|
turboraton posted:Civ 6 is cool and good, buy it on a sale. Nope. Don't buy it. And £35 for the newest expansion is loving robbery. I understand that games are technically cheaper than they should be and things like that but honestly that cost is absolutely mad.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:51 |
|
|
counterpoint: buy it
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
Buy civ6 if you just want to play sim Don't buy it if you expect the AI to be competent at any facet of the mechanics or to provide a competent challenge to you in singleplayer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 17:41
|
|
|
I found it pretty challenging on the highest difficulty. I'd say don't buy it if you've already sunk 2000 hours into one of the other civ games because you will hate it in a unique insane person way that makes you post about it till you die
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:Buy civ6 if you just want to play sim The thing is I love playing it as just a buildy game and I played the others that way. It doesn't work as well in this because cities have less character and everything is a lot slower. I just feel like I run out of stuff to do a lot more quickly and I have fewer "standout" amazing cities.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Brother Entropy posted:this is true but i am a petty bitch and can't deal with how IV looks these days Seconding that the look of 4 is really dated. I personally much prefer sn00py's watercolor mod for Civ3 over anything since then. drat shame they made the terrain so hard to mod, because Civ4 terrain detracts from the experience IMO. Also, I've played a lot of all of the Civs since 1, and gently caress 1UPT, it's ruining the series. BE as a Civ4 mod would have been so much better, terrain aside. What a waste as a Civ5 sequel! I hope in Civ7 they bring back multiple units per square so the AI has a chance, perhaps use logistical limits like Endless Legend or penalties for too many units per square like in the Realism Invictus mod for Civ4 (or any others using limits per square). Maybe Take Two will sell the franchise to Sega so they can be combined. edit: to make this less of a useless complaint post, I'd like to say that I think the terrain in Civ4 is hard to differentiate because it went too realistic instead of allowing for clearly identified terrain types. I think 5 and 6 did a better job there, although 5 and then BE started to slip back. Mizaq fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Nov 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
prometheusbound2 posted:The Civ V vs. Civ VI argument is a little silly given that IV is clearly the best game in the series. Nothing but truth in this post. I'll always maintain that 1UPT was a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
1upt was a mediocre game designer's 1 weird trick and made civ games worse for a decade after that, gg looking forward to At the Gates, it's in the home stretch!! gonna be another epic game from that epic dude
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
I dislike Civ 6 because of how lazy the writing is. There’s a reason people long for an alpha centauri update, and it’s not because it was ‘balanced’, its because it really hit that sweet spot of imagination and creativity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Taear posted:It doesn't work as well in this because cities have less character This is a standout weird thing to say in a thread with "this game is trash garbage and nobody should buy it, by the way LOL I haven't bought the expansion or played more than four times." Through districts, cities have never been more different from each other in any civ game. I understand that you want to build all the wonders in one or two cities, and this game doesn't let you do that, but going for a religious victory in this thread is a mistake! Abort!
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
learning that civ 6 AI couldn't take a walled city ruined it just as much as learning that enemy boss health in bioshock didn't get restored if you died and you could literally kill a boss by wrenching it one time and then dying over and over i mean not that you'd want to, just that like there wasn't even the slightest hint of a penalty for dying other than walking back to the enemy
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
barge posted:I found it pretty challenging on the highest difficulty. I'd say don't buy it if you've already sunk 2000 hours into one of the other civ games because you will hate it in a unique insane person way that makes you post about it till you die I mostly play games for the challenge but playing Civ V/VI on Deity mostly just means you have to play in a highly specific way to exploit the AI's weaknesses and overcome their enormous bonuses. Like it does it make it more challenging but not really in an interesting way, and it again comes down to the AI's weakness at warfare. Obviously that's also true for IV, but you don't really have to play Deity in the first place to be challenged in that game since the AI is far less crippled in the military front.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
homullus posted:This is a standout weird thing to say in a thread with "this game is trash garbage and nobody should buy it, by the way LOL I haven't bought the expansion or played more than four times." Through districts, cities have never been more different from each other in any civ game. I understand that you want to build all the wonders in one or two cities, and this game doesn't let you do that, but going for a religious victory in this thread is a mistake! Abort! Yea that'd work if you didn't have to build the same districts in every city to make it worthwhile and if building them later in the game didn't take absolutely loving forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
homullus posted:This is a standout weird thing to say in a thread with "this game is trash garbage and nobody should buy it, by the way LOL I haven't bought the expansion or played more than four times." i don't think this is a fair assessment. if you enjoy civ, and have played the others a lot, but disliked civ 6 enough that you only played a couple games of it, it speaks to your dissatisfaction with it. i still play 4 sometimes, 5 less frequently. i can still even get into civ 1, and i dabble in freeciv because it's an interesting change of pace. but not 6, i've never even contemplated reinstalling it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
IDK, I like Civ 6 a lot, I find having to worry about terrain interesting and fun. If you always use the exact same min-max strategy every game because it's the most efficient and managed to master it immediately, then good for you. I like to try to get different victory types with different civs, and I get a lot enjoyment out of it. Maybe I suck because I don't always do the optimal solution every game, but I have a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:IDK, I like Civ 6 a lot, I find having to worry about terrain interesting and fun. If you always use the exact same min-max strategy every game because it's the most efficient and managed to master it immediately, then good for you. This is why I didn't enjoy Civ6 though. I like to play every different character, I basically roleplay and never played the same person more than once. But Civ6 sort of pushes you towards playing a certain way and if you don't play that way you don't play at all. Without tonnes of cities you're really horrendously weak, without building industrial districts your cities build so slowly they never produce anything and etc etc. Hell in the other civs - especially 4 - I had real difficulties keeping a military because I had so much other stuff I'd rather build first. That's never an issue in 6 for me. In fact I find myself playing Gilgamesh and making war carts because it just feels like anything else is a loving slog. It just doesn't flow for me the way the other ones do. I don't feel like you can be just easy going in Civ6, it pigeonholes you and makes playing how I played every Civ from 2 onwards pretty much impossible. And I know that spamming cities was the best idea in things like SMAC but you could still play and be productive and have fun without doing it, but I don't feel like that in 6 at all. Taear fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Nov 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
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 I don’t think it’s really a “goons lol” thing to expect a single player game to have an AI that can pose a challenge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Stefan Prodan posted:learning that civ 6 AI couldn't take a walled city ruined it just as much as learning that enemy boss health in bioshock didn't get restored if you died and you could literally kill a boss by wrenching it one time and then dying over and over I just had a city taken from me very late in the game, the AI was effective and quick in taking it (using both boats and land units) and I couldn't scramble my meager forces fast enough to defend it. NOW, not saying that the AI doesn't have issues. There definitely appears to be some thing in the AI which makes it very... indecisive at times when it wages war, like it can't focus on its target properly. At least later in the game. And for other concerns, I absolutely cannot understand the "Civ VI forces me to play in a certain way". If you're on Deity, then yes, you'll probably want to play the "ultimate way" to survive which, I might add, the other Civs have as well (an ultimate way of playing). But I mean, the leaders themselves are pretty dang different and encourages different playstyles. Perfectly balanced? gently caress no, not even close. But there are *many* good options, and no, they don't necessarily involve building Industrial Zones (which aren't that useful imo though the Great Engineers can certainly be nice). Something like Scotland is well suited for playing more "tall" (though wide is always good in this game which is how it should be afaik) for example. Civ VI is a frustrating game at times, don't get me wrong. Like I said, I also feel the AI has some serious issues for example. But a lot of the complaints in this thread are stuff that I just can't relate to at all, or in some cases, I could relate to when the game was first released but not right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 22:44
|
|
|
ate poo poo on live tv posted:I don’t think it’s really a “goons lol” thing to expect a single player game to have an AI that can pose a challenge. i have never really considered the civilization games as single player games but i can understand the ai frustrations
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
General Morden posted:i have never really considered the civilization games as single player games but i can understand the ai frustrations Games can be so long that it's crazier to think of them as multi-player games first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
I like multiplayer too, but the majority of my civ time is single player, which is why a challenging AI is a must for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
most civ5/6 mp games are decided prematurely once the game reaches a certain point and it looks like a player will be the winner so i haven't had that problem, personally if everybody knows what they're doing and is playing competitively i've seen civ games end 30-40 mins in but i realize that this is a smaller subsection of the civ player base and most players play very slowly and don't necessarily play the game in mp because it forces you to play a certain way and invalidates a lot of things that you can do in sp
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
These what civ is the best discussions are dumb and useless.... Because Smac exists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
There's one thing about V over VI that I really want to bring back, and it's the general aesthetic design of the map, the terrain, and probably the UI as well. I prefer the Fog of War as either just being in a shadow or covered by the clouds. The old-time-y map look in VI makes sense but the sepia tone over anything out of sight makes it harder to distinguish at a glance what kind of terrain you're looking at sometimes. I just think V looks loving pretty, and specifically in terms of having a desire to explore every inch of the map it's my favorite in the series. Oh and I forgot V's leader screens. I prefer those as well. The leaders, being sort of in their natural settings and being portrayed more realistically (in bodily proportions), were generally pretty well done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
1UPT would be an amazing choice for this series if Firaxis was willing to spring for a half dozen Stanford CS PhD students to help the AI play it sorta somewhat competently As it is I think the best chance for the Civ series is something like freeciv where the ruleset isn't thrown out every 5 years to sell a new $60 version. Just iterate on the boardgame and the gameplay and competent(ish) AI will follow. Pakistani Brad Pitt fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Nov 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
The thing I really like about Civ 6 is that it displays properly, unlike Civ 5, which is unplayable on the resolution my computer runs at. gently caress Civ 5 for this single reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
I hate it when a spearman on a mountain kills my battleship. People have been bitching about civ forever. I think the only time a new version didn't cause people to have apoplexy was IV, since III was just that mediocre.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 04:25
|
|
|
I've been playing the series since one and the first time an enemy city culturally flipped to my control in three a whole new layer of immersion opened up to me.
Star Frog fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Nov 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 09:23
|
|
|
General Morden posted:i have never really considered the civilization games as single player games but i can understand the ai frustrations The first two didn't have multiplayer on release though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
eXXon posted:The first two didn't have multiplayer on release though. First 3, even. Multiplayer was an expansion feature for III.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 15:29
|
|
|
SMH if you didn't play with friends and family the scenarios
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:Yeah the walls thing is really what does it in In my experience, not particularly. It just made the game even easier. I only played a few games on deity with it before disabling. The AI def seemed better at taking cities, and actually uses bombard/frigate type units to take down walls. But was much worse at building infrastructure. Builds far, far, too many units relative to districts (and seems to completely ignore the theatre square); and then mostly just leaves their army standing around doing nothing. It seemed to make the AI really passive against the the human player. I could usually get friendships with the AI on first meeting them which is ridiculous. It also may have mucked up wonder prioritisation for the AI, for example they wouldn't build stone henge until after all religions were founded. It's not necessarily worse - just bad in different ways.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
Brother Entropy posted: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' I like when Alexander literally interrupts peace talks that end a thousand year conflict to try to shame me for not being at war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
SlothBear posted:I like when Alexander literally interrupts peace talks that end a thousand year conflict to try to shame me for not being at war. The danes getting in touch to say "How dare you haven't got a fleet" when you're effectively Uzbekistan. Although I think that's sorted now isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 17:41
|
|
|
I decided to try out the game again. I settled two cities next to Tomyris, who asked me not to do it again. I agreed. Next turn, she denounced me for breaking the promise, apparently because of the second city I settled (before making the promise). Also, I apparently broke my promise to take my troops away from the border, because I had one warrior scouting who had to step next to her borders. I'd forgotten how absolutely infuriating the diplomacy with AIs is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
Staltran posted:I decided to try out the game again. I settled two cities next to Tomyris, who asked me not to do it again. I agreed. Next turn, she denounced me for breaking the promise, apparently because of the second city I settled (before making the promise). That kinda of stuff is really the worst I could accept the AI being braindead at war. Most time since 5 I try to avoid war altogether becouse 1UPT made it such a chore. Not even becouse the AI can't play it with minimum competence, is just annoying and tiring on itself to move all those units, all getting on each other's ways all the time But it is really too much to ask for an AI that won't act like a lunatic retarded baby on diplomacy? Diplomacy in these games is not even that complex, come on edit: I know it's a different beast, but in EU, with a much more complicated diplomacy, the AI can act with coherence and rationality. It's not impossible, just put some effort on it, goddamit Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Nov 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
Yeah, I certainly understand the AI not being good at war. Navigating the map and maneuvering units into the right place to attack other units, that might also move, is pretty complicated. The diplomacy is just a simple decision tree though. All of the data is already there, you just have to make the AI smart enough to use it. Maybe have Harald count the number of docks and coastal cities you have before he yells at you. Or have Mvemba a Nzinga wait for 30 turns after you found a religion to get angry at you for not spreading it. And get rid of the AI asking you to move your troops from their border. It doesn't work now, and it hasn't worked for the 8 years since it's been in V. The AI calls you out when you have two scouts near them, and it's never in your interest to agree since it often forces you to move your own troops from your own border.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Taear posted:The danes getting in touch to say "How dare you haven't got a fleet" when you're effectively Uzbekistan. At least the message is "hey buddy, your seas look pretty ripe for the picking, just sayin'," and the diplo hit is understandable because it makes you a more likely target for war. I think the historic agendas on the whole are the least infuriating thing about diplomacy, even if it means folks Saladin and Jadwiga are bound to always hate your guts. Robert is the most annoying, but I do like that he'll sometimes call you up to give you poo poo for being at war before you get the message from the AI that's actually declaring war on you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:Yeah, I certainly understand the AI not being good at war. Navigating the map and maneuvering units into the right place to attack other units, that might also move, is pretty complicated. Monty once asked to move my troops away from his border, because our borders were adjacent. I had them there because he had like 20 swordsmen on his side of the fence
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:51 |
|
|
Hate on AI all you want but if I tell you to please move your troops out of my borders and I see you doing it anyways I will dow you just to get you away from my beloved workers/settlers. Early game in MP is some Mad Max poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 22:59
|
|