|
Kanfy posted:The AI is my personal sticking point as well, if it was actually competent then I'd definitely like VI a lot but it's become pretty clear that it's just not going to happen with the 1UPT system. It's an enormous bummer too because despite certain other shortcomings I otherwise really like what VI has going for it. The biggest issue is that walls just...break the combat AI. At least the combat AIs for civs. Barbarians have no qualms with slamming themselves into them so if you reach critical mass of barbarian you have a real threat. The AI player's combat routines cause it to freak out against walls because they'll be losing half a unit's HP for what, to them, looks like negligible damage. So they'll never just nut up and take the city even if they've reached critical mass and then some.
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:41 |
|
|
fridge corn posted:Is the game any good tho? I liked Civ 5 a lot Install the "vox populi" mod for Civ 5 and get a new Civ game, for free
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:VI is a pretty mediocre Civ game, but it is still a Civ game with a bunch of novel ideas and civ choices. For all the harping we do here, anyone who still posts in the thread is likely to rack up the ol' 100+ hours of playtime before they're done with the game. I pretty much only play the game while watching Netflix or listening to a podcast on the side, but it's still given me my money's worth. Empire building and changing my playstyle to suit the Civ in playing as has always been my favourite part of Civ games so maybe I will give this one a shot, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Install the "vox populi" mod for Civ 5 and get a new Civ game, for free Is that the one that makes dromons a regular unit? Summoning Byzantine in 3, 2, 1...
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
VI also has strengths as a multiplayer game, if you enjoy that. Can be done live or turn-based via stuff like Play Your drat Turn, which makes it very easy to set up "hotseat" games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 16:07
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:The biggest issue is that walls just...break the combat AI. At least the combat AIs for civs. Barbarians have no qualms with slamming themselves into them so if you reach critical mass of barbarian you have a real threat. The AI player's combat routines cause it to freak out against walls because they'll be losing half a unit's HP for what, to them, looks like negligible damage. So they'll never just nut up and take the city even if they've reached critical mass and then some. Its internal maths is a complete mess when combined with the not well balanced cards, you can't get a religion unless you play Arabia on a non baby AI setting, and the civilopedia doesn't even tell you the formula about how to win a tourist victory, great installment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
I also hate that the religion game is completely orthogonal to the rest of the systems, so much so that it even has a different strategy later. Very jarring and poorly implemented. Also the limited religions is dumb, why did they do that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:Also the limited religions is dumb, why did they do that? Presumably so every civ doesn't found its own religion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:The biggest issue is that walls just...break the combat AI. At least the combat AIs for civs. Barbarians have no qualms with slamming themselves into them so if you reach critical mass of barbarian you have a real threat. The AI player's combat routines cause it to freak out against walls because they'll be losing half a unit's HP for what, to them, looks like negligible damage. So they'll never just nut up and take the city even if they've reached critical mass and then some. did they ever change how the city state barbarian invasion event works or does it still spawn a barb every other turn and if a single one spawned by the event is alive, in the borders or out, the CS gets converted to a barbarian state
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:I would very much like to not be constantly reminded that my spies are doing counter-espionage. There's a mod for this. Just search the workshop for repeat counterespionage or something like that and you'll find it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Yeah the walls thing is really what does it in Anyone know if this is any good: https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/ai.25439/ AI improvement mod
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Gort posted:Presumably so every civ doesn't found its own religion. They still want conversion and shared religion to be a big thing like it was in 4, which means some civs have to go without so that there can be a vacuum for religions to safely spread into without an all out holy war. (It still doesn't work though.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
conversion and shared religion only works under non-exclusive rulesets
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:VI is a pretty mediocre Civ game, but it is still a Civ game with a bunch of novel ideas and civ choices. For all the harping we do here, anyone who still posts in the thread is likely to rack up the ol' 100+ hours of playtime before they're done with the game. I pretty much only play the game while watching Netflix or listening to a podcast on the side, but it's still given me my money's worth. No it's a mediocre version and better ones exist whether you want more gameplay oriented (civ 4) or nicer looking and more streamlined (civ 5) and yeah, Civ 6 is just basically not much of a game from a mechanical standpoint. The AI doesn't work. The game is not really functional but you can pretend to play it for a while. The whole "let's be honest you'll get 100 hours out of this busted rear end game" statement is bizarre, I think that's just you and a small number of people. To flip it around, can you describe what experience the Civ 6 game with absolutely no meaningful AI or combat challenge provides you that Civ 4 and Civ 5 would not, but going with the whole "lol its a civ they can't gently caress it up" argument seems very ambitious given what happened with Beyond Earth and now Civ 6, two disasters in a row.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:No it's a mediocre version and better ones exist whether you want more gameplay oriented (civ 4) or nicer looking and more streamlined (civ 5) and yeah, Civ 6 is just basically not much of a game from a mechanical standpoint. The AI doesn't work. The game is not really functional but you can pretend to play it for a while. The whole "let's be honest you'll get 100 hours out of this busted rear end game" statement is bizarre, I think that's just you and a small number of people.   
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
As bad as Civ 6 is, it casts Civ 5 in a very harsh light. The mechanics and AI in 5 are worse in basically every respect. It creates the illusion of being a game by imposing artificial limits on the human player that don't exist for the AI.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:As bad as Civ 6 is, it casts Civ 5 in a very harsh light. The mechanics and AI in 5 are worse in basically every respect. It creates the illusion of being a game by imposing artificial limits on the human player that don't exist for the AI. i was pretty mad when civ 7 came out and human players couldn't attack walled cities but ais could
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Do you want a medal for being a dumb rear end?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Replayed a bit of Civ V a few days ago and the global happiness mechanic alone was enough to make me go running back to Civ VI in a heartbeat, screwed up AI and all. I used to play V quite a lot but I cannot for the life of me enjoy it nowadays. IV is still easily the best though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
Yeah, the V love in this thread is kind of odd since, if VI is the same game as VI and VI is a bad game, V is even worse because it mostly has less stuff, is catastrophically poorly-balanced, heavily pushes you towards a particular set of choices (four cities, Tradition, as few policies as possible before Rationalism, etc) via very arbitrary limits, also has braindead AI, and so on. You can argue that VI should be better, but "VI bad game, V good game" rings hollow when a lot of the arguments for such are based on VI's similarity to V. This isn't to say that you can't like V more than VI or anything, that's perfectly valid, but a lot of the complaints feel like they're looking back with rose-tinted glasses and/or amount to "I got used to V's flaws and bad decisions and don't like VI's new, different flaws and bad decisions". Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Nov 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Yeah, the V love in this thread is kind of odd since, if VI is the same game as VI and VI is a bad game, V is even worse because it mostly has less stuff, is catastrophically poorly-balanced, heavily pushes you towards a particular set of choices (four cities, Tradition, as few policies as possible before Rationalism, etc) via very arbitrary limits, also has braindead AI, and so on. You can argue that VI should be better, but "VI bad game, V good game" rings hollow when a lot of the arguments for such are based on VI's similarity to V. it could be this, that civ 6 is so unchangingly similar to 5 that all my exhaustion over the system is reflected in that i just don't want to play either. but 6 came out after a thousand-odd hours of 5, and to me the only mechanical difference is that you frustratingly can't move into a hill or forest with 1 move point v honestly i didn't care for vox populi, it's too kitchen sink-y for me. but it's as different from civ 5 as civ 6 is Fur20 fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Nov 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
All I'm gonna say about this stupid argument is vox populi CTD'd after about 20 turns on a fresh install of Civ5, no other mods running. I'm not convinced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Ulvino posted:Is that the one that makes dromons a regular unit? Summoning Byzantine in 3, 2, 1... Yes, and it's loving garbage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
I'm hearing comparisons saying that Civ5 has every fault (and therefore is just an inferior version to) Civ6, and I don't believe this. When learning how to play on higher difficulties, the AI could and would regularly take cities off of me. Civ6 has had empirical testing showing otherwise. To me, that issue trumps literally everything else. The '5 AIs may be an inept psychopaths, but at least they are entities with presence. Knowing that the AI can't hurt you in '6 spoils the game entirely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
i guess since i play with actual people the fact that the ai sucks really doesn't matter that much to me but it is apparently a huge thing for goons lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 02:18
|
|
|
All I want in a Civ game is for the AI to leave me alone to build and research and make my empire pretty, but even on the lowest difficulty setting Civ6 is filled with bloodthirsty sociopaths - I always end up getting declared on by every civ except Sumeria, multiple times throughout every game. Even when I wipe out every attack with ease and take their cities, they declare peace only to declare war again ten turns later. That more than anything is what convinced me to not buy any Civ6 DLC or expansions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:All I want in a Civ game is for the AI to leave me alone to build and research and make my empire pretty, but even on the lowest difficulty setting Civ6 is filled with bloodthirsty sociopaths - I always end up getting declared on by every civ except Sumeria, multiple times throughout every game. Even when I wipe out every attack with ease and take their cities, they declare peace only to declare war again ten turns later. civ 6 AI is this really obnoxious mix of 'very easy to piss off' and 'completely incompetent at warfare'. their only real threat is to my enjoyment of the game by constantly interrupting gameplay to go 'grr i'm mad at you for this reason'
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 02:37
|
|
|
Serephina posted:I'm hearing comparisons saying that Civ5 has every fault (and therefore is just an inferior version to) Civ6, and I don't believe this. When learning how to play on higher difficulties, the AI could and would regularly take cities off of me. Civ6 has had empirical testing showing otherwise. To me, that issue trumps literally everything else. The '5 AIs may be an inept psychopaths, but at least they are entities with presence. Knowing that the AI can't hurt you in '6 spoils the game entirely. That is not actually what I said, at least. I was pointing out that the same people in here constantly complaining about VI simultaneously try to criticize it for being V again but with districts pretty much, while also listing off a lot of flaws that it does mostly share with V, yet also talk about how good V is. "VI is bad", "V is good", and "VI is the same as V" are not compatible. Personally, I think V's worst aspects are largely unique to it, though it is unfortunate that a lot of VI is taken right from V. Which is where some (though not all; it does have some unique and annoying problems of its own) of its own badness comes from. Also, while I personally play MP almost exclusively, I've seen a few videos and play reports from other people where walled cities were taken or almost taken, and in one of the games I'm in, someone quit, then after the AI took over their civ it went on to wipe out a different player. So, "the AI can't hurt you" is demonstrably false, and personally I question any "empirical testing" that amounts to engineering a situation that looks nothing like normal play and then seeing how the AI responds. Which is not to say that the AI is not really bad, just that the "tests" are probably crap; I tried finding them again, and the first I found involved starting in the Information Era, which has massive warmongering penalties (which the AI cares about a lot, something the thread also likes to complain about), when game is designed so that the Ancient Era has a ton of fighting and skirmishing but that ramps down lower and lower over time, and then declaring war on the AI the moment it was found. So, basically, the "proof" that the AI can't take defended cities is that in defensive wars set at a point in the game that heavily discourages fighting if you're not making a play for victory or something otherwise hugely important, the AI doesn't take cities. Somehow that is not very convincing to me, given how the AI seems pretty okay at taking cities in earlier eras and during wars where its goal was in fact to take your cities, as demonstrated by play and tests that have a less flawed setup. Heck, this seems pretty consistent with how the AI gets pissed at you for taking cities "defensively". Yes, VI's AI is pretty bad, and has had some pretty big issues, only some of which have been fixed (and some of which were added more recently because Firaxis kind of sucks). It isn't uniquely bad by Civ standards though; being crap at waging war when not given overwhelming offensive advantages is a pretty recurring thing in the series, which is why the difficulty levels are generally just adjustments of how much it stacks the deck in your favor or the AI's in all the games. Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Nov 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
I for one am psyched to be reading this exact same argument again, except with Civ V's traits cast in a positive rather than negative light. If we are talking impossible asks, I just really want the mobile sea cities mechanic from BERT in any Civ game. I don't give a gently caress if the AI knows how to react to 3-6 endgame cities full of planes surfing into their coastal territory and stealing their tiles  With districts I don't see that coming back easily, though. RIP Deepcastle, you were the fastest possible city.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
Leinadi posted:Replayed a bit of Civ V a few days ago and the global happiness mechanic alone was enough to make me go running back to Civ VI in a heartbeat, screwed up AI and all. I used to play V quite a lot but I cannot for the life of me enjoy it nowadays. Vox populi overhauls the happiness system and does away with the stupid global happiness!  Aerdan posted:All I'm gonna say about this stupid argument is That's an awful shame because it's super good*. There's a 20-5 version and some newer, playtest versions - maybe try a different one? *It is kitchen sinky though. Brace yourself for a million new buildings. The learning curve is steep because until you're familiar with at least some of those buildings, you'll have no idea what's going on
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 11:08
|
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:To flip it around, can you describe what experience the Civ 6 game with absolutely no meaningful AI or combat challenge provides you that Civ 4 and Civ 5 would not, but going with the whole "lol its a civ they can't gently caress it up" argument seems very ambitious given what happened with Beyond Earth and now Civ 6, two disasters in a row. Sure. City planning is a lot more involved in VI than any of its predecessors. In the older games, you'd look at which tiles would be available to a city before you plopped it down, and that was about it. You decided which improvements to build and what forests to chop and such, but cities were a fairly static force compared. In VI, the tiles around your city matter much more. Do you build a holy site in some distant woods for the adjacency bonus and era points, or do you save that site for something later? Will you save a cluster of tiles for farms so the city can grow past 15 citizens, or will you only need to work 12 tiles? Do you leave a couple river tiles undeveloped for a shot at building a river-adjacent wonder later, or do you reap the definite bonuses now? Will you space out your cities so they all get to develop as many tiles as possible, or do you cluster them so you can build blocks of districts all giving adjacency bonuses to each other? Will this city ever grow big enough to build all the districts you want, or do you need to prioritize? You're constantly evaluating the development of the land around your cities, and that is very nice. The civilizations are also much more strategically distinct than in older games, where most uniques were just a bonus to things you were going to do anyway. Cythereal posted:All I want in a Civ game is for the AI to leave me alone to build and research and make my empire pretty, but even on the lowest difficulty setting Civ6 is filled with bloodthirsty sociopaths - I always end up getting declared on by every civ except Sumeria, multiple times throughout every game. Even when I wipe out every attack with ease and take their cities, they declare peace only to declare war again ten turns later. Have you played much since R&F came out, and were they mostly Joint Wars? The AI used to use a different decision process for declaring Joint Wars than other wars, which overrode a lot of other routines and made them excessively bloodthirsty. They fixed this in Rise and Fall, and I don't know if the fix also came with the free patch, but if you haven't played since that came out, it's worth giving it a shot. Civs definitely leave you alone more than they used to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Have you played much since R&F came out, and were they mostly Joint Wars? The AI used to use a different decision process for declaring Joint Wars than other wars, which overrode a lot of other routines and made them excessively bloodthirsty. They fixed this in Rise and Fall, and I don't know if the fix also came with the free patch, but if you haven't played since that came out, it's worth giving it a shot. Civs definitely leave you alone more than they used to. Haven't played at all since R&F came out and they were never Joint Wars.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 13:11
|
|
|
General Morden posted:i guess since i play with actual people the fact that the ai sucks really doesn't matter that much to me Its a huge thing for people who enjoy single player, goon or not edit: and I would bet most civ players are more interested in SP than MP Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 13:47 on Nov 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 13:43
|
|
|
Building placement requirements are one of the most frustrating things about Civ VI and one of the reasons why I'd prefer a Civ-like game without the board game influence. Maybe it's unfair to complain about immersion breaking but it feels absurd to have to carefully consider building placement in the classical era because it will impact something two thousand years later. I know there's little chance for future Civ games changing the formula much but I would like to see an attempt to make something more like Distant Worlds (but less complicated), with a continuous map and finer levels of discretization that you don't have to micromanage. Barring that, there are other ideas they could steal like more interesting exploration mechanics a la Fall from Heaven/Endless Legend, or historical goals and mechanics to make managing sprawling empires more challenging like in Rhye's and Fall. Zulily Zoetrope posted:Have you played much since R&F came out, and were they mostly Joint Wars? The AI used to use a different decision process for declaring Joint Wars than other wars, which overrode a lot of other routines and made them excessively bloodthirsty. They fixed this in Rise and Fall, and I don't know if the fix also came with the free patch, but if you haven't played since that came out, it's worth giving it a shot. Civs definitely leave you alone more than they used to. I played a few games without R&F after the patch and still got lots of joint war spam. Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Nov 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Its a huge thing for people who enjoy single player, goon or not I play Civ almost exclusively in multiplayer but that's with 1 or at most 2 people where the AI being bad is just as big of an issue, even amongst this crowd people who can organize games big enough to replace all or most AI with players consistently are pretty rare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Its a huge thing for people who enjoy single player, goon or not Yea, goons are a bad demographic for it because most people here are significantly better than the usual people playing and are more likely to be playing with other people. Even people who are poo poo (like me) notice how bad the AI is in this one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
The Civ V vs. Civ VI argument is a little silly given that IV is clearly the best game in the series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
prometheusbound2 posted:The Civ V vs. Civ VI argument is a little silly given that IV is clearly the best game in the series. this is true but i am a petty bitch and can't deal with how IV looks these days
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 16:27
|
|
|
Civ 6 is cool and good, buy it on a sale.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 16:41 |
|
|
I've been playing civ6 on the ipad and it is very much a Civ game and the touch controls are pretty good. The display seems a bit cluttered at times though and its hard to see things like tile yield and stuff. The districts thing and adjacency bonuses are kinda confusing and I don't really understand what I'm doing but in having fun with it
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 17:16
|
|