|
Harrow posted:I might just be having a hard time getting into Civ 6 in general. I've won a couple games on Prince but I still don't feel like I can entirely wrap my head around the number of things the game wants me to keep track of (like adjacency bonuses, loyalty, placing districts in a way that lets you build wonders adjacent to them, how many cities to settle, etc.). I got bored of always going tall in Civ 5 but it seems like in Civ 6 you really need to go wide ASAP or you're going to run out of places to settle. Yeah, that whole where to place districts and wonders is hard, but in my (short) experience, adjacency bonus doenst matters all that much Loyalty mostly is not a problem, except when you conquer a city right inside foreign territory or try to place one besides another nation. Is cool when the AI does that, though: you might end up getting a free city And yes, you need to expand more and faster, but I dont usually feel the need to conquer for that, unless Im unlucky and start too close of another civ and they start expading too much around me And I usually settle for 6 or 7 cities and it seems enough, no need to spam dozens
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 15:55 |
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Yeah, that whole where to place districts and wonders is hard, but in my (short) experience, adjacency bonus doenst matters all that much This is pretty much exactly my experience of the game. Elias_Maluco posted:
Oh, and this. The WC is bewilderingly bad. Even the fact that diplomatic visibility, unless I'm missing something huge, does precisely bugger all to help guide your voting decisions. Aaaaaa.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
Speaking of diplomacy: how do you get away with an early conquest? The one time I pulled it off, dudes were still pissed off by the time the World Congress came about and declared a military emergency on me, leaving me at war with literally every civ on my continent. So I decided never to do that "conquer a neighbor early" thing again  Actually maybe I'll stop playing Civ VI for a while because for some reason I just can't wrap my head around it and it's more frustrating than fun. Either I snowball to victory and it's just boring clicking, or I'm flailing around drastically lacking in production wondering where I went wrong this time while I'm unable to actually build anything. Something about this one just kind of rubs me the wrong way, I think? I can't really pinpoint why, it just seems a lot more frustrating. The World Congress isn't helping. Harrow fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Aug 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I found the world congress is even more stupid than people here had told me, and that "diplomacy points" mechanic is dumb and annoying. After half a game with this thing on, I want to know if there's a way to disable it completely I don't know how much you've investigated into the inner workings of the WC, but it gets worse the more you learn about it. For example: If you lose the vote you get your diplomatic currency refunded. If you vote for the winning yes/no option, but the wrong combination you get 50% of your diplomatic favor returned. If there is a tie, then whichever player applied a higher percentage of their available diplomatic favor wins. And I love that people you haven't met yet can vote on resolutions that affect you. It's the most nonsensical mechanic I've ever seen. It offends me that an adult could even come up with such a thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I don't know how much you've investigated into the inner workings of the WC, but it gets worse the more you learn about it. Holy poo poo What were they smoking when they came up with that? Civ 5 WC was not perfect but at least it made sense Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 03:12 on Aug 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
Barbarians are designed to snowball unless you stay on top of them, so some games they'll be no issue at all and some games they will be a constant drain of resources until you've filled in the map entirely. One game I started out in a massive basin surrounded by mountains and I sent my first two settlers and most of my military to claim the mountain passes that connected it to the rest of the world. Those cities were incredibly defensible and despite being surrounded by warmongers, no other civ ever stepped foot in the land I had staked out for myself, but I was constantly being hounded by barbarians until I'd settled the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 04:38
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I might just be having a hard time getting into Civ 6 in general. I've won a couple games on Prince but I still don't feel like I can entirely wrap my head around the number of things the game wants me to keep track of (like adjacency bonuses, loyalty, placing districts in a way that lets you build wonders adjacent to them, how many cities to settle, etc.). I got bored of always going tall in Civ 5 but it seems like in Civ 6 you really need to go wide ASAP or you're going to run out of places to settle. Yeah this has burned me out on the game. The mounting pressure I feel to go wide and fast. It's a style I don't like much
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 04:44
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Yeah this has burned me out on the game. The mounting pressure I feel to go wide and fast. It's a style I don't like much There is absolutely no need to go wide. I never settle more than 5 cities, it's easy to get a culture or science victory anyway. And im not being all "git gud" here. Decide how you want to win, science or culture, then build those districts in all your cities, that's enough to win on anything but deity. If you want a diplomacy victory you need to plan a bit more, you need the wonders that give you victory points and you must only vote for stuff that you know will give you victory points, never waste points always go all in. Culture is also good when going for a diplomacy victory since you need to be suzerain of many city states to get many votes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 08:02
|
|
|
TjyvTompa posted:There is absolutely no need to go wide. I never settle more than 5 cities, it's easy to get a culture or science victory anyway. Yeah but in my experience (small/normal maps, 6-8 civs), if playing at my "normal" favorite pace, I can maybe found a couple cities in addition to my capital before either not having any more good land, or being hemmed in by the AI - that can somehow found 5-6 cities in the same time it turns me off a lot, because it basically force me to go conquering and it's almost impossible to do a "peaceful" expansion game unless I just go bigger map with less AIs (and I'm playing on prince/king, so not a case of the AI having too many bonuses either... I'm just slow at this game I guess)
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 08:28
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Yeah but in my experience (small/normal maps, 6-8 civs), if playing at my "normal" favorite pace, I can maybe found a couple cities in addition to my capital before either not having any more good land, or being hemmed in by the AI - that can somehow found 5-6 cities in the same time Yeah that happens My solution to this is to play on huge maps with low sea level and fewer AI civs, so more space for everyone. And if I find a civ too close at the beginning, Ill restart
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 12:30
|
|
|
TorakFade posted:Yeah but in my experience (small/normal maps, 6-8 civs), if playing at my "normal" favorite pace, I can maybe found a couple cities in addition to my capital before either not having any more good land, or being hemmed in by the AI - that can somehow found 5-6 cities in the same time
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 12:31
|
|
|
I tend to go that way every game I play. I feel like there should be more alternatives, but particularity the free settler, is very hard to pass up...
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
Yeah I think Ancestral Hall is the only workable tier 1 government building. Anything that gives you free production is incredibly valuable in this game. If you're planning on going full conquest, the Warlords Throne might edge it out in terms of free production (especially late game), but the 20% bonus for 5 turns just isn't that useful in the early game because you barely have any production to boost in the first place. If you're struggling to expand quickly enough, you may want to start investing in faith earlier. If you're going for a culture or science victory, it's tempting to ignore holy sites altogether, thinking they don't contribute to your win condition but faith can be incredibly useful. The golden age bonus for Monumentality (which allows the purchase of civilian units with faith) is probably the most powerful bonus in the entire game. If you can even get one solid holy site (a plus 3 or 4 is great) and get faith trickling in early, you open up a lot of possibilities for early expansion. It's probably most useful for buying settlers but being able to convert gold/faith into builders or traders is great too. Using ancestral hall with the bonus builder charge policy from Feudalism, you can spend like 150+ faith (it scales up) to buy a settler that provides a free 5 charge builder once it settles. So in terms of pantheons, the free settler is still very good, but if you can get a solid faith gain instead, you'll be able to get far more than 1 free settler out of it. You don't even need to worry about getting/maintaining a religion, the faith alone makes at least one holy site worth it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 13:41
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
pogothemonkey0 posted:You don't even need to worry about getting/maintaining a religion, the faith alone makes at least one holy site worth it. And when you don't build at least one holy site, the game will give you Hildegard of Bingen as a great scientist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
TjyvTompa posted:There is absolutely no need to go wide. I never settle more than 5 cities, it's easy to get a culture or science victory anyway. The problem is having to spend the entire early game building settlers. It doesn't matter if I stop at five (I feel boxed in at three or four anyway.) The frantic land grab in the first turns just isn't fun for me, and it defines any play session
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 13:58
|
|
|
So which part of the early game do you find frantic? Is it the fact that other civs will take the locations you want to settle if you don't move fast enough or that you feel forced to build settlers when you'd rather be building something like wonders/districts? The game can definitely make you feel like you're being pulled in every direction when you have like 5 available things you want to build but have to prioritize. Early production has a massive impact on the flow of the game and might alleviate some of that pressure. Settling on a plains hill and getting +1 production compared to other tiles is a giant bonus. I'll often just restart if I don't have a plains hills and/or at least 1 decently productive tile in my capital - a purely flatlands start is just not fun to play. Choosing your second city location also has a big impact on the flow of later cities to the point that I'll prioritize a good, productive city location over something like a natural wonder, access to amenities, or other bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
pogothemonkey0 posted:So which part of the early game do you find frantic? Is it the fact that other civs will take the locations you want to settle if you don't move fast enough or that you feel forced to build settlers when you'd rather be building something like wonders/districts? The game can definitely make you feel like you're being pulled in every direction when you have like 5 available things you want to build but have to prioritize. Yeah, starting location more important than ever for the capital. And some good tiles for production is more important than anything Also I build the industrial zone in every city. Production is a slog on this game
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Yeah, starting location more important than ever for the capital. And some good tiles for production is more important than anything I feel like I never get natural wonders anymore even when setting legendary start unless I really reach and throw off the natural contours of my empire. But it's OK because I will just make do building an arid desert city instead as long as it has 5-6 hills to work with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
Religious Settlements has become my go-to, but man, I am sure not sick of it yet. I get it close to the time I'm getting my first built settler, so going from one city to three has been consistently exciting. It's great to stake out the empire's core all at once. That would be pretty fun mechanism for some other game, actually: no settlers can be built at all until you reach a certain tech and explore a bit, and then just immediately choose one large, two medium, or three small cities with proportional improvements. Which you choose (and where you put them) would be based on terrain and how close the AIs are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
Try and time the pantheon for after you've built that first settler as the price will increase and could delay it some more. Even if you have to use shift + enter to force the turn to end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Marmaduke! posted:Try and time the pantheon for after you've built that first settler as the price will increase and could delay it some more. Even if you have to use shift + enter to force the turn to end. you can do that????
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
GodFish posted:you can do that???? Crypto Cobain fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Aug 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
I love this game, but I literally woke up this morning feeling annoyed at the World Congress system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 07:36
|
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:I love this game, but I literally woke up this morning feeling annoyed at the World Congress system. just mod it out
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 10:50
|
|
|
I never knew you could force end turns, thats amazingGoa Tse-tung posted:just mod it out Is there a mod for it? I want ithat for my next game, I get very annoyed every time the WC pops up Is sad anyway, WC in Civ 5 made late game more interesting, even if it wanst perfect. I wish we could combine Civ 5 and Civ 6 into a new game. Civ 6 has a lot of improvments, but also is definitely worse in a number of aspects edit: also GS is the laziest expansion ever. Is amazing they had the audacity to charge $40 for it Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 12:09 on Aug 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 12:04
|
|
|
homullus posted:Religious Settlements has become my go-to, but man, I am sure not sick of it yet. I get it close to the time I'm getting my first built settler, so going from one city to three has been consistently exciting. It's great to stake out the empire's core all at once. Just started a new game as Mansa Musa and was veeeery tempted to take Desert Folklore, but Religious Settlements is just too good. (Also I turned off religious victory, so gently caress it.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:I never knew you could force end turns, thats amazing adding force end turn was easier than patching out the bug that sometimes caused a random unit on full defense somewhere on the map to wake when you got a "barbarian scout spotted" prompt the fortified unit was awakened so you couldn't end your turn but didn't register as needing orders, so you couldn't cycle units with unfinished turns to highlight them, you just had to go through your empire manually and re-fortify everything one by one
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 14:50
|
|
|
I dont think Ive saw that Religious Settlements pantheon. Maybe Im getting a patheon too late?The White Dragon posted:adding force end turn was easier than patching out the bug that sometimes caused a random unit on full defense somewhere on the map to wake when you got a "barbarian scout spotted" prompt lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:adding force end turn was easier than patching out the bug that sometimes caused a random unit on full defense somewhere on the map to wake when you got a "barbarian scout spotted" prompt The devs really are utterly terrible aren't they Remember when they mis-spelled "yield" in the XML https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3775912&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=456#post482127409 And then, if i remember correctly, they quietly fixed it without ever admitting the error
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:And then, if i remember correctly, they quietly fixed it without ever admitting the error They did cop to this, and believe it or not they thanked the modder that found (and initially patched) it. But they also described it in a way that implied the bug was relatively minor and not some game-breakingly bad typo that persisted for over a year. Also yes, the World Congress is hands down the worst part about Civ VI. Something closer to Civ V would be great, but tweaked a little bit. Instead of only the top civs adding proposals perhaps diplomatic favour can be spent to put proposals up for debate and vote on those proposals. So you have to choose between bringing proposals to the floor and controlling the outcome of proposals. I have to choose whether to put up a vote to 'embargo _____' or hold on to my favor so that I can downvote someone else's luxury ban proposal. Also make governments/ideologies more salient in international relations as time goes on to encourage those alliance-blocks like we saw in Civ5 BNW.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
The World Congress really isn't great. I like the competitions and the emergencies. If I got to pick, I would cut out all the world congress sessions except the ones for competitions and emergencies, and fold in the ability to ask for some of the little issues that constitute the rest of the world congresses as concessions for your vote in the small number of remaining sessions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
I don't want V's world congress again. What are we doing tonight France? Same thing we do every night England, permanently ban every luxury in the game!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Can't agree about the emergencies. They are the WORST aspect of the world Congress for one major reason: they can make allies declare war on you in the middle of an alliance. It's extremely frustrating when it happens. Sometimes it can feel pretty drat game-breaking when your entire military is elsewhere fighting an offensive war, and all of a sudden your neighbor, trade partner, and ally of 800 years betrays you for a stupid emergency.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
Poil posted:I don't want V's world congress again. Yeah that was bad But even with that, it was much better than that nonsense in Civ 6
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:Can't agree about the emergencies. They are the WORST aspect of the world Congress for one major reason: they can make allies declare war on you in the middle of an alliance. It's extremely frustrating when it happens. And it goes the other way around, you might be happily conquering a neighbour, agree to an emergency and suddenly you've declared an unbreakable peace. All areas of the diplomacy victory game are just wrong. You'll never win a diplomatic victory, so never try. Just sell the favour for LOADS of cash, and you're set.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
My second GS game there were two emergencies going at once: disaster relief to Russia and disaster relief to Kongo. As far as I could tell, they were literally passing the same gold back and forth between the two of them, racking up points. Because this is Civ AI though, I was still able to win the aid competition to one of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
Firaxis posted:-Fixed religious settlements so that instead of never taking it in any game, you must choose it every game. PoizenJam posted:They did cop to this, and believe it or not they thanked the modder that found (and initially patched) it. But they also described it in a way that implied the bug was relatively minor and not some game-breakingly bad typo that persisted for over a year. I remember if funnier. That it was thought to be a major bug because it was affecting how the AI builds, and the same typo was in many places. But the AI was written so poorly that nothing changed even after it was corrected and working as intended. The Human Crouton fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Aug 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
Fleetwood Crack posted:Can't agree about the emergencies. They are the WORST aspect of the world Congress for one major reason: they can make allies declare war on you in the middle of an alliance. It's extremely frustrating when it happens. tbf that can only happen during a Betrayal Emergency, which is declared when you declare war on someone with whom you have had a level 2+ alliance It's clearly intended to be a last hurrah against someone going for a domination victory, and would be entirely reasonable if there was a non-war way to retaliate against allies turning super lovely and starting to gobble up your city state buddies
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2019 00:02
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:tbf that can only happen during a Betrayal Emergency Crypto Cobain fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Aug 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 15:55 |
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:I remember if funnier. That it was thought to be a major bug because it was affecting how the AI builds, and the same typo was in many places. But the AI was written so poorly that nothing changed even after it was corrected and working as intended. It didn't improve the military AI, no, but the build AI significantly improved from my subjective experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2019 01:09
|
|