Civilization VI - Now available, so you can sink all your free time into it

[kris]

No, choosing your land mass is not an exploit, it's part of the world creation screen, the screen you're supposed to have fun experimenting with in all the varieties on offer - by intentional design. An exploit is something that wasn't intentionally designed into the game as a means to make the game easier but can be found by players by experimenting with stuff.

Now you did just put in reverse and back into the post.

Obviously the exploit is not just using the world creation scene. but using the world creation screen to set up a scenario were you can USE an exploit is what I talked about. Like if you calculated that starting on a jungle island on a small archipelago map will give you an science victory and then play it out. Then you used an exploit to set-up a scenario you knew you would be winning.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Countering ICS has been the central issue of Civ franchise ever since first game came out. A city is a source of everything you do to progress, techs, money, armies, it all starts in the city. There need to be mechanical drawbacks build into the system to prevent you from just spamming the cities brainlessly and snowballing into a superpower with minimal effort. Otherwise it just stops being strategy game where you think long and hard about your next choice, and becomes settler spamming game, and eventually the game ends up having zero replaybility once the novelty wears off.

Civ:BE for example had anti-ICS drawbacks, but they weren't playtested properly, and you could almost entirely bypass them using various happiness boosts. As a result the hardcore player community virtually abandoned the game weeks after launch, because if you can faceroll AI on high difficulty levels on your first game, without even learning half the new systems, than what's the point sticking around?

Resorting to ICS needs to be a carefully weighted choice made by the player to take advantage of his particular starting situation, like somehow ending on large land mass with one of the AI opponents not known for their aggresive play.

Simply put, if ICS is the default strategy, the game is finished.

 

[Kem0sabe]

From all the extended gameplay videos, I'm digging the new mechanics, but the visuals are just not doing it for me.

 

[rezaf]

Protip: I hear arguing semantics about how games ought to be balanced isn't the most efficient strategy when deciding what to do with your lifetime...

 

[Average Manatee]

We can technically do a hands-on of this game at Gamescom, but I find it hard to muster the enthusiasm. Have there been any announced features that have made people feel excited about Civ 6?

Plenty actually. The whole concept of tying your optimal early development to geographical location can potentially change the whole paradigm. Instead of everybody rushing the Great Library or whatever is the current meta, every game might be different. Districts are nice idea, even if it's cloned from Endless Legend. They seem to finally made spies useful again. Workers are a resource now. Armies will have support units that work as some sort of attatchment. I could go on , but you get the idea. They really reworked a lot of systems for this one.

One thing that really peaked my interest from a video posted earlier in the thread is the new culture system. Apparently its like a whole alternate tech tree, which excites me both from a simulationist angle and from a gameplay angle. I think most of these other things have already been decently explained, but the culture system seems to have been skimmed over. What's a culture victory now? Is culture-slingshotting a thing like tech-slingshotting? Can you trade/share/learn culture from other countries?

 

[vdweller]

Rumors circulate that new and exotic civilizations will appear in the new installment. The new graphical style, which was selected to cater to autistic asspie weeaboo faggots provide more visual clarity, brings a great opportunity to play with never seen before leaders!

Here are some leaked screenshots of the new leaders:

 

[Ludovic]

It's annoying with the cartoony graphics, because the game play changes look surprisingly good, and the improved modding support is also great. The map itself looks much better in videos than in screenshots, but the leaders are so over the top that it detracts from an already questionable aesthetic. The artists working on the game are obviously extremely talented, but I think the art direction is wasting that talent by being so exaggerated and well, childish.

 

[Delterius]

Post-Brexit Scottish Civilization?

 

[vdweller]

Post-Brexit Scottish Civilization?

That would be Too Controversial

 

[Infinitron]

 

[Space Satan]

>"One of the things we raised with the art department was how in Civ 5, almost everyone had like this really statuesque and unbelievably attractive model even though in reality, historical leaders were of course just normal people like you and me. So one of things we wanted to do was make them look more grounded and relatable, and I think they did a really amazing job kind of conveying that."

>"Well we had a really long talk about [the Mongols] and whether we should include them in this installment of the series. Eventually we started asking ourselves if it was just time to move in a different direction and finally retire them from the series. The Mongols were known for committing mass rape and murder and just kind of being jerks {laughs}, and how would people feel if we included someone like Hitler in the game? We still wanted to have a nomadic horse people from the steppe though, and eventually someone suggested the Scythians led by Queen Tomyris, who most people never even heard about. I remember we were doing our research on her and Steven literally asked me "How have I never heard of this woman?" So yes, that really fit into the vision we wanted to have of showing off lesser known but still larger-than-life personalities. It was like the stars aligned, basically. Of course Genghis Khan can still show up as a great general, but I'll probably delete him if I ever get him." {laughs}

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Women ruining gaming, more shocking news at 11.

 

[Jack]

Everyone with pink hair ought to be beheaded.

 

[ArchAngel]

Nerd rage in this topic is over 9000

 

[Kem0sabe]

They leave out mongols because rape, but maintain Aztec with human sacrifices, Spain which pillaged an entire continent, Chinese which killed and exploited millions, American warmongers, English who conquered half the known world, etc.

These cunts and their agendas...

 

[GrainWetski]

Fucking pink-haired dykes and their incessant need to insert trannies and butch dykes into everything they touch.

Are trying to make it seem like the only women that exist either look like men or are extremely ugly?

 

[Snorkack]

>"One of the things we raised with the art department was how in Civ 5, almost everyone had like this really statuesque and unbelievably attractive model even though in reality, historical leaders were of course just normal people like you and me. So one of things we wanted to do was make them look more grounded and relatable, and I think they did a really amazing job kind of conveying that."

Yeah, incredibly stupid reasoning overall. But I don't get the picture you posted. The C6 female leaders look like female leaders always did in the series.

 

[Snorkack]

I finally got around to watch a few of the 150 turns of gameplay vids. I gotta say, I'm positively surprised. The district system and the heavy impact of terrain seem to require much more flexibility in earlygame strategy. The eureka boni are a good mechanic to reward careful planning ahead and the new Civics tree is infinite times better than the C5 'pick traditionalism or get rekt' garbage.
Great Persons now have unique abilities and you got to directly challenge the other civs to get one. That sounds pretty cool and I can imagine tons of good mods around that. Also the agenda system seems to make AIs less erratic and much more interesting and diverse. ICS seems to be inhibited by exponential increase of Settler cost. Seems fine for earlygame, don't see how this mechanic would prevent ICS mid to lategame tho.
I'm not sure whether resources are still meaningless like in C5, and I'm still not sold on the 1UPT which I hardly believe will work in this type of game. Also the artstyle is hideous, especially the fog of war falls under the category 'nice idea, horrible execution'. But C4 has a poor art style too, yet it's my all time fav.
So overall, maybe I shouldn't dismiss that one prematurely, they do seem to have tackled most of C5's critique points (well, except the elephant in the room, ofc).

 

[kris]

>"One of the things we raised with the art department was how in Civ 5, almost everyone had like this really statuesque and unbelievably attractive model even though in reality, historical leaders were of course just normal people like you and me. So one of things we wanted to do was make them look more grounded and relatable, and I think they did a really amazing job kind of conveying that."

>"Well we had a really long talk about [the Mongols] and whether we should include them in this installment of the series. Eventually we started asking ourselves if it was just time to move in a different direction and finally retire them from the series. The Mongols were known for committing mass rape and murder and just kind of being jerks {laughs}, and how would people feel if we included someone like Hitler in the game? We still wanted to have a nomadic horse people from the steppe though, and eventually someone suggested the Scythians led by Queen Tomyris, who most people never even heard about. I remember we were doing our research on her and Steven literally asked me "How have I never heard of this woman?" So yes, that really fit into the vision we wanted to have of showing off lesser known but still larger-than-life personalities. It was like the stars aligned, basically. Of course Genghis Khan can still show up as a great general, but I'll probably delete him if I ever get him." {laughs}

Cleopatra confirmed Tranny. I am not even sure who that longhaired dude is supposed to lead.

 

[Snorkack]

The 'dude' is presumably aforementioned Queen Tomyris.

 

[vdweller]

Sigh..I just...I don't know what to comment exactly and how...

 

[Steve]

>"One of the things we raised with the art department was how in Civ 5, almost everyone had like this really statuesque and unbelievably attractive model even though in reality, historical leaders were of course just normal people like you and me. So one of things we wanted to do was make them look more grounded and relatable, and I think they did a really amazing job kind of conveying that."

>"Well we had a really long talk about [the Mongols] and whether we should include them in this installment of the series. Eventually we started asking ourselves if it was just time to move in a different direction and finally retire them from the series. The Mongols were known for committing mass rape and murder and just kind of being jerks {laughs}, and how would people feel if we included someone like Hitler in the game? We still wanted to have a nomadic horse people from the steppe though, and eventually someone suggested the Scythians led by Queen Tomyris, who most people never even heard about. I remember we were doing our research on her and Steven literally asked me "How have I never heard of this woman?" So yes, that really fit into the vision we wanted to have of showing off lesser known but still larger-than-life personalities. It was like the stars aligned, basically. Of course Genghis Khan can still show up as a great general, but I'll probably delete him if I ever get him." {laughs}

God damnit what a retarded reason to not have Mongols in the game as history is filled with atrocities committed by pretty much everybody, that's how most (if not all) nations got big enough to be considered a valid candidate for a faction in a civ game in the first place.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Does this bitch realize that every army known to mankind committed mass rapes on regular basis?

 

[ArchAngel]

>"One of the things we raised with the art department was how in Civ 5, almost everyone had like this really statuesque and unbelievably attractive model even though in reality, historical leaders were of course just normal people like you and me. So one of things we wanted to do was make them look more grounded and relatable, and I think they did a really amazing job kind of conveying that."

>"Well we had a really long talk about [the Mongols] and whether we should include them in this installment of the series. Eventually we started asking ourselves if it was just time to move in a different direction and finally retire them from the series. The Mongols were known for committing mass rape and murder and just kind of being jerks {laughs}, and how would people feel if we included someone like Hitler in the game? We still wanted to have a nomadic horse people from the steppe though, and eventually someone suggested the Scythians led by Queen Tomyris, who most people never even heard about. I remember we were doing our research on her and Steven literally asked me "How have I never heard of this woman?" So yes, that really fit into the vision we wanted to have of showing off lesser known but still larger-than-life personalities. It was like the stars aligned, basically. Of course Genghis Khan can still show up as a great general, but I'll probably delete him if I ever get him." {laughs}

God damnit what a retarded reason to not have Mongols in the game as history is filled with atrocities committed by pretty much everybody, that's how most (if not all) nations got big enough to be considered a valid candidate for a faction in a civ game in the first place.

So with that reasoning they should also delete USA because it was based on genocide over native americans?!

 

[baturinsky]

These faces are not "relatable". They are grotesquely deformed abominations.