Gort posted:

There is a grace period for agendas. Some require 10 turns to pass since you met, some require 30.

Get this mod called "Agenda Tweaks" if you want them to make more sense.

Orange Sunshine posted:

Well then the grace period isn't working. I know I've met the Kongo guy, and 2 turns later he denounced me for not spreading my religion to his cities. It would be physically impossible for me to have spread religion to his cities within 2 turns of meeting him.

Orange Sunshine posted:

Well then the grace period isn't working. I know I've met the Kongo guy, and 2 turns later he denounced me for not spreading my religion to his cities. It would be physically impossible for me to have spread religion to his cities within 2 turns of meeting him.

homullus posted:

Not if you were exploring with missionaries.

Alkydere posted:

I think my favorite lack of grace period is the leader of Kongo freaking out the moment you have a religion, but haven't had a chance to spread it to him. Dude, you're on the other side of the world, past barbarians and 2 other civs, and I haven't even built my worship building that will allow me to build a loving missionary. Chill the gently caress out.

markus_cz posted:

ProfessorCirno posted:

I admit upfront that I remember more or less nothing about pre-expansion Civ 5, but going off what few memories I DO have, this seems way less fun.

I mean, I dunno if I'd call it worse. It's more that every flaw in this game serves to decrease it's enjoyment factor. Even changes that "make sense" like the movement changes on rough terrain means the game a) moves way slower, and b) makes ranged attacks way more powerful, which is why the game is ranged supremacy unless you have a specific civ bonus. Other changes include port cities being terrible, encouraging horrendous city swamping so that you have as many cities as humanly possible, the asinine way districts are priced so that they become harder to build as the years pass on, the nonsensical diplomacy system that mostly just serves to ensure you will always go for a domination victory...the list goes on.

I almost feel like they tried to play up the domination factor, and in doing so ruined everything else. Except they also cocked that up with AI that literally cannot invade you.

Civ 6 is a bad game.

ProfessorCirno posted:

I admit upfront that I remember more or less nothing about pre-expansion Civ 5, but going off what few memories I DO have, this seems way less fun.

I mean, I dunno if I'd call it worse. It's more that every flaw in this game serves to decrease it's enjoyment factor. Even changes that "make sense" like the movement changes on rough terrain means the game a) moves way slower, and b) makes ranged attacks way more powerful, which is why the game is ranged supremacy unless you have a specific civ bonus. Other changes include port cities being terrible, encouraging horrendous city swamping so that you have as many cities as humanly possible, the asinine way districts are priced so that they become harder to build as the years pass on, the nonsensical diplomacy system that mostly just serves to ensure you will always go for a domination victory...the list goes on.

I almost feel like they tried to play up the domination factor, and in doing so ruined everything else. Except they also cocked that up with AI that literally cannot invade you.

Civ 6 is a bad game.

Gort posted:

Sounds like most of the things you've listed (slow unit movment, bad sea tiles, bad diplomacy, but not district costs, though I've seen mods for that) are addressed by Quo's combined tweaks mod. Might be worth installing that and AI+ if you're not just washing your hands of the game entirely.

dy. posted:

Well this looks pretty fantastic.

Gort posted:

Disclaimer: I haven't played that mod.

markus_cz posted:

If you are annoyed with the AI and want to battle it out with real humans, come and join the 3rd goon PBEM game. You will download a client which handles the save distribution
automatically and notifies you when it's your turn.

Password: letmein

What to expect:
- Small map, 6 players, shuffle (I'm willing to change the map type if other players want to)
- Online speed, which is around 250 turns max. The average turnout seems to be one whole turn per day, so this is up to 250 real life days.

It's a slow-paced experience, only a few minutes a day, so you should have patience. The ability to play your turns somewhat reliably is welcome.

ProfessorCirno posted:

I admit upfront that I remember more or less nothing about pre-expansion Civ 5, but going off what few memories I DO have, this seems way less fun.

I mean, I dunno if I'd call it worse. It's more that every flaw in this game serves to decrease it's enjoyment factor. Even changes that "make sense" like the movement changes on rough terrain means the game a) moves way slower, and b) makes ranged attacks way more powerful, which is why the game is ranged supremacy unless you have a specific civ bonus. Other changes include port cities being terrible, encouraging horrendous city swamping so that you have as many cities as humanly possible, the asinine way districts are priced so that they become harder to build as the years pass on, the nonsensical diplomacy system that mostly just serves to ensure you will always go for a domination victory...the list goes on.

I almost feel like they tried to play up the domination factor, and in doing so ruined everything else. Except they also cocked that up with AI that literally cannot invade you.

Civ 6 is a bad game.

markus_cz posted:

If you are annoyed with the AI and want to battle it out with real humans, come and join the 3rd goon PBEM game. You will download a client which handles the save distribution
automatically and notifies you when it's your turn.

Password: letmein

What to expect:
- Small map, 6 players, shuffle (I'm willing to change the map type if other players want to)
- Online speed, which is around 250 turns max. The average turnout seems to be one whole turn per day, so this is up to 250 real life days.

It's a slow-paced experience, only a few minutes a day, so you should have patience. The ability to play your turns somewhat reliably is welcome.

Sheriff posted:

Civ 5 was way, way less fun on launch than Civ 6 because there wasn't anything to do. It was so incredibly barebones. No religion, no tourism, no trade routes, no espionage, no world congress, no great works. The tech tree was sparse, wonders were rare, and the civilizations at launch didn't feel very unique. Coming from the fully expanded and patched Civ 4, the sheer lack of things to do was jarring. It may feel like like tried to play up the domination factor in 6, but with 5, they didn't have to, because it was almost literally the only thing you could do. And while the AI definitely leaves a lot to be desired in 6, it was somehow even worse at 5's launch. To me, there's no comparison. Civ 6 definitely suffers from a lot of balance issues, but the mere fact that there's imbalanced systems is a huge step above what Civ 5 shipped as.

kater posted:

Wasn't base five basically a revolution reskin?

kater posted:

Wasn't base five basically a revolution reskin?

Tahirovic posted:

I would actually be playing MP games (coop) with friends if teams still existed. Our theory is that they couldn't be arsed to balance things like Religion around them or something, seeing those never really worked in Civ5 teams.

Gort posted:

Sounds like most of the things you've listed (slow unit movment, bad sea tiles, bad diplomacy, but not district costs, though I've seen mods for that) are addressed by Quo's combined tweaks mod. Might be worth installing that and AI+ if you're not just washing your hands of the game entirely.

Zero_Grade posted:

A lot of these changes seem a) modest and b) clever while being c) interesting and d) not overpowered, which is quite the achievement. Maybe Firaxis will just steal all of these for a patch (wishful thinking I know).

homullus posted:

I hope they don't copy the ones that remove restrictions on buildings and wonders, or the increase in strategic resources, or lower the barbarians. Those are not interesting or clever,

CascadeBeta posted:

Thats my one complaint as well. Being able to grab a colosseum with no entertainment district makes the district itself moot. I wonder how hard it would be to make those tweaks myself.

Target Practice posted:

Weird question, but I find myself with a lot of time with only access to my laptop. If I run Civ 6 in strategy mode, does that give me any graphical performance increases at all?

The White Dragon posted:

when i meet ai it's because they declared joint war on me thanks game

No, seriously, this off-the-rails aggro AI is cool and honestly makes for an interesting game... if one or two out of eight to ten AI players have it, not goddamn everyone. Like, Montezuma or Hojo should be making the other players diplomacy extremely wary of them because they're always asking to do joint wars against the player (and only ever against you, I've seriously seen the AI declare war on each other maybe one tenth as many times as I've received DoW and not even once in my most recent game) to the point where eventually, everyone should just start offering you to joint DoW them for their own safety.

of course, thanks to the garbage swiss cheese logic gates in the diplomacy in this game, you'd accept their joint war and then they'd denounce for you declaring war on someone

when i, of all people, can honestly say that i could cook a tighter diplo ai than what we have right now... holy poo poo your ai has major loving problems

homullus posted:

"Oh man, all of the world's [strategic resource] is under my ally's civ. Do I . . . attack them? Provoke them into attacking me? Hope we remain buddies, so they'll keep letting me use them?" is one of the most interesting and key decisions in the game.