81–90 of 224 posts
Hope they’re thinking more Civ V than Civ VI.
You like digging your own roads? I think the workers concept is vastly improved in VI I agree with you on the cartoonish leaders though.
It would be really interesting if some of the advances in AI could make their way into the game. Make the gameplay more human by incorporating recent advances in ML-based gameplay e.g. Diplomacy and Poker. Create more variety of dialogue using transformer models. Make in-game diplomacy more nuanced. There’s a lot that could be done.
The dirty secret is we think we want the AI to play more realistically, but actually don't. This is true in many games but especially Civilization, where we rely on the AI behaving predictably to feel mastery over the environment, and for diplomacy to feel "fair". If the AI were playing to win, diplomacy would mostly evaporate as a game system. It'd break the fiction of the game.
I bought the original when it came out and, together with Master of Orion, it ate so much of my life that it added a year to my time at university. Since then I've bought every new Civ as it came out and maybe played through two or three games before abandoning it. None of them capture the original, but rather just add more and different crap to micromanage. They're just not fun. The big exception is Alpha Centauri,…
I bought the original when it came out and, together with Master of Orion, it ate so much of my life that it added a year to my time at university. Since then I've bought every new Civ as it came out and maybe played through two or three games before abandoning it. None of them capture the original, but rather just add more and different crap to micromanage. They're just not fun. The big exception is Alpha Centauri,…
On the contrary, they add a whole new strategic dimensions to the game. In Civ I you had what, two victory conditions (Domination and Science)? In Civ V, you have also Cultural Victory (producing much more tourism than every other civilization's culture) and Diplomatic (getting most of the city states on your side). This is not "crap to micromanage", but more like changing the game from 2D chess to 3d chess.
Not to mention, the one unit per tile limit in Civ V makes combat much more tactical and interesting (combat is no longer just about quantity).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...what do you mean? Civ is very moddable.
I had to look it up. There are a bunch of mods, wow. I stand corrected, sort of. The UI to browse these mods is something out of a geocities website from the 1990s. I should've been more specific, I meant modding that enables creators to actually make money and gets promoted by the game developer - not a dark corner that hasn't been updated in 30 years where you can click an image but can't get to the next image with…
Is the Steam Workshop that bad for Civ?
Did Civ6 end up being good? Civ games usually only beat their predecessors once the last expansion comes out. I stopped playing 6 after the climate change DLC. Was pretty underwhelmed. Has it matured now like 5 did?
It's definitely better than the previous ones .. the previous games feel unplayable now. I can't imagine civ5 (4 cities only to be viable and stupid-as-heck civic options) or earlier (no hexes, stacking units?). But... at the same time, Civ6 feels super phoned-in and underwhelming most of the time. (The AI dialog, world congress, road-building-via-trade routes, and various other stupid things are so annoying that I c…
The "4 cities" may be easiest and most obvious strategy, but there's plenty of people who beat the game on Deity via Warmongering or spamming cities all over the map as well. The game has plenty of depth.
- You can’t automate many tasks. This is especially true in Civ 6 where you have to re-select everything. I’m not certain who thought this is a good idea.
- As you progress in the game, the turn time become ridiculously long.
- For it to be reasonably fast, you are limited in term of map size and the number of opponents.
- The AI is dumb. After a few plays, the game is pretty much predictable.
Europa Universalis covers all of these shortcomings and more. However, it’s not turn-based and it’s still stuck in the 1700s, so no new technologies. Climate change, for example, is an interesting addition and adds spice to the game.
Still looking forward to Civ 6. Will be playing at least a couple times to see their progress.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s more realistic than Civ 5, but it’s not as fun. I feel that they made Civ 6 into a board game so that underpowered systems like the Nintendo Switch can run it. Civ 6 feels like a blend of Civ Revolution and Civ 5. I’m sticking to Civ 5.
I think the art style of Civ6 fits your point.