ1, actually took the time to discover 6 and appreciate the game. But hey, thanks for stopping by. Can I help you find the door now ?
I think it's time for an houdini impression as the pinnacle of your show.
 
Moderator Action: This is not about insulting anyone, it is about differences of opinion. Please do not read things into posts by others that disagree with you. This thread needs to stop being personal. People have a right to express their opinions, as long as they are respectful and civil. Back to civility please.
 
Top Bottom