|
Agreed. I'm not wholly against the concept of using cards in a Civ game (just kind of against it) but in general I think the cards are poorly balanced. There are some cards that are amazing and cause me to rush them in the social policy tree and there are many, many, other cards that I've never even used because they are garbage. I'd prefer if there were fewer cards, the cards were stronger, and governments had fewer card slots. I think one of the main weaknesses of the system is that cards are accrued continually over the game but they're infrequently upgraded, obsoleted, or removed. I never feel that the cards are that interesting in the late game because I have been seeing the same set of cards for so long and the bonuses don't scale. Raj seems pitifully underpowered, especially in the late game (unless I am missing something).
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 12:25
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
Yeah, Civ games have never been that good for balance since 4. I think you'll be looking at mods to do more than the most basic job of balance for most of the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 12:34
|
|
|
I wish they would actually do something to make the cards more distinct, they shouldn't be just blank rectangles with some text. The whole card system looks like a placeholder for some barely finished system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
pogothemonkey0 posted:Agreed. I'm not wholly against the concept of using cards in a Civ game (just kind of against it) but in general I think the cards are poorly balanced. There are some cards that are amazing and cause me to rush them in the social policy tree and there are many, many, other cards that I've never even used because they are garbage. I'd prefer if there were fewer cards, the cards were stronger, and governments had fewer card slots. Actually, these are not the problems I am having with the system. The problems I am having is that you have cards that provide a constant bonus to a yield (ie more gold) competing with highly situational cards (ie cheaper land purchaces). To give you a really strong example, consider these two cards: Charismatic Leader posted:+2 Influence points per turn towards earning city-state Envoys. Diplomatic League posted:The first Envoy you send to each city-state counts as two Envoys.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 12:46
|
|
|
Rexides posted:They compete with each other for the same slot, and it gives you the illusion of them affecting different playstyles. However, what you end up doing is having Charismatic Leader up for most of the time, and when you have a bunch of envoys you want to spend you switch to Diplomatic League for a spending boost, and then back to Charismatic leader. Not to mention that this switching back and forth incentivises you to research your civics in a way that optimises policy change triggers. None of these strategies should be what this game is about. Does Diplomatic League also multiply the envoys for meeting city states first or completing their quests?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
It does, which can be a case for having it up in the very early game vs a flat +2. However, even if that is a valid strategy, a player who neglects exploration and opts for the +2 instead is still incentivised to temporarily switch to the other before spending.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
Good times as Kongo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
Rexides posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
I get your argument, and I'm sure others do too. The problem in my mind is that it's incredibly micro-oriented. You can swap policies every ten turns thereabouts, oftentimes less. While that will benefit some micro-oriented players, it just feels tiresome to me. I don't get the same sense of accomplishment from doing that as I would a well timed slingshot, for example. I feel that changing civ policies should have consequences, an opportunity cost. That doesn't happen when you can often cheese the system by saving techs at 1 turn to completion and finishing them whenever you want. I also think tech boosts should be rebalanced. Teching seems too goddamn fast.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Trivia posted:The problem in my mind is that it's incredibly micro-oriented. You can swap policies every ten turns thereabouts, oftentimes less. While that will benefit some micro-oriented players, it just feels tiresome to me. Then don't swap them? Or swap them only when you change governments? The benefits of swapping are significant, but not so significant that you can't win if you don't. Like, they function much as trade routes do: if you want to or like to manage the bonuses for growing cities and connectivity of roads, you can move traders around from city to city. If you don't like that, you can set a few to get you some cross-empire roads and otherwise just take the route with the most gold.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Trivia posted:I get your argument, and I'm sure others do too. The problem in my mind is that it's incredibly micro-oriented. You can swap policies every ten turns thereabouts, oftentimes less. While that will benefit some micro-oriented players, it just feels tiresome to me. I don't get the same sense of accomplishment from doing that as I would a well timed slingshot, for example. Teching feels fast because everything else is glacial in comparison. Production costs are absurd. My big issue with policies is how often you need to change them to play optimally. It's not like the civics system in Civ4 where unlocks were slow and varied, and changing poo poo around locked down your empire for X turns. Optimal play involves timing so much poo poo perfectly, building everything in waves to coincide with policy card changes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
homullus posted:Then don't swap them? Or swap them only when you change governments? The benefits of swapping are significant, but not so significant that you can't win if you don't. I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not claiming the card system is bad, far from it. I'm not saying that swapping the cards is inherently bad. I"m saying that the opportunity costs for swapping cards is too low, and opportunities to change cards are too high. Coupled too many meaningless or horribly niche cards, and it just feels like a poorly balanced system. The solution of "not swapping them" or artificially inhibiting yourself is a dismissive argument and doesn't lead to a discussion on how the system could be better. e: Cynic Jester posted:My big issue with policies is how often you need to change them to play optimally. It's not like the civics system in Civ4 where unlocks were slow and varied, and changing poo poo around locked down your empire for X turns. Optimal play involves timing so much poo poo perfectly, building everything in waves to coincide with policy card changes. Pretty much this I feel. It's super micro. If this is the route the devs want to go, fine. They just need to add an in-game alarm in that case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Ambivalent posted:Swapping policies to suit your current purpose and using them efficiently isn't an unintended downside, though? It's the whole point. Swap stuff out all the time, sit on yield bonuses and passive stuff til you need active stuff. This is something a high culture civ can do nimbly that a low culture civ can't, and while in play the distinction between high and low culture isn't much, the concept is fine and good. Switching to the More Horsedudes policy when you want to build more horsedudes is using them efficiently. Timing your Tech and Civic completions so that you can switch to the 50% cheaper upgrades just as the new tier is available and then switching the policy back the next turn for free because you had another civic hanging on 1 turn to completion is prime cheese.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
kid sinister posted:This new "OMG barbarian scout totes found ur city!!!" feature is complete utter bullshit. Barbarian units have no problem finding my cities if my only unit ventures even one hex beyond my map knowledge, despite if I pound their scouts into dust. Yes it is stupid. If you are unlucky they can step into sight and out of sight without ever altering you I think. At least that's what seemed to happen to me. Even late-game barbarian encampments popping up in the few tiles of fog is just so irritating and stupid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
So maybe I just learned a valuable lesson about how religion works in this game but I'm fairly sure my founded religion got wiped out before I even made a missionary. Founded one, was surrounded on each side by Russia and China who were already with religions. They crawl all over me like parasites and convert enough of my capital that my founded religion isn't dominant. I can't make faith units in that city now because it's 1/3 1/3 1/3. Many turns later and I have wiped Russia off the map. They declared on me and I refused all pleas for mercy. I learned from Germany you shits, even if you cede the city to me the AI just denounces every 10 turns. Anyway my whole empire now is largely the Russian faith and I see no way to recover my faith in my capital short of hacking the damned game. Is this right? Is it really just as simple as this? Because I was just playing on easy to get a feel for the new mechanics and it seems dumb as hell that I can't pick a missionary type from the faiths of the city.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Yeah, writing over a holy city is a huge boon/pain in the rear end because there's no way to proselytize a minority religion in a city. I cruised to a pretty easy religious victory just by using an apostle that was lucky enough to get the "wipe out religions when you convert" promotion on the enemies' holy cities. After that, I used the increased passive spread to hold the line while I hopped around spreading the ancient Brazilian ways of PARTY TIME.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:Yeah, writing over a holy city is a huge boon/pain in the rear end because there's no way to proselytize a minority religion in a city. I cruised to a pretty easy religious victory just by using an apostle that was lucky enough to get the "wipe out religions when you convert" promotion on the enemies' holy cities. After that, I used the increased passive spread to hold the line while I hopped around spreading the ancient Brazilian ways of PARTY TIME. What was the symbol of PARTY TIME?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
homullus posted:What was the symbol of PARTY TIME? I couldn't really figure out a good symbol so I used the peacock.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
JetsGuy posted:So maybe I just learned a valuable lesson about how religion works in this game Here are some tips by me pro Civ6 player Decrepus: 1. Religion is stupid as hell. 2. Declare a war and trample the everloving gently caress out of the enemy religious units. 3. Accept a favorable white-peace by maybe killing someone enemy units as they funnel into you. 4. Ignore the frowny faces that warmongering gives you because it doesn't matter at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:I couldn't really figure out a good symbol so I used the peacock. That's Melek Taus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
i've already played more civ 6 than i did BE
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Here are some tips by me pro Civ6 player Decrepus: I keep trying to blitz a religion and it doesn't really work out ever so I'm just gonna follow this advice, ignore it like I did my first awesome game, and paint the believers' lands in the glowing radiation of my superior science.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Efexeye posted:i've already played more civ 6 than i did BE Not there yet, but I soon will be. There's a certain vital spark here that was missing in BE. That said, I'll always love BE for giving me hovertanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
I think my earliest Stonehenge completion report was on turn 31.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:I think my earliest Stonehenge completion report was on turn 31. The AI rushes Stonehenge in Civ 6 like it used to rush the Great Library in Civ 5.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Speedball posted:The AI rushes Stonehenge in Civ 6 like it used to rush the Great Library in Civ 5. Well, they should. Stonehenge is among the best ancient wonders and the Great Library is garbage now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
Gort posted:Well, they should. Stonehenge is among the best ancient wonders and the Great Library is garbage now. Oh, totally. Stonehenge saves me SO much time and effort. Hell I rushed it back in Civ 5. You can live without religion in Civ 6, but the benefits of being able to use it as a buff and a way to influence areas is too useful to me. Or hell, just generating faith to burn on structures and Great People. I like giving my units Missionary Zeal as the Enhancer Belief so I can use Missionaries and Apostles as scouts, too. They even ignore river crossings. So I think they're literally walking on water.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
If you want a religion you have to pick Saladman because there is no way you are beating the AI to it. I just tried it in my last play through and wasted probably 6+ turns on district projects trying to get a great prophet and lost it before even my second one was finished. e: On Deity I mean
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
JetsGuy posted:So maybe I just learned a valuable lesson about how religion works in this game but I'm fairly sure my founded religion got wiped out before I even made a missionary. Founded one, was surrounded on each side by Russia and China who were already with religions. They crawl all over me like parasites and convert enough of my capital that my founded religion isn't dominant. I can't make faith units in that city now because it's 1/3 1/3 1/3. I'm pretty sure building a holy site converts the city to your religion (if you have one), so you can do that and get missionaries/apostles from that city to convert your capital back. Or get an apostle, start an inquisition and get an inquisitor to remove the other religions from your capital first. I don't actually know if non-religious* citizens are easier to convert than those that already follow another religion, but I would assume so (otherwise I don't really see many use cases for inquisitors). If so, that would probably be more efficient (depending on available apostle promotions). Apostles can't start inquisitions if they're not at full charges, right? e: * Not really the right term, especially if they follow a pantheon - which they almost certainly do past the early game - but whatever. Non-denominational? I think that's mostly a Christian term. vvv Eh I haven't tried Deity but Immortal was a cakewalk really. Staltran fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:If you want a religion you have to pick Saladman because there is no way you are beating the AI to it. I just tried it in my last play through and wasted probably 6+ turns on district projects trying to get a great prophet and lost it before even my second one was finished. Well, on Deity you have to practically cheat because the computer's stacked the deck against you. On sane difficulty levels you can try other stuff...
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
I think if I were to tweak the policy system, I'd 1) Restrict the free policy swap to only apply to the actual new policy you got and 2) scale up the cost of swapping the more you do it. Then at least there would be the strategic concern of getting more benefits from swapping, while still keeping the costs manageable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I wish they would somehow dissuade players from having to engage in a card-shuffling metagame. It's definitely involved and I guess it does make players feel smart for timing their policy changes for maximum efficiency, but it should not be what the game is about. I think having control over your bonuses so you can swap in boosts for things that you're doing and then swap them out again when you're not doing those things so you can swap in boosts for other things you are doing is exactly what the government/policy system should be about. It was part of the fun/power of the Spiritual trait in Civ IV. It could do with some harsher limitations on the frequency of swapping, perhaps, but overall I think the system functions very well. Now the balance of individual policies is a perfectly fair criticism, there are some weird/useless ones (like the one that gives you gold when replacing a Farm with a Neighborhood). Mods seem to be addressing this issue pretty well but the base game, sure, that kind of thing is annoying. Magil Zeal fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Staltran posted:I'm pretty sure building a holy site converts the city to your religion (if you have one), so you can do that and get missionaries/apostles from that city to convert your capital back. Or get an apostle, start an inquisition and get an inquisitor to remove the other religions from your capital first. I don't actually know if non-religious* citizens are easier to convert than those that already follow another religion, but I would assume so (otherwise I don't really see many use cases for inquisitors). If so, that would probably be more efficient (depending on available apostle promotions). The problem is partly my fault in that I was learning the system and just a few turns later Russia and China had converted enough of the holy city so that I can't buy holy units if my religion. My religion is effectively dead aside from the 4 pop that believe in the capital. But it's not the majority faith so I can't buy any. Ah well I own the Russian holy city now and just inquisition all the loving legions of missionaries china sends. Seriously though gently caress the AI and their endless missionaries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
So, I have a serious question... Has anyone actually been attacked by an AI that isn't barbarians? I don't mean declared war on, I mean having them actually attack your cities or units with theirs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:So, I have a serious question... My first game I started playing it like civ 5 and left my city undefended and without a lot of units. Teddy declared war and nearly took the city before I could get a slinger trained and my warriors back.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Magil Zeal posted:Now the balance of individual policies is a perfectly fair criticism, there are some weird/useless ones (like the one that gives you gold when replacing a Farm with a Neighborhood). Actually these kind of policies are more interesting than +Number and I wish there were more of them. But yeah, as they are right now they can't compete with the dumb flat bonus policies and they just add to the clutter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
JetsGuy posted:The problem is partly my fault in that I was learning the system and just a few turns later Russia and China had converted enough of the holy city so that I can't buy holy units if my religion. My religion is effectively dead aside from the 4 pop that believe in the capital. No I mean building a holy site in another city should convert that city to the religion you founded, unless I'm wrong. You could then buy religious units of your religion from there. It might be that the conversion of holy sites is a one-time thing only when you found the religion, though, I'm not sure how it works. Or maybe it only converts the holy city and I'm completely misremembering how it works? e: Manual, end of page 124 and start of page 125 posted:Once your religion is founded, all of your cities with Holy Sites will automatically convert to the religion. Any future Holy Sites built will immediately adopt your religion. Staltran fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Nov 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Gort posted:Well, they should. Stonehenge is among the best ancient wonders and the Great Library is garbage now. Great Library is okay-ish for tourism if only because it's another two slots for Great Works of Writing. Even with the buff to amphitheaters holding 2 it's not hard to end up with too many writers. The rest of it is...mediocre at beast just because you can't really get it early.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:So, I have a serious question... Not really. I mean, they'll do these half-assed attacks that peter out into nothing much; I've never felt seriously under threat. The barbarians have been far more vigorous and aggressive than the 'proper' civs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
Trivia posted:Any mods out there that make policy cards actually interesting? This is an excellent example of the "less is more" mantra. It'd also be nice to know what yields I'd receive for activating a policy. Here's one, though it does a lot more than just policy card changes: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/mod-civ-6-improvements-patch.601878/ 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 00:44
|
|