Your Experience Starting New Game with Spring 2017 Patch

[DocRock]

I started playing again because of your reports in this thread that the game offers a better challenge now. I decided to go with Emperor difficulty, just to make my first game after a few months not too frustrating.

Unfortunately, absolutely nothing changed. I went with Cyprus doing the usual Archer rush, nearly taking over my continent. Every time I checked the tech screen, I saw Germany being on par or maybe slightly behind me. As everyone labeled me Warmonger anyway I just attacked to eliminate a potential rival. I recently discovered Battleships, Artillery and Infantry at that point.

Guess what... Even though he was as advanced as I was, I found him attacking me with Catapults, Caravels and Spearmen. What a joke. Motivation again dropped to negative levels for me, as this game is still not fun at all. I guess it's better to wait for a real xpac and hope that at least some things will significantly change.

 

[Victoria]

If you want to be a warmonger you need to really play on Deity to have a challenge currently @DocRock and even then you can have easy games and very challenging games so you really need to play a few times on deity to get a correct feel. Units do upgrade, the Ai will be much more advanced than on Emporer and you are likely to be DOW'd much earlier. But the choice is yours and there is a lot of other things that may also still annoy you you have not mentioned.

 

[The Islander]

I've just had my first games on the new patch (mac), both of them were on emp, and both times i got destroyed by barbs! I really wasn't xoecting them to be that much more challenging, but they cut through me much too easily. I've found the ai to be very friendly too. Tomyris became a friend almost straight away, and she's never even accepted a delegation of me before!

I think the strat might be to turtle up and produce a strong military, then see if there are any opportunities. Or start building scouts again so the military units that are built can be garrisoned.

 

[DocRock]

If you want to be a warmonger you need to really play on Deity to have a challenge currently @DocRock and even then you can have easy games and very challenging games so you really need to play a few times on deity to get a correct feel. Units do upgrade, the Ai will be much more advanced than on Emporer and you are likely to be DOW'd much earlier. But the choice is yours and there is a lot of other things that may also still annoy you you have not mentioned.

Yes, you are right about the unmentioned things. I find the mid to late game extremely lacking for example. But I think that's not a part of this thread. So far, I'm just disappointed that the AI still isn't upgrading its units and still offers no challenge (besides early barbarians).

And I still wonder how so many people struggle with low difficulty settings in this thread. I am no expert at all and it is really, really easy.

 

[LDiCesare]

And I still wonder how so many people struggle with low difficulty settings in this thread. I am no expert at all and it is really, really easy.

My guess is early game. Early barbs are a challenge. Early opponents can bring lots of units to attack you, and they are up to date at that time.
Also, when a player sees their sole warrior killed and the enemy bringing two or three units, they are prone to abandon. In y case, the disappointment came when I kept fighting and realised the AI wouldn't use its advantage in numbers to, for instance, take my cities. So you may think you're lost when in fact you are far from it because the AI can't capitalise on its advantages.

 

[Victoria]

@DocRock they do upgrade units, you must have been unlucky in your game as the AI now has a stronger bias for upgrading and it's very noticeable over a few games. I agree not all units do but for example last game on immortal I was allies with all the civs on my continent and they had upgraded a large majority of their troops and were only churning out the latest.

I sometimes play prince, the AI is still aggressive down there. Some people struggle and play lower. A lot of people just want to play and build, I still struggle with the aggression as I have other games I use for war games and this to me was always a good strategy game until doom stacks came, everything changed since IV. I like the game regardless but it's so aggressive bias now I may just move games.

 

[Leyrann]

I think that, by now, the AI only doesn't upgrade it's units if it doesn't have the resources, and then I want to ask, can we really blame them for it? We've all had games where we couldn't upgrade our warriors or our heavy chariots because we lacked iron, or where we couldn't upgrade our swordsmen and catapults because we lacked niter.

 

[Tacgnol]

And I still wonder how so many people struggle with low difficulty settings in this thread. I am no expert at all and it is really, really easy.

Well, there's a pretty huge difference in ability between casual players and more involved players.

More thoughtful players, which includes every serious poster or Civ veteran and most of the posters on civfanatics, view the game as a strategy game. You come up with a long term plan, you read tooltips, you figure out how things work, you take steps to reach your goals. Different players do different degrees of micromanagement but you will be aware of the difference between a science victory and a cultural victory, how you should plan out your cities, how you should manage your military, what you should be doing. You come up with strategies and execute them. When you do this it's a pretty quick game to learn and an easy game to master, getting past Prince is just a matter of learning the mechanics and winning on Deity is just a matter of time and patience.

But many, probably most players on Steam are casual players who don't play strategy games, and don't really view Civ as one. Rather, it's just a series of choices, the way it's presented if you don't un-anchor the screen and uncheck 'always wait at end of turn'. You decide what to do with each unit, what to build in each city, what to research on a case by case basis. Sure, you know culture is good for civics and governments, science for tech and units but you don't know what +4 or +6 science really means. You might form some strategies like 'build units, attack here here and here' but you're not really planning out your victory, just heading in a general direction. And when you play like this, Civ is a pretty hard game.

@DocRock they do upgrade units, you must have been unlucky in your game as the AI now has a stronger bias for upgrading and it's very noticeable over a few games. I agree not all units do but for example last game on immortal I was allies with all the civs on my continent and they had upgraded a large majority of their troops and were only churning out the latest.

I sometimes play prince, the AI is still aggressive down there. Some people struggle and play lower. A lot of people just want to play and build, I still struggle with the aggression as I have other games I use for war games and this to me was always a good strategy game until doom stacks came, everything changed since IV. I like the game regardless but it's so aggressive bias now I may just move games.

Well, the AI is definitely better at upgrading and more aggressive but they only upgrade when they can, and still prefer a mix of units. Cavalry/Infantry and Catapults is not that uncommon. And they still can't really figure out how to use siege units.

 

[Victoria]

While I agree with regard to siege towers and battering rams they can be quite handy with bombards/artillery but yes I have yet to see a balloon

 

[PendragonWRB]

Yes, you are right about the unmentioned things. I find the mid to late game extremely lacking for example. But I think that's not a part of this thread. So far, I'm just disappointed that the AI still isn't upgrading its units and still offers no challenge (besides early barbarians).

And I still wonder how so many people struggle with low difficulty settings in this thread. I am no expert at all and it is really, really easy.

I always play with the balanced start option which means the AIs also get a balanced start and are more likely to have the resources to upgrade their units. The reason I 'struggle' on Emperor is I never come out of the gate with Domination in mind. I like to play a balanced game where I do a little of everything. Lately going for a Religion, not to win a Religious victory, just to have that extra dimension in my games, has made things difficult as I am not expanding as fast as I could. I like building an empire and the only time the swords come out is when the AI forward settles or attempts to in the land I had intended on using.

Maybe if you try playing a little less aggressively militarily the AI won't seem so weak to you. You are basically playing to it's weakness if all you do is warmonger. If warmongering is what you enjoy, then you should play Deity like Victoria suggested.

 

[Grotius]

I also think the game is a lot easier to win if you warmonger than if you try to play peacefully, which is my preferred approach. I play grognard wargames to fight. I play Civ to build a civilization. In most of my Civ games, I never declare war, and I get a good challenge. In the few games where I go all-in on warmongering, I find it much easier.

 

[DocRock]

Well, the thing is I enjoy playing for domination. I do not play it because it's easier, I play it because it's much more fun. I usually get pretty bored when I go for a peace game, as this usually ends up in pressing "next turn" as the only meaningful action.

I understand your point about the difficulty setting. I'm playing this series since the beginning and while I was only able to best 4 on Monarch (if I remember correctly), with 5 I was able to beat Deity regularly. And 6 is even easier. I just noticed that some of my friends who only played 5 on King also think that Immortal is basically too easy in 6. If you can avoid the early game horse Archer barb camp of course.

I will try another game soon I guess. Hopefully I'll meet more than Catapults and Caravelles in the Industrial age...

 

[Leyrann]

Well, the thing is I enjoy playing for domination. I do not play it because it's easier, I play it because it's much more fun. I usually get pretty bored when I go for a peace game, as this usually ends up in pressing "next turn" as the only meaningful action.

I understand your point about the difficulty setting. I'm playing this series since the beginning and while I was only able to best 4 on Monarch (if I remember correctly), with 5 I was able to beat Deity regularly. And 6 is even easier. I just noticed that some of my friends who only played 5 on King also think that Immortal is basically too easy in 6. If you can avoid the early game horse Archer barb camp of course.

I will try another game soon I guess. Hopefully I'll meet more than Catapults and Caravelles in the Industrial age...

That feels kinda weird to me. I can do IV on Monarch while I played V on King and play VI on Emperor, and I have by far the least experience with IV.

 

[PendragonWRB]

Well, the thing is I enjoy playing for domination. I do not play it because it's easier, I play it because it's much more fun. I usually get pretty bored when I go for a peace game, as this usually ends up in pressing "next turn" as the only meaningful action.

I understand your point about the difficulty setting. I'm playing this series since the beginning and while I was only able to best 4 on Monarch (if I remember correctly), with 5 I was able to beat Deity regularly. And 6 is even easier. I just noticed that some of my friends who only played 5 on King also think that Immortal is basically too easy in 6. If you can avoid the early game horse Archer barb camp of course.

I will try another game soon I guess. Hopefully I'll meet more than Catapults and Caravelles in the Industrial age...

I don't go for a peace game either, so don't feel that war is off limits. Build a little empire first, get a religion, maybe a wonder or two. Let war happen more organically and you might find a bit more resistance that way. The AI always seems to get in my way one way or another.

I also get bored with a game before it's over. The most fun is always the beginning and there is often a lull while I catch up tech wise to the AIs on the other continents before the final push to end the game. The end game has almost always been a drag in V and VI for me. Acken's balance mod really extended the life of V for me making it very competitive till very near the end and sometimes not knowing if I could win kept it pretty interesting.

 

[DocRock]

That feels kinda weird to me. I can do IV on Monarch while I played V on King and play VI on Emperor, and I have by far the least experience with IV.

Maybe I played IV or Emperor, I haven't played it for years and cannot remember it that detailed. But it was definitely harder than 5 and 6. There was even a Noble series here on Civ Fanatics because Noble was a decent level to play on. Comparable to the current Deity.

 

[Leyrann]

Maybe I played IV or Emperor, I haven't played it for years and cannot remember it that detailed. But it was definitely harder than 5 and 6. There was even a Noble series here on Civ Fanatics because Noble was a decent level to play on. Comparable to the current Deity.

Oh lol I just realized I messed the names. I play on Noble, not Monarch. They're the two names that don't appear in other civs, hence the mixup...

 

[Tuvok694]

I still have the impression that the AI aggressiveness has risen to an insane level after the last patch. Just had a game as Kyros (level king, standard speed). I built one scout and then nothing but warriors and slingers. In round 20 Trajan attacked me with 2 archers and 3 warriors. Could hold him off for some rounds, but in round 30 Australia attacked me with several slingers and warriors. Only reason they did not destroy me quickly was the Roman units which stood in their way. Completely frustrated I gave up the game, but even if I had survived those wars, I would be hopelessly behind in science, culture, faith, and had not even founded a second city. Where's the fun in that?

 

[Leyrann]

I still have the impression that the AI aggressiveness has risen to an insane level after the last patch. Just had a game as Kyros (level king, standard speed). I built one scout and then nothing but warriors and slingers. In round 20 Trajan attacked me with 2 archers and 3 warriors. Could hold him off for some rounds, but in round 30 Australia attacked me with several slingers and warriors. Only reason they did not destroy me quickly was the Roman units which stood in their way. Completely frustrated I gave up the game, but even if I had survived those wars, I would be hopelessly behind in science, culture, faith, and had not even founded a second city. Where's the fun in that?

You're also just unlucky to have two seperate AI's declare an early war on you, but on top of that, you don't need to build an early scout. They're a bit better at exploring, but warriors and ships can do it too. And they don't have a habit of dying to random barbarian camps that just spawned units.

I play on Emperor myself, and while I most certainly have to fend off an early war every now and then, I don't think two wars at the same time happened to me even once, and additionally, without an early scout, I've always been able to defend myself quite well. I have to admit, it took me a bunch of games to adapt and not go for an early builder or something, but it's just how Civ VI works. I typically build one warrior and keep an eye on my closest neighbour. If he has units between my city and his, I go for another warrior, otherwise I go for a builder or settler. Exception is Sumeria, like my current game where I started with three War Carts and it was actually me doing the early DoW, getting a major civ plus two city states in the ancient era.

 

[Unconquered Sun]

VI's Deity difficulty is on par with IV's Warlords expansion's Monarch (that's a level between prince and emperor).

As for DoWs, I haven't been DoWed yet, but rate this positively for the AI as it hasn't been in a position to threaten me.

 

[Balkans]

I was very critical about the state of the game before so here's my impressions after couple of games. It's a little better. I like the fact that AI kinda feels not being brain dead anymore. I like the fact that they go crazy early but feels kinda cheesy because they start with bunch of units and based on context of the game maybe you wont be able to produce defense. I would like some faceliftting on the pacing of early game(highest difficulties). A lot issues still exist, not happy at all about it, but whatever, i don't relly expect finished vanilla games anymore, since that's what people are willing to buy. I was one of the idiots who preordered. That's a mistake i won't ever repeat again, for the greater good of this industry.