Civilization VI

o i'm not done with it

quick games usually take me about 20-24 hours i believe

they have done away with expansion penalties? as frustrating as those have been to play with they have seemed essential after spamming cities being way op in early civ versions

it seems like it?

the cost of districts, science and culture all scale I think. the diplomacy seems like the clunkiest area so far but the underlying mechanics behind it are more interesting/sophisticated

Come on, dammit, where's that patch

yeah -- u have any specific complaints?

Balancing and AI bits, mainly. As a game, this far exceeds what vanilla Civ V was right out of the gate.

I'm right on the border conditions of Civ VI's hardware requirements. Is Civ VI manageable in some minimal graphics mode?

as long as you don't mind missing out on the leader animations I think you'll be fine

I'm not sure what I'd change balance-wise yet. some of the civs seem obviously better/worse but that's always the case. some of the AI diplomacy decisions/warmonger stuff esp with joint wars maybe

I'm playing on a technically unsupported machine (2012 pre-Retina MBP), but it's been perfectly playable on low settings. Very stable, very little lag.

i like the idea of scout barbarians alerting camp barbarians to attack but in practice it just becomes busy work. i still think there shd be a late-game version of barbarians where u have to protect them in the way ppl leave the deep amazon tribes alone

Love that idea

ya that is a pretty cool idea

and if you kill them you get minus foreign policy points or your relationship with other leaders goes down

anyway, still haven't finished the first game i started

(only played it the one time sadly)

Is this a good starting version of Civ for someone who's never played before?

yeah- it's a really good version and it's not like they're canonical so you don't need to know what happened in the first 5 games. i think most ppl consider IV the gold standard tho by the end of the expansions V was excellent and II and III both probably seem a little outdated but were fantastic in their day. even 1 was a great game.

I love this alternate universe where the Civ games are canonical, like Fallout or something

Newbies to the series just go "oh huh chariots, are these any good"

Veterans who remember Civ XX say "OH SHIT THE CHARIOTS ARE BACK IN THIS ONE"

Serious fans jump on the Internet to explain to each other how the chariots mean Gandhi is the Demiurge

plot of alpha centauri def makes no sense if u don't know what happened in civ

https://civilization.com/news/entries/civilization-vi-fall-2016-update-now-live

'bout fuckin' time

Also, found a bug/exploit where I can con any leader into giving me dosh for any resource I offer, even if they initially don't want it.

Who wants to purchase my 2xCD copy of Civ II off me? still in good condition! i think!

Added UI to show the next tile a city will grow to.
Reduced the effectiveness of cavalry production policies.
Units may no longer be deleted when they are damaged.
Deleting a unit no longer provides gold.

lots of necessary fixes there, and the AI changes all look sensible

the early game is much tougher in VI but mid-late game seems easier to me

wld love to be able to execute foreign spies tbrr

Check out crusader kings 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hAk3rrySRs

o_0

how did this hold up? have ppl been enjoying it?

Lifelong Civ fan. I like it and have sunk a few dozen hours into the game, but I still have some mixed feelings about it.

The biggest innovation, unstacked cities, just seems to exacerbate the map congestion issues that came with 5's one-unit-per-tile mechanic. (Did we need even more encouragement to be fussy about city placement?) Splitting tech and culture into separate research trees is neat, though the advances themselves tend to feel a bit bland and inconsequential by mid-game. Late game still a bit of a slog. Overall pace of building and expansion feels a bit too slow. Combat AI is inept.

I'll pick it up again whenever the next big round of DLC hits.

thank you. not quite a ringing endorsement. i am v much on the fence about whether to bother.

it's not such a huge leap forward that it seems essential - i'm curious to see what they do in the expansions. i think one problem is that we live in a paradox world now and simplistic 4x's no longer really cut it (especially when it's just another iteration of a series we've played 5 times already). also it feels like they borrowed a lot from eternal legend - but not quite as interesting?

i think it's good. religion could stand to be nerfed a little bit -- if you aren't going for religious victory there still has to be a certain level of religious protectionism which takes time and effort. conquest is really the only victory condition you can go all-in

i like it tho.

i found dealing w/ thousands of acolyte spam units to be annoying + tedious tbph

i love this game right now. started playing multiplayer with friends, really fun keeping an eye on what everyone's up to and unpredictable into the late game

The Digital Antiquarian articles are giving me the yen to go back in.

I really underplayed Civ V - stuck with IV, pure comfort food. Should I go back to fully expanded V or spring for VI during a sale? Doesn't seem to be much in it from this thread, and I think I've already got a complete V in my Steam library.

sometime last year i was thinking about buying VI and decided to get the complete expansion pack for V instead. almost an entirely different game to the launch version. think i will be happy picking up any new civ games about 3 years late from this point on.

the only reason to buy a game new these days is multiplayer, right?

civ 6 has so many little improvements. there are still problems with the AI but the ages, events, governors and loyalty system are all interesting and work well

Reckon I’ll get to know v. Don’t think I’ve played the expansions at all (I assume I bought them while they were on sale and I was drunk).

See you in 2020 or so Civ VI.

eh I'm not in love with civ6. don't rush out to get it until its on sale, imo

I used to love Civ 2 and I have a 12 year old with a modest 2010 iMac - which version should I look out for, to give her some Civ fun?

V is v good with the expansions and should run ok on your rig

I think just get her 2!

4.

i mean just get 5

I think just get her 2!

― Screamin' Jay Gould (The Yellow Kid)

i understand the reasoning behind this, but i still think it would fall into the category of

https://i.imgur.com/eNJnyk1.png

2 and 3 are too old. 5 was a system hog in 2010. 4 lets you zoom out until the map turns into a globe.

the real remain in light dad answer tho, and the correct answer, is alpha centauri.

i wish my dad would have bought me alpha centauri. still have never played it!

Civ 4 seems like a good way to get your kid into classical music.
Or to have her drop out of school, glued to the screen, muttering "the people are the heroes now, Behemoth pulls the peasants plow" forever and ever.

These are beautifully on-point parenting observations - I have already ruined her pop culture currency by showing her endless episodes of The Goodies and The Mighty Boosh, and she's into the new Breeders album.
Civ 4 sounds like it would be graphically interesting but not a resource hog - older versions may look too visually creaky, but then Minecraft and Undertale are good enough for today's hip kids.

just bought Civ 6 on PS4. Haven't played Civ or any other strategy type game since the early 2000s. Have I made a good decision? Is there anything I should know before starting?

i've been trying to branch out beyond Civ V - i haven't even tried Civ VI because it seems like it has all the problems that V did and possibly more. i'm really not sure i'm cut out for 4X games though. I tried one of those Paradox games and I just had to nope out, too ridiculously complex for me. I'm trying a game called "Endless Legend" now that seems not quite as bad but it still took me an hour to do the tutorial and I was left so utterly exhausted I just want to play Cat Quest instead.