|
Eiba posted:When I say wonders are less competitive, it's not that they aren't as good, it's that they have more specific requirements and can't be all piled into one city. Ah, I see. That makes more sense. And thanks for reminding me about the Venetian Arsenal; I remember seeing that and going "well, I'm going to either want to steal that on principle or avoid the coasts entirely". Might not be that crazy admittedly, but jeez. On a tangent, this isn't a unique district, but I think the Madrasa's going to be pretty good. Making Campuses give Faith based on adjacency as well is pretty nice (especially since you can also make a regular Holy Site, which will be producing extra Faith as well thanks to Saladin's ability; Arabia should be drowning in Faith), and the building itself is like getting a better Research Lab sooner given that it makes more Science than a regular University as well. And, if Well of Souls is right about it requiring the Theology civic rather than Education, you can get it much earlier than a normal University, too (Theology is last Classical Era, versus Education being late Medieval). So all your Campuses also become mini-Holy Sites and you're pumping out considerably more Science in the Classical Era. Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 07:43 on Oct 9, 2016 |
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:12 |
|
|
a
emTme3 fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Mar 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
Eiffel Tower looks pretty key to an easy culture victory. +2 Appeal to all tiles not only affects the Tourism output of both National Parks and Seaside Resorts, but also makes building those much much easier (since they have a minimum Appeal rating to even build them at all). Also makes your Neighborhoods even better, since Neighborhood housing is based on Appeal rating of the tile. I do agree with strongest CIv potentially being Germany, at least beyond early game rush strategies from Scythia. Having Industrial Zones everywhere seems to be really important for mid to late game production, with the overlapping effects of multiple Factories/Power Plants. And Germany can get them in every city for relatively cheap, and have another district beyond that. A wide Germany with many smallish cities (since you can basically have 2 districts beyond the normal cap) should have amazing outputs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
All of the civs seem to be OP in their own way, which is cool. In theory they should cancel out right? I think Gilgamesh is probably a bit of a loser here though, mainly because of the janky AI for your "allies" and the fact no-one would use him in multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
mitochondritom posted:All of the civs seem to be OP in their own way, which is cool. In theory they should cancel out right? I think Gilgamesh is probably a bit of a loser here though, mainly because of the janky AI for your "allies" and the fact no-one would use him in multiplayer. I don't know, Sumeria seems like it has a place in MP to me. First, barbarian camps being goody huts has the potential to be really good, though admittedly it's gambling. Second, and more important, people will want to be friends with you. Say someone's playing a late bloomer civ, or some rear end in a top hat picked Scythia, or whatever. You can maybe get allies from early on to do things like stop Scythia or the Aztecs, or gain an early lead, or something. If you have another codependent civ (like Egypt) in your game, you could become friends for life maybe. I mean, they're not my first pick, but they should have a place. Also, the game is supposed to have coop modes and scenarios as well, so they'll definitely have a place there, even if they're admittedly probably not most people's first choice for regular games. Someone you'd love to have as a neighbor, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
Rome also seems pretty good. The legions seem incredibly useful, what with needing no iron, having a big old strength bonus, and being military engineers on top of it. It's probably not too representative what with being just Prince difficulty and all, but one guy I'm watching has managed to eliminate Japan, Greece, and Kongo before turn 100, just by throwing shitloads of legionnaires at them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
Something to bear in mind when talking about Germany's Hansa: It doesn't get adjacency bonuses from Mines and Quarries. There is a tradeoff involved.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 12:20
|
|
|
I see all these discussions about how wonders, districts and bonuses are restricted by both the terrain and other improvement you have already built, and I have this irrational fear that I am gonna regret every single choice I make in every Civ VI game. I already get angry with Civ V when I realize mid-game that I forgot to build my capital within range of a mountain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I see all these discussions about how wonders, districts and bonuses are restricted by both the terrain and other improvement you have already built, and I have this irrational fear that I am gonna regret every single choice I make in every Civ VI game. I already get angry with Civ V when I realize mid-game that I forgot to build my capital within range of a mountain. This is a good thing, frankly. Every decision you make should have meaningful tradeoffs; otherwise that decision is actually a non-decision "just do the optimal thing". The only reason you kick yourself in Civ5 is because you forgot one of the steps in the Ritual of Winning so you aren't winning as hard as you "should" be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The only reason you kick yourself in Civ5 is because you forgot one of the steps in the Ritual of Winning so you aren't winning as hard as you "should" be. *picks Byzantium* *kicks self*
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Eiba posted:So now that we pretty much know all the traits for all the civilizations at launch, who wants to guess which ones will be overpowered? I don't know about "overpowered", but right now I'm really liking Japan and the Aztecs. The Aztecs because getting early builders from capturing them can save you a lot of production in the crucial early game turns, which you can then use to speed along districts, and you can go wider than wide with the extra amenities per luxury. But wanting to produce more warriors might be a trade-off that keeps them in check. Still, it appeals to my preferred strategy of "expand fast and wide, wage war early to secure territory and then build up". On the other hand, I feel like Japan can play the district game really well by creating its own powerful adjacency bonuses. It may not be enough to overshadow Germany's two not-population-gated-districts, but Hojo does get three different districts at half price. I'm going to enjoy playing Japan if just because it makes the puzzle of the perfectly-laid-out city cluster even more engaging. And the payfoff should be that Japan can get better specialty districts than anyone else. My feeling is that Japan is really getting overlooked in the shadow of the newer civs and their shiny toys.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Def gonna play a Japan gimmick game where my capital is just one big blob of districts with a mess of farms somewhere on the outskirt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
I'm going to do a gimmick run where I try and cram as many wonders as possible into one city. I'm thinking I can pull off at least 12.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Eiba posted:So now that we pretty much know all the traits for all the civilizations at launch, who wants to guess which ones will be overpowered? I compared Scythia to the Huns when they were revealed but I think that's selling Scythia short by a lot, at least as far as war goes. The Huns have fantastic early units that trivialize early war but don't actually have any REAL combat bonuses to speak of, so past the classical era their units are no better than anyone else's. Their pasture bonus is insane though and that's really what keeps them top tier. Scythia's war bonuses are all extremely good, are not at all situational like the bonuses of other civs like America, synergize with each other perfectly, and remain relevant for the entire game. I'm super excited to mess with them and see what they're capable of on higher difficulties. Super Jay Mann fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Oct 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
I actually really like what they did with Kongo. After playing so many games against AIs that obsessively spam their religion against you it will be nice to play as a civ that actually wants that to happen. The early neighborhoods look pretty nice too. I'm also excited about being able to go wide again. Civ IV/V crippled it so much compared to what you could do in the earlier games. And I'm hoping that the niche places to build wonders/districts etc means that you can't go in with the one true strategy that easily wins every time and have to adapt to what you can do with what you're given, which I think will make things more fun. I want to play this game already. I should have just ignored it for another two weeks. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
SlothBear posted:I actually really like what they did with Kongo. After playing so many games against AIs that obsessively spam their religion against you it will be nice to play as a civ that actually wants that to happen. The early neighborhoods look pretty nice too. I'm looking forward to Kongo, because it's going to be interesting to play a game as a civ that wants another civ's religion, and then has a great interest in killing that civ so they don't win a religious victory. And I'm hoping the niche places to place wonders allows me to actually build certain wonders on higher difficulties.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
Yeah, Kongo and India both seem interesting in how they want other religions (Kongo gets the founder bonus of the dominant religion in its lands, while India gets the follower bonuses of all religions in its cities), particularly since they still have different reactions afterward. Kongo can't win a religious victory, and probably wants to handicap whoever's converted it because that person is making progress towards their religious victory, and really only cares about having one religion, while India wants as many other religions in its lands (but not dominant) as possible but also has the tools to make a strong attempt towards a religious victory itself. Add in things like Russia's strong religious start through the Lavra, Arabia's "late religious explosion" capabilities, and Spain's regular warfare also being religious warfare, and the religion game is very interesting this time around.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
SlothBear posted:I'm also excited about being able to go wide again. Civ IV/V crippled it so much compared to what you could do in the earlier games. I'm a bit worried that Civ VI won't have a choice either, and a small empire will necessarily be backwards in every respect compared to a large one. Probably a better balance overall, and a change is good in any case. I guess it also allows for a "tall" core being supported by various colonies. Playing Spain or England and having a modest peaceful game to start and building up a sold core, but being really aggressive on the other continent with a sprawling empire sounds pretty fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I'm looking forward to Kongo, because it's going to be interesting to play a game as a civ that wants another civ's religion, and then has a great interest in killing that civ so they don't win a religious victory. Oh my god, Mvemba is a Sith Lord. He learns from his master and then kills him! Rule of twooooo 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Captain Fargle posted:Something to bear in mind when talking about Germany's Hansa: It doesn't get adjacency bonuses from Mines and Quarries. There is a tradeoff involved. True, but you get a Major (+2) bonus from Commerical hubs and a Standard (+1) from each resource (presumably includes all types of resources). Since Quarries have to be built on resources, the Hansa effectively gets the exact same bonus for Quarries that the normal IZ gets. So the question is if you can get multiple resources next to it. Judging from LPs seen so far, I think 2 adjacent resources is probably reasonably easy in almost every city. The challenge is finding a spot that has adjacent resources AND has a good spot for an adjacent Commercial hub, which in turn gets adjacency for rivers and Harbors. So that does make it a bit tougher. I do think that getting +4 production adjacency for the Hansa isn't unreasonable though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
Gully Foyle posted:True, but you get a Major (+2) bonus from Commerical hubs and a Standard (+1) from each resource (presumably includes all types of resources). Since Quarries have to be built on resources, the Hansa effectively gets the exact same bonus for Quarries that the normal IZ gets. So the question is if you can get multiple resources next to it. Judging from LPs seen so far, I think 2 adjacent resources is probably reasonably easy in almost every city. The challenge is finding a spot that has adjacent resources AND has a good spot for an adjacent Commercial hub, which in turn gets adjacency for rivers and Harbors. So that does make it a bit tougher. I do think that getting +4 production adjacency for the Hansa isn't unreasonable though. I think the trick to Hansa and Commercial Hub placement is what FilthyRobot did in his Germany game: Match them up with those two from a second city. You can have both commercial hubs at a river, and next to them two Hansa's to get a bonus from each Commercial Hubs. That's an eays +4. Any resource thats next to that somewhere is a bonus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Eiba posted:I prefer going tall in general... but I like it when it's an option, not the only way to play. Being a little highly developed state among sprawling empires is fun. Same, but the more I think about it, the more I realise that the reason I prefer tall is my distain for having to deal with wide. I don't want to micromanage 15 cities, even if deep down I know that even a badly mismanaged city is a net gain for my empire (before Civ IV). If the capital was mechanically different from other cities (like in Imperialism) and you could expand your borders without having to deal with everything that comes with putting down a city, I would be more open to that kind of gameplay. The other reason is that going wide often involves getting into wars, whether you want to capture someone else's cities or just forcing them to attack you because you are literally everywhere. War is a loving chore, whether the sucky part was of the stack or carpet variety. I wish there were more ways to expand other than just "Territory". Venice has a billion trade routes, but these don't really show up on the map the same way borders are. Same with religion, you could have spread it everywhere and reap all the benefits that come with it, but it still doesn't have the visual or mechanical impact of physical territory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
I'm really surprised they haven't done an in-depth look at modding yet since they touted early on that the modding was a particular focus for this new engine. Since there are no more civs left to announce I'm guessing they'll do something on modding this week, or possibly alternate leaders. What else is left?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 11:53
|
|
|
bisonbison posted:And can you set your preferences to launch a game in strategic view? My laptop's gonna be chugging along on this. to answer my own question, yes: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
If I loathed playing basic V will this be a waste of time?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
Depends on what you hated about it, I guess? When you say "basic" Civ V, does that mean you liked it with the expansions?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:If I loathed playing basic V will this be a waste of time? In terms of features, Civ VI has taken the kind of unusual step of including all the features that eventually ended up in Civ V. Obviously a lot of stuff is tweaked, but it's not like Civ V that launched without espionage and religion and other basic stuff. And Civ VI adds a number of other interesting mechanics, so you shouldn't be lacking things to do. However if you're likely to get frustrated by poor balance or an AI that can't really play the game all that well... it's too soon to say for sure, but you might end up having to deal with some of that. On that subject, I'm not sure how well the AI is treating joint war declarations. We already talked about Marbozir's stream in this thread, and how weird it was that he got England to pay him for a joint declaration of war that he was suggesting... and then two turns later England and Germany declared war on him. But just now I was watching Quill18's Norway game and when he attacked his neighbor Germany in a formal war (not a surprise one), Scythia and Greece both attacked him the next turn, presumably in a joint war, even though it was a surprise war for both of them which Scythia is supposed to hate. Basically it looks like the AI might be a bit too eager to agree to a joint war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
...You know. Watching the Civ V Battle Royale, I am noticing things that lead me to believe the AI may not be as totally changed as indicated. Mostly because a lot of changes make sense as a workaround to the oddities of the AI. AI tends to build way too many workers so they have a ton just lingering around by the end of the game massively draining their gold? Make workers expended after a few uses! AI invades territory solely with piles of ranged units that then cannot take cities no matter how much they overwhelm the opponent? Make cities taken if they have totally surrounded it even if they haven't brought in the type of unit that explicitly can take over cities! To a lesser degree there's also the capacity to merge 2 or 3 units together in later eras but that's likely something they did for the benefit of the player more than anything since moving around dozens of units is kind of a pain. ...Hopefully they've got something planned to deal with the thing where they build hundreds of empty aircraft carriers, then!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
Gorgo seems to have been revealed: http://civilization6.vgbaike.com/%E6%96%87%E6%98%8E#.E6.B3.95.E5.9B.BD She gets culture from killing units.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:If I loathed playing basic V will this be a waste of time? Tbh if you played Civ 5 sans expansions you haven't really played Civ 5. Civ 6 is mostly built on a foundation of 5 though, it is not all that dramatic of a departure. Proposition Joe posted:Gorgo seems to have been revealed: http://civilization6.vgbaike.com/%E6%96%87%E6%98%8E#.E6.B3.95.E5.9B.BD Monty Classic, only one calorie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Gorgo's Leader Agenda is called With Your Shield Or On It and apparently it's that she will never accept an unfavorable peace deal and will dislike civilizations that do. But she will also hate civilizations that have never been at war. (An unfavorable peace deal might mean having the loser cede cities.) The rest of the Greek abilities are the same, naturally, so basically Greece has two Culture generators- Pericles with his percentage boost from City-State suzerainty, Gorgo from just killin' units all game long.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
That's a shame, I guess I'll never, ever play as Pericles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:That's a shame, I guess I'll never, ever play as Pericles. Hey man, random leader exists for a reason!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Hogama posted:Gorgo's Leader Agenda is called With Your Shield Or On It and apparently it's that she will never accept an unfavorable peace deal and will dislike civilizations that do. But she will also hate civilizations that have never been at war. So if there's a specific agenda that refuses poor peace deals, does that mean you can actually negotiate for peace in Civ 6 without completely ridiculous conditions?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:Tbh if you played Civ 5 sans expansions you haven't really played Civ 5. Yeah, 3-5 all followed a pattern of the vanilla having some significant issues, the first expansion being more of a feature pack, and the second expansion actually bringing the game up to par and being really fun. Vanilla V was by far the worst offender in this regard though, the game that launched was barely playable and it was only on a whim that I tried out the rest of it through a steam sale and I'm so glad I did. From what I've seen of the playthroughs VI is launching in a much, much, much, better state than V did and that's probably one of the reasons they gave out so many copies was to make sure people understood that. Brannock posted:So if there's a specific agenda that refuses poor peace deals, does that mean you can actually negotiate for peace in Civ 6 without completely ridiculous conditions? From what I've seen in a few playthroughs, yes but like anything else we won't really know until we play for ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Rexides posted:Same with religion, you could have spread it everywhere and reap all the benefits that come with it, but it still doesn't have the visual or mechanical impact of physical territory. In civ4, you were granted vision around cities that had your religion. It was a great little addition, if only for helping the player get a feel for their own influence, and I really can't see why it hasn't been carried over to 5 or 6.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
SlothBear posted:Yeah, 3-5 all followed a pattern of the vanilla having some significant issues, the first expansion being more of a feature pack, and the second expansion actually bringing the game up to par and being really fun. Really, that's less true for 4. 4 basically took the entirety of Civ 3, changed or threw out the things that didn't work, refined the things that did work, and out of the gate was what Civ 3 wanted to be but never reached, and then 4's expansions went from there. 3 and 5 were the ones that tried to create whole new game systems from whole cloth, 5 even moreso than 3. It looks like 6 is trying to do what 4 did; don't start over from scratch, just squeeze the entirety of civ 5 into a better experience. Obviously it remains to be seen if they succeed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
Gorgo's agenda is basically " Is a Civ V AI." Sounds hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Eiba posted:Basically it looks like the AI might be a bit too eager to agree to a joint war. It's probably just an extension of the AI not evaluating trade deals correctly, like they trade a relic for 1 gold and seem to generally give the player incredibly good deals too often. Joint War seems to be negotiated at the trade menu so whatever value they're supposed to place on it just isn't there most likely. That's my working theory anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:12 |
|
|
Eiba posted:On that subject, I'm not sure how well the AI is treating joint war declarations. We already talked about Marbozir's stream in this thread, and how weird it was that he got England to pay him for a joint declaration of war that he was suggesting... and then two turns later England and Germany declared war on him. Scythia is just a case of the only moral surprise war is my surprise war. It's not like she can give a diplomatic penalty to herself, but Greece probably notched one up in the background (if AI diplomacy even uses them, which I doubt)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 08:56
|
|
