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

[GS] Your first impression score of this expansion

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Disgustipated, Feb 18, 2019.

?

Your overall first impression of this game on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being lowest and 10 highest.

Poll closed Mar 4, 2019.
  1. 1 Very bad, virtually unplayable

    1 vote(s)
    0.4%
  2. 2

    1 vote(s)
    0.4%
  3. 3

    3 vote(s)
    1.3%
  4. 4

    4 vote(s)
    1.7%
  5. 5

    8 vote(s)
    3.5%
  6. 6

    17 vote(s)
    7.4%
  7. 7

    35 vote(s)
    15.3%
  8. 8

    71 vote(s)
    31.0%
  9. 9

    46 vote(s)
    20.1%
  10. 10 Fantastic, nearly perfect in all aspects

    15 vote(s)
    6.6%
  11. I need more time to evaluate

    19 vote(s)
    8.3%
  12. I have not purchased or played this expansion

    9 vote(s)
    3.9%
  1. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,864
    Gender:
    Male
    The impression scores for any sequel should always be higher than the scores for the prior game/book/film/season in the series. If they aren't, the game developers are doing something really wrong, as the customer base buying the sequel will be tilted towards people who liked the prior version.

    I find it quite likely that GS will be very well received by its overall player base, as it's gameplay seems to be very consistent with the experience offered so far in Civ 6.
     
  2. fubi

    fubi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2016
    Messages:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Honestly... it feels the first 100-150 are what really matters (just like vanilla).

    Either you get stomped early or you manage to take out a weak neighbour and establish some good 8 cities.

    And then? Its just a whole bunch of clicking. And there's a looot of clicking now in GS. And there's all this shiny crazy new stuff, and the eras just fly by, and all of it is really cool .. but you won already a long time ago.

    Don't know, been playing Stellaris over Christmas, and it has much better pacing. There's a big built up to an endgame crisis, which you can actually lose to if you fall behind to much.

    ---
    edit: Ok after playing a bit more, gotta admit it's still as addicting as ever. The new Civs are very awesome, and the early/mid game is probably the best it ever was now. Like trying to hit that 'streak' where you line up seemingly every tech boost, culture boost, expanding, and having war at the same time, is one of the greatest things in this game. I think it just needs some late-game beef and it would be perfect, something to make the new endgame techs & climate change be more relevant somehow.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2019
  3. LFRANK

    LFRANK Semper Fidelis! Supporter

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    74
    Location:
    Hell, MI
    I'm in the middle of my 3rd game and so far GS feels easier to win than R&F. Managed a SV as Eleanor in the first game, am well on the way to a CV in the second as Ghengis, and now am dominating everyone with Pachacuti and trying for another, faster SV.

    Saving your diplomatic points seems the best way to go. I've trade none away, accepted all that are offered or won and by the end of the game can easily overwhelm most other civs votes by sheer DP numbers.

    Have had more than handful of emergencies against my civs but no other civs have provided any challenge and I've handily won them all.

    All-in-all gameplay feels more watered down than with previous releases. Not that I'd don't like wins, but I've not yet had to stretch myself to do so. Note I am not a deity level player but do enjoy a good challenge. Maybe I'm finally learning how to play this game. LOL
     
  4. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    I voted 'need more time to evaluate' but I would certainly say nothing about this expansion is in any way game-changing. Mechanically it's probably less significant a shakeup than Rise & Fall, which itself I felt had less impact on the game experience than the subsequent patches.

    Then again, I'd reached a point I was happy with in Civ VI and accepted it as a sandbox. I was looking forward to Gathering Storm for the flavour, and so far on that count it has been ... a partial success.

    The circumstances of my specific game have thrown this into stark relief. I spent about the first 200 turns almost wholly at war, with no safe way to get settlers to new locations and falling far behind on science for too long. I latched onto diplomatic victory as my last best chance. People were getting rocketry while I was discovering how wonderful steam power is.

    A hundred turns further in, and I'm close to diplo victory, I'll be the culture leader by the time culture victory is close enough to matter despite missing many wonders (and trying for several), and if I'd invested any effort in creating a spaceport I would probably be at least no. 2 in the space race as I received Carl Sagan from the Nobel Prize for Literature and Werner von Braun from natural engineer points (and grabbed him to prevent a space power from doing so). This is on Deity, after one of the slowest starts I've ever had in the game, in which I made multiple significant mistakes that set me back, and in which I'm playing very suboptimally (including going for more than half a dozen Wonders I failed to achieve).

    Even when the AI has the tools to win it seems deliberately lethargic about using them to let the player catch up. It's possible I'll lose the session regardless - but if so that's because of mistakes that cost me two diplo points from aid emergencies and from not anticipating that the AIs would vote to strip a VP from me in what I'd planned to be the final Congress. Playing badly should result in the player losing because the game demands tight strategic play, not because they're being ambushed by new game mechanics whose implementation they can't be expected to anticipate on the first playthrough.

    None of this is the expansion's fault - it's the way Civ VI already plays and why I consistently describe it, despite the enthusiasm for it here, as worse than both Civ V and Civ IV. Even when it's fun, it is not really a strategy game because "anything goes" is not a strategy.

    I thought that may just be me not paying enough attention to its effects (again, who cares if you have a couple less production in a game that isn't interested in pushing you to play optimally? If I can get most of the way to Sydney Opera House and lose much of that production when I'm beaten to it without any clear downside, it simply doesn't matter).

    I've been impressed with a lot of what the AI now does on the way to the game's end point - wars and expansion now look somewhat plausible, you can imagine defined reasons for conflict and the AI interactions that emerge during the game - but you're right that it's all just passing the time and the AI doesn't have winning as an apparent goal. For some reason a lot of people hated the fact that Civ V AIs were coded to try and win and blamed a lot of seemingly (to me) unrelated issues on that, but Civ V had the most dynamic late game of any Civ game and the closest contests for victory I can recall in the series.

    This is how I see it: They've decided what they want Civ VI to be, and it's not the strategy game experience of its immediate predecessors. Civ VI has a large fanbase which likes this new direction, and the expansions are for the people who already like the game as it is. They seem to have no interest in bringing back older Civ players who want more of a challenge, unlike Civ V whose expansions actively reintroduced elements older players missed and generally increased the difficulty of the game over time. So a Civ VI expansion isn't a failure if it doesn't add anything that changes the core gameplay.
     
  5. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,020
    Only new civ I have in my game is Sweden so haven't been exposed to much of the new music - the Zulu theme is presently my favourite.

    Civ VI easily surpasses every other Civ game in this regard, and both Civ IV and Civ V set high benchmarks (I've listened to the Civ V soundtrack as background music more than once). I played Civ VI more than its then-thin gameplay warranted early on simply because the music was so good.

    Seems unchanged to me. In my experience in R&F, having taken on emergencies alongside the AI, the AI would send units then - it would just focus on killing enemy units and never made real moves to take the objective city. This seems likely to be the same now.

    I agree this is worth highlighting. I agree with Firaxis that something needed to be done, but this is too far. I had a close aid emergency at one point and no spare money. but was able to win it by pillaging a Zulu market and commercial hub for upwards of 300 gold on the spot.
     
    ChocolateShake likes this.
  6. ChocolateShake

    ChocolateShake Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2016
    Messages:
    525
    Gender:
    Male
    It's alright I guess... I'd give it a 9/10 :D

    Seriously though that's the score I'd give it based on my first impressions. I took a break before hopping back into civ with GS, and I've got that one turn feeling again. Playing as Sweden I've had a pretty sweet game, I played peacefully as I usually do, then Gilgamesh attacked me and took two of my cities, he probably could taken my capital if he hadn't been concerned with conquering those two cities first.

    An emergency was declared to recapture the bigger of the two cities from Gilgamesh, and he had protected it with walls. I was almost not going to make the emergency, but Philip had joined in and was sieging it! I was able to capture it in time thanks to that. I allied with Philip after that :)

    But in between that, disasters hitting my cities, competing for the Nobel Prize competitions, and deciding on my victory path, I'm certainly enjoying the game.

    The AI still has apparent weaknesses, but I play civ to have a good time while relaxing, and that's what I'm getting. Philip could've taken my city if he'd brought a bigger army to liberate it (or would he take it for his own?), Gilgamesh could've knocked me out, but this is miles ahead of where things started with Civ 6.

    I'd say disasters, the world congress, and the new systems should also appeal to players looking for a challenge through finding the fastest ways to win.

    To me this is pure civ - I'd love for Firaxis to go for another expansion, or use the game as of GS as the base for the next civ game, keeping all the improvements that have come along since release.
     
  7. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,864
    Gender:
    Male
    I find it interesting how differently people viewed the older civ games. Having played Civ 1 through 5 quite extensively, Civ 6 feels nothing like it's predecessors to me. Yet others who also enjoyed past civ games can find Civ 6 a natural progression from those past iterations.

    There was a true genius to the way the early civs appealed to a fanbase who wanted such different things in a game. Civ 6 may well end up with an even larger overall fanbase, but I wonder if it will collect such a diverse group of players amongst it's diehard fans?
     
  8. Ornen

    Ornen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2006
    Messages:
    265
    I'm a 5/10 so far. The big new systems feel pretty underwhelming, and the newly extended science game tends to drag. Hopefully they tweak science to run faster rather than culture to run longer.
     
    Victoria and Kmart_Elvis like this.
  9. teakbois

    teakbois Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Messages:
    300
    7/10

    Im scoring based on did it improve the prior experience, and bottom line its a more fun game than it was before.
    It makes Rise and Fall seem more complete. Governors more interesting, and civs that meaningfully use loyalty.
    There aren't any real big game changers here, but it didn't need any.

    Can't give it higher than a 7 because diplo victory is not good, and global warming is a dud.


    I would like to see a mini expansion with the following:
    revamp diplo victory and wc
    slow down global warming and make it more meaningful
    add another difficulty level. The AI is clearly getting better but it has a long way to go...Deity honestly isn't awful for a next to last setting, but needs to be tweaks for the AIs to more aggressively go after victory conditions.
     
  10. Sprenk

    Sprenk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Traverse City, Michigan
    9/10 I loved the Polynesians in Civ V, winning culture games on sea maps. Now I love the Maori.

    Plus I like the new dynamic map features. Very happy here. Would get a 10/10 if the Worldbuilder was up.
     
  11. isau

    isau Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,052
    I gave it a 7. There are some cool new features. The maps look much, much better.

    Biggest drawback is the game has never fixed some serious AI issues that make the game unengaging for me. This can't be fixed with mods at this time and makes me lose interest in the game.

    I'm not a huge fan of random events. I kept them turned off in Civ 4 because they annoyed me. Might not so annoying if the events in Civ 6 were connected to weather patterns or they were determinative in some way. Instead they are just random stuff that occasionally happens. The disasters feel more like mod content to me than expansion worthy material.
     
  12. ChocolateShake

    ChocolateShake Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2016
    Messages:
    525
    Gender:
    Male
    I remember a presentation from Soren Johnson on Civ 4, where he mentions the different types of players in the fanbase. He touches on the same topic a bit in this one: http://intrinsicalgorithm.com/IAonAI/2008/02/gdc-2008-soren-johnsons-lecture-on-the-civ-4-ai/

    There was another presentation, but the point is mostly the same, designing for challenge and for sandbox/narrative/other types of players. I don't play Civ for challenge most of the time, I mostly focus on role playing and a sandbox style of play. I started with Civ 2, and have been playing mostly the same way throughout the series. I think 4 was the last one to really sufficiently address the many different play-styles.

    Regarding challenge, was Civ 5 really much more difficult than 6? To me Civ 5 felt like a departure from the series traditions on release, mostly due to the art style, the global happiness system, and 1 UPT. I picked it up on release but those things combined caused me to take a break for a long while, I came back to it after I think brave new world and was able to enjoy it, but it still felt a bit odd to me that settling was so heavily punished.

    I've played deity in Civ 6 and was able to win, but I hadn't been focusing on trying to win as quickly as possible. Still though I get a challenge out of civ with the way I play. I'd say for challenge players those are the two best ways to focus on that aspect, along with using mods to increase the level of difficulty. I'd imagine a mod that removed eurekas (or gave them to the AI), forced them to research all techs in an era before moving on, gave them enough gold and resources to keep things upgraded, etc. could really up the difficulty level, and @cvb had a great idea of giving cheaper units only to the AI. These things I think could up the challenge level and be used alongside a dll release.

    I'd love for the series to keep addressing all the different play styles. On Soren's website there's an interesting presentation on this too in terms of franchise audiences.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2019
  13. NorthernPalmyra

    NorthernPalmyra Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2019
    Messages:
    66
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm really enjoying it its made a great game even better I really like the iron/horse system with graduations in cavalry,I'm happy cause Ive found my new civ to adapt (Scotland)
     
    King Rad likes this.
  14. CornPlanter

    CornPlanter Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,066
    Location:
    Lithuania
    Solid 8 and I just ignored UI in my voting. If I factored in UI, it'd be a solid "1: virtually unplayable".
     
  15. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,864
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree, Civ 5 also narrowed the diversity of the player base. Civ 6 continues that trend. The main departure of Civ 6 from the rest of the series, for me, was well described by @PhilBowles a few posts back, and I won't add to it as this isn't the thread for that. I just find it interesting that others who enjoyed Civ 2, as I did, could find Civ 6 offers them a similar, even better, game experience.
     
    ChocolateShake and Siptah like this.
  16. ChocolateShake

    ChocolateShake Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2016
    Messages:
    525
    Gender:
    Male
    I see what you mean, I definitely understand your viewpoint.

    There are quite a few things I miss from Civ 2. The wonders like Leonardo's workshop and Darwin's voyage, and the power of wonders in general, being one of them. The air units being so powerful and fun to use is another. I'm not so sure that 1 UPT was a good thing for the series. I think it's worth exploring going back to stack combat, it's much easier for the AI to handle.

    I think GS introduces some great stuff for the series, I hope Firaxis takes a deep look at Civ 7 and decides whether or not 1 UPT still needs to be in the series. Rolling back global happiness was a great idea, I'd say something like @Gedemon's stack mod could be implemented as part of the base game.
     
    Trav'ling Canuck likes this.
  17. Uncle_Joe

    Uncle_Joe Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    467
    It really depends on their design philosophy when approaching Civ7. If they want to return to an actual strategy-based game rather than a sandbox, then yes rolling back 1UPT would be a huge help. But if they are content to keep it more of a sandbox, I wouldn't expect major functionality changes like that.

    And yes, I miss some of the old wonders and definitely miss that wonders used to have IMPACT. They are just so flat and boring now (for the most part). But as I said above, most of the game's mechanics are like that now. Everything is muted and subdued. There is very little "WOW, I gotta get that!" with wonders, techs, GPs, etc. Most of my decisions are made for ease of use rather than strategic impact.

    I know Civ4 was very polarizing but the techs and wonders were miles ahead of Civ6 in terms of effect. So many of the Civ6 techs unlock a single mediocre building or a wonder (which as noted, are lackluster). Very few have the impact that Astronomy or Education or Liberalism had in Civ4. Add that to a Civ4 AI that was not only concerned with winning but also was very dangerous if you neglected your military and you got that DRIVE that caused 'One..More..Turn..!". In Civ6, you can just ignore and downplay half the mechanics and not be worse off. There is no need to play a tight game so there is little push to make sound decisions...whatever you do will likely work.

    All that said, I think Civ6 added a LOT of cool idea but the fundamental flaw of not being an actually competitive game pulls the rug out from under it IMO. Of course a LOT of people seem to enjoy it so I can't say they were wrong for moving in that direction.
     
    Siptah and Trav'ling Canuck like this.
  18. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605
    Location:
    South Wales
    I thought it tended to work the other way.
    A large portion of the buyers of sequels will be fans of its predecessors and inclined to hate any changes.
    Certainly seems that way with most videogames.
     
    Karmah likes this.
  19. cvb

    cvb Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2017
    Messages:
    290
    Just because you summoned me & out of context of the thread here (right now I'm quite behind in reading all the current post-GS stuff):
    I do still collect notes, which I plan to implement sometime (when it is clearer how big the gap is, which is to be filled). But there is already a working mod made in this philosophy, which looks great to me: Fearsunn's AdaptiveDifficulty (the older versions available here on CivFanatics).
     
    ChocolateShake likes this.
  20. dewbak75

    dewbak75 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    38
    I would probably say 8 for the initial release of the expansion, but I fully expect them to tweak the mechanics and overall balance in future patches, as they've done before. But conceptually, I think they've got some really great ideas in place, and I can't wait to take One More Turn many, many, many times.
     

Share This Page