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

[Severian Silk]

Or maybe the amorphous blob is a casualty of censoring.

As in, "Gee, lets apply a filter effect in Photoshop to see if the nipples go away. Oops! There go the lips too! Oh well..."

 

[Hoaxmetal]

Woman's lips are sinful anyway.

 

[thesheeep]

Can anyone explain to me why so many people don't like the 1*-unit-per-tile rule?

In older Civ games, it always went like this:
Build doomstack, win any encounter. Doesn't matter what kind, really. Just doomstack faster than anyone else and you'll be fine.
No matter which Civ I played, and no matter if against human or AI, this was the way to go.
I fail to see the brillance in that. It is not exactly the epitome of strategy, no matter where it appears, from Civ to HoMM.

As it is in Civ V, positioning, movement/attack order, etc. have all become more important in relation to that.
A well placed unit of the right type at the right spot can easily defeat an incoming force of a larger size, forcing the attacker to apply a little more strategy or fail.
Earlier, the one with the bigger balls unit stack would have won, except for vast military tech differences, maybe.

Of course, I can see the appeal of big balls unit stacks to many here...


*Well, 1 military unit plus one misc unit, and now it seems a support unit can be there as well.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Can anyone explain to me why so many people don't like the 1*-unit-per-tile rule?

In older Civ games, it always went like this:
Build doomstack, win any encounter. Doesn't matter what kind, really. Just doomstack faster than anyone else and you'll be fine.
No matter which Civ I played, and no matter if against human or AI, this was the way to go.
I fail to see the brillance in that. It is not exactly the epitome of strategy, no matter where it appears, from Civ to HoMM.

As it is in Civ V, positioning, movement/attack order, etc. have all become more important in relation to that.
A well placed unit of the right type at the right spot can easily defeat an incoming force of a larger size, forcing the attacker to apply a little more strategy or fail.
Earlier, the one with the bigger balls unit stack would have won, except for vast military tech differences, maybe.

Of course, I can see the appeal of big balls unit stacks to many here...


*Well, 1 military unit plus one misc unit, and now it seems a support unit can be there as well.

I actually think Civ 5 has the best combat of the series, the 1 unit thing made logistics a bit more realistic.

But there has to be a balance somewhere. Especially with noncombat units. It becomes a fucking chore in the mid game when 10-20 automated Workers are trying to get to the same area to build a road to a newly conquered town, the pathfinding jams up and you have to manually play sliding puzzle for half an hour.

 

[Average Manatee]

I like the concept of multi-tile cities and and research thing might be interesting. Agree that the artstyle is getting a bit too cartoony.

French tits too ugly for Firaxis.

I am amazed it took so many posts before anyone reacted to this! I was absolutely raging when I watched this. A game meant to celebrate the great achievements of man, censoring such an important piece of art because of a warped moral codex!

What have we become that we don't react to this! Censorship is a plague that anyone who loves games, art and history should fight!

I can still jack off to it, so they failed.

 

[Average Manatee]

Can anyone explain to me why so many people don't like the 1*-unit-per-tile rule?

In older Civ games, it always went like this:
Build doomstack, win any encounter. Doesn't matter what kind, really. Just doomstack faster than anyone else and you'll be fine.
No matter which Civ I played, and no matter if against human or AI, this was the way to go.
I fail to see the brillance in that. It is not exactly the epitome of strategy, no matter where it appears, from Civ to HoMM.

As it is in Civ V, positioning, movement/attack order, etc. have all become more important in relation to that.
A well placed unit of the right type at the right spot can easily defeat an incoming force of a larger size, forcing the attacker to apply a little more strategy or fail.
Earlier, the one with the bigger balls unit stack would have won, except for vast military tech differences, maybe.

Of course, I can see the appeal of big balls unit stacks to many here...

*Well, 1 military unit plus one misc unit, and now it seems a support unit can be there as well.

That really wasn't the case if you played at high difficulty level or in a competitive multiplayer setting.

e.g., 1 move units were generally either general attackers, city attackers, or defenders. You had to have the right mix and the opponent could lopside their composition to fuck you. Attack order was absolutely critical for this reason, the game had a greedy order but it was often not optimal when taking into account the larger composition and you could gain from manually attacking in different orders. Siege units destroyed true doomstacks hard. Cavalry with 2 move could move to threaten multiple cities, forcing the opponent to split their defenses or lose a lightly defended city. There was a shit to of depth to combat, it simply wasn't in your face hurr durr only one unit can fit across choke points and I can pwn the noob AI with my l337 cavalry tactics.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Can anyone explain to me why so many people don't like the 1*-unit-per-tile rule?

In older Civ games, it always went like this:
Build doomstack, win any encounter. Doesn't matter what kind, really. Just doomstack faster than anyone else and you'll be fine.
No matter which Civ I played, and no matter if against human or AI, this was the way to go.
I fail to see the brillance in that. It is not exactly the epitome of strategy, no matter where it appears, from Civ to HoMM.

As it is in Civ V, positioning, movement/attack order, etc. have all become more important in relation to that.
A well placed unit of the right type at the right spot can easily defeat an incoming force of a larger size, forcing the attacker to apply a little more strategy or fail.
Earlier, the one with the bigger balls unit stack would have won, except for vast military tech differences, maybe.

Of course, I can see the appeal of big balls unit stacks to many here...

*Well, 1 military unit plus one misc unit, and now it seems a support unit can be there as well.

That really wasn't the case if you played at high difficulty level or in a competitive multiplayer setting.

e.g., 1 move units were generally either general attackers, city attackers, or defenders. You had to have the right mix and the opponent could lopside their composition to fuck you. Attack order was absolutely critical for this reason, the game had a greedy order but it was often not optimal when taking into account the larger composition and you could gain from manually attacking in different orders. Siege units destroyed true doomstacks hard. Cavalry with 2 move could move to threaten multiple cities, forcing the opponent to split their defenses or lose a lightly defended city. There was a shit to of depth to combat, it simply wasn't in your face hurr durr only one unit can fit across choke points and I can pwn the noob AI with my l337 cavalry tactics.

Yup. You obviously didn't play Civ on high enough difficulty, if you think building death stacks is some auto-win button. Death stacks have a hard-counter in siege units, and if you're trying to play on Emperor or higher, composing your stack and unit upgrades becomes quite a mini game.

The problem with 1 unit per tile is twofold.

One, the logistics of moving large armies are a gigantic pain in the ass and they can overwhelm you with boredom at late game, when you're dealing with dozens of units.

Two, the combat actually became too tactical. The AI just cannot deal with so many variables. Picking choke points, taking into account terrain types, unit types, unit upgrades, terrain layout, longterm strategic goals, on map of hundreds of hexes, all while developing it's empire, all that in 5 seconds it has for its turn. As a result you can routinely dispatch armies twice your size, because AI cannot compete with a 5 year old.

And don't get me started on amount of cheese tactics allowed by one unit per tile. Like blocking cities of your besieged ally with your units without declaring war. Their opponent cannot attack and it's a stalemate.

 

[flyingjohn]

Civ v is nullifies any attempt with movement and army composition with the ability for workers to build roads anywhere and ranged units being a Swiss knife that can do everything.
I mean the most popular strategies are building a road into your enemy and using a army of xbows to butcher everything.(and it works pretty good)
I know one mod where compositions actually matter because it makes ranged units melee strength so low they can be one shotted.
It is the superpower mod,but it has it own sets of problems.(experimental nautilus and Zeppelin aircraft carrier don't work in the civ setting)

 

[Ludovic]

Has Civilization ever had anything more than a superficial connection to history? I don't want to see Civ transform into Europa Universalis (or vice versa).

The original Civilization was a lot more abstract - they've piled mechanics on: religions, espionage, tourism, luxuries, civ-specific buildings/units, puppets, culture, city-states, trade routes, great people, etc. It's not that I want Civ to turn into EU, but I feel the mechanics have made the game more gamey and less about "Civilization".

My dream Civilization game would dial back the gamey mechanics - and add some kind of cycling between different Civilizations (a la History of the World), where you get a new Civilization as each era rolls around. Something that feels like an abstraction of history. Instead they have this weird thing were stuff like tourism has really detailed (and non-sensical) mechanics, but it feels like a strange parody of actual history.

 

[thesheeep]

Well, some valid points got raised here, flyingjohn IHaveHugeNick Average Manatee .

I always played on higher difficulty settings, but never on the highest. Nor did I play in a competitive environment (that usually starts boring me as it becomes more work than enjoyment).
So, it is quite possible that the earlier games were better suited for that.
But in the end, I think combat is just one part of many in a Civ game. So while I certainly prefer the non-stackable units*, I wouldn't mind either way as long as the "whole thing" is good.

*All the points you raised against them could be fixed, Firaxis just... didn't.
Yes, the amount of cheesy tactics and the nonsensical worker blocking are quite annoying in Civ 5.
And that at least the second one remains unfixed after so many addons & patches does not really insipire confidence.

 

[Merkwürdigliebe]

Allow there to be more than one unit per hex, but add an increasing combat malus for stacking like in Hearts of Iron. Now you have improved combat and movement isn't a pain in the ass. Problem solved.

 

[Tigranes]

Huge doomstacks of 30 units were annoying and 1upt isn't bad in and of itself, but it served to turn what used to be "click 8000 times to keep a production line of 8000 tanks flowing" to "battle is basically a small puzzle of ~10 tiles".

The obvious solution is to place some hard/soft cap on stacking, e.g. leader ability sets a hard cap on how many units they can stack and leaderless units have to go 1upt (or 2-3 with techs), or as above post says apply some logistics/supplies penalty.

Instead it seems like what they're doing is everything is still 1upt but you can 'attach' support units that don't take up space, which is better than Civ5 but still not ideal.

 

[tripedal]

This is a great analysis of what's wrong with 1UPT, and how it's related to map size, cities, economy, happiness, etc.: http://www.sullla.com/Civ5/whatwentwrong.html

 

[Ulminati]

Can anyone explain to me why so many people don't like the 1*-unit-per-tile rule?

1) Doomstacks are countered (especially in the God Emperor's favoured SMAC) by abilites that damage the entire stack.
2) 1-unit-per-tile turned into endless shuffling in the mid-late game when your entire empire was full of military units.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Instead it seems like what they're doing is everything is still 1upt but you can 'attach' support units that don't take up space, which is better than Civ5 but still not ideal.

No, they're making both capped stacking AND support units. Details are unknown yet, but stacking will probably be research locked. Research corpse and you get 2 stacks, research army and you get 3 stacks, something like that. So it actually makes sense, and should hit a nice balance between doom stacks and 1UPT.

A lot of announced new features look quite good. Endless Legend style city development, and tying research strongly to your geographical location with bonuses based on resources. It should make early game a lot more varied.

This is a great analysis of what's wrong with 1UPT, and how it's related to map size, cities, economy, happiness, etc.: http://www.sullla.com/Civ5/whatwentwrong.html

Ah man, I miss this guy. His Civ text based "Let's Plays" were legendary.

 

[Tigranes]

I should learn to read, then. That does sound positive. Pity about the retarded browser graphics that burn your retinas, but as long as the gameplay is sound...

 

[coldcrow]

This is shit. It's the same fuckup reactive gameplay as in civ5 and it's abominable step-child Beyond abortion. In 4X you are in control, apparently the decline has hit the devs so hard that they think gamers have to be spoonfed bits and pieces. See Civ5, you react to city states, you react to magic glittering barb camps and so on. Add to that the overall slooowww gameplay, uninventive buildings, broken diplomacy, stupid AI, awful UI and you end up with such a peice of shit civgame, that even civ3 looks good in comparison. I don't expect anything out of Firaxis anymore. Same shit like PB they had their swan song with smac and civ 4 then died.

 

[an Administrator]

Time to forget the Civilization and move on.

 

[Orobis]

Reading through this thread just gave me a huge urge to play Alpha Centauri.

 

[Raghar]

The Japanese go berserk if nipples are visible. Once worked on a game where we had to censor away male nipples from skin textures for the Japanese market.

http://kotaku.com/japanese-women-dont-want-to-see-man-nipples-1621454235

 

[Beastro]

Cannot wait to fap to TV ads of Sean Bean's head on Kate Upton's body leading fantasy armies in sexy armour.

 

[MilesBeyond]

Cannot wait to fap to TV ads of Sean Bean's head on Kate Upton's body leading fantasy armies in sexy armour.

That is... one possible response to this, yes.

 

[Mazisky]

LOOL day night cycle confirmed. Already bought

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

 

[MoLAoS]

The fact that Civ6 is such an utter disaster makes me so happy.