Civ 6

[Architect]

The best game for INTP's? Don't know, but it's surely the best game in that regards I've ever played. What I like in games is complexity and strategy. I also like good graphics, music, narrative and a game that integrates it all very well. Civ 6 nails it.

Long time player. Spent the most time in Civ 5 as I didn't have much time for the earlier games. Civ 5 though never really quite got there. Not quite complex enough, somewhat disjointed (BNW update was a fundamental game engine change, not just a DLC update). Anyhow long thought 4X was probably the best at tickling the INTP mind-bone, but Civ 5 wasn't quite good enough. Civ 6 is.

Can't find anything wrong with it. Love the graphics, love the music, love the civs. More complex and multidimensional than Civ 5. Recommended.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

I've spent 1200+ hours in Civ5. I never really got into the earlier versions and I thought Beyond Earth was disappointing. 6 looks really good, though, so it'll probably be my first real purchase once I get a job.

Hopefully my laptop can support it.

 

[Grayman]

Hopefully my laptop can support it.

Don't be so selfish!!!! Buy a new computer and help the economy!



*************
@OP

Loved the DLC BNW. It really added a lot to it.

How is the faith and religion in the new civ 6? I thought they could have done better and yes there are some good faith mods but it is nice to have it as a supported DLC.

 

[Pizzabeak]

I've only ever played Civ Revolution and enjoyed it, although I generally enjoy those types of games. I planned on getting into Civ 5 but never did. But since I've been looking for some new long term games to play I want to try Civ 6 in the same fashion. I traditionally try to play classic RPGs with storylines but I've always had a thing for tactical strategy games especially turn based.
The only thing I didn't like about Civ 4 is how long matches can take. I didn't mind saving it and continuing it the next day but rather would not have. Wish I started playing it earlier I guess but I started once I found out my friends played it, although I already knew I would like it.
Might feel kind of bad since I didn't play Civ 5 but am also hoping Civ 6 is just as welcoming, even though I'm not afraid of any extra complexity they may have added. In hindsight Civ 4 kind of sucked or was disappointing in a way, I just hope they filled in whatever that missing feeling may have been I got whenever I played it. I don't think it's really my favorite kind of game but it surely suits the mood whenever it strikes otherwise I sometimes enjoy a mindless game like Halo 5 or whatever else. It's usually worth it to play the game when too exhausted for anything else, at least for a little while. Most games suck after a while though, wish I could find one that reminds me of the past where it could be played for hours, all day. Guess I can't complain and can be satisfied with an intermittent style of game playing. I'm sure it'll be better with a more powerful PC.

 

[Hadoblado]

It's taking me more willpower than I knew I had not to buy this and start passing turns as the world and my life within it burn. Once exams are finished there will be a reckoning.

Civ5 was good in some ways, but it felt incomplete. Poor design choices reduced interaction, and even the interaction got cumbersome, in the mid-game war felt like a struggle to just push more units into a crowded space than your opponents. From what I've seen of Civ6, the interaction is far more dynamic and transparent, but the unit crowding issue may or may not be there? Still excite

 

[QuickTwist]

Separate subject, but MEA is coming in the spring and before that (in 5 days) special edition of Skyrim is coming out.

 

[Grayman]

in the mid-game war felt like a struggle to just push more units into a crowded space than your opponents.

Don't you have to pull out near death units to heal them anyways essentially rotating them in and then out like ocean waves,... on mars if mars had an ocean, although maybe it wouldn't be called an ocean because that would like be calling dirt on mars 'earth'. IDK but I but if they had civ Mars edition then I would definitely make hippographs to fly in and then out in a single turn during the midevil era. But since this is all flat earth ther isn't really a mars anyways so the game wouldn't be really realistic and all that.

 

[Seteleechete]

Not sure I could play this game without doing it as efficiently as possible = exploity. Kinda reminds me of the one BE game I did that I won by turn 100 or something(or was it 80? Can't remember/=)

 

[Architect]

Hopefully my laptop can support it.

Probably fine, I ran it on a variety of computers including a laptop. It does the usual civ trick of ramping the graphics up/down based on GPU

Loved the DLC BNW. It really added a lot to it.

Agree, it was just really weird and annoying that you had to buy DLC which fundamentally changed the game, just to make it playable. They did the same with Beyond Earth. With this one it's great out of the gate, no need for any of that nonsense.

I suspect they might have actually misjudged the market. I think they released these games in a more simplified version, to attract new players. Somehow forgetting about all the hard core civ players out there? Until they complained about the simplicity of the game. Civ 6 is from the start the kind of Civ you want. Deep, rich and complex in possibilities.

How is the faith and religion in the new civ 6? I thought they could have done better and yes there are some good faith mods but it is nice to have it as a supported DLC.

Better than ever. Now you have a religious victory, religious units can fight each other in some kind of religious war, and all sorts of special tweaks with religion. I haven't even gotten into that yet, still trying to figure out the game.

From the previews we were worried about the graphics. They looked like a cartoon and silly, but no they're perfect. Civ IV was a cartoon, in Civ V they tried to make it more realistic, and this game is so much more complex they didn't want to overwhelm, so they went more stylized graphics. I LOVE the map now, the fog of war is a old map parchment, really plays into immersion. And the animations are of course better. The leaders are fully animated characters. The UI is more complex and better handled.

Amazing, probably the most complex and deep game I've played. Finally!

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Civ 6 has more interesting mechanics than 5 did and it seems deeper (great people ledger and districts are notable additions), still not as deep as your run-of-the-mill grand strategy multiplayer games. So far early settling seems to be the strongest strategy as there's no way to do anything else and not fall behind and there's no way to punish that unless one starts as a war-oriented ancient civ like scythia or sumer.

Also the UI is terrible, it was much better in Civ 5 as it updated instantly and provided all the relevant information at a glance.

AI is close to nonexistent, it's terrible and exploitable at every step, obviously this game is meant to be played in multiplayer, but poor AI makes it more of a gift for the player who captures them first, rather than any kind of enrichment to the play.

The unique civ units seem too strong for what they cost, they give too much of an advantage, especially when there's an ancient civ going against a civ that starts getting their bonuses after the medieval era. War cart spam, elephant india spam, etc. Even stronger if one were to play on "online" speed, which is 200% faster than standard and already it's not difficult to build 1 war cart / turn on standard speed. Seems best to set the game speed to epic or marathon for better exploration rewarding and more strategy, instead of tactical unit spam.

There are some typical lazy inaccuracies in the history and lore, like for example Cleopatra is the least Egyptian leader of Egypt you can possibly have, as she was a Ptolemaic Macedonian Queen in what was essentially another Greek city-state.

 

[Minuend]

Haven't played it a lot. Seems more fleshed out, yes. I enjoyed civ 5 a lot and have almost 900 hours in there. Got fairly sick of it in the end. I figured getting civ 6 would be a ok investment if I ended up spending another 900 hours. But when I started playing it.... it felt a lot like civ 5. They are different, obviously, but for those of you out there who got very sick and tired with civ 5 I wouldn't recommend jumping on civ 6. It feels like a more fleshed out civ 5. I guess that's what a sequel is, I don't know what I was expecting. I thought I would be playing this 8 hours a day, but instead I'm playing other games.

 

[Hadoblado]

I've been playing a bit, but like Minu, not as much as I expected. Trash AI is a big reason, I don't have the time to sit down for a 5 hour multi game.

What I've found so far:
- one-time harvesting benefits is not adjusted for game-speed. Playing at online speed, where everything costs approximately half the production, a worker can pay back itself three times over across the course of six turns by choppety chop shop. A fast start can involve workers paying for workers etcetc. until you've clearfelled the entire area. Very hacks.
- Melee units suck with the new movement system. Cavalry are just better in every way. Cavalry are so efficient they counter their dedicated counter of spearmen in terms of raw point to point power, as well as in movement etc.
- Civs that get better cavalry are OP - scythia in particular more than doubles the effectiveness of cavalry spam BS.
- Religion is rubbish again unfortunately. I thought they might have improved it since Civ V, but it's a complete waste of time. Stick to culture and science (after food and production of course).
- The new eureka/inspiration system is awesome. Great mechanic.
- Barbarians are a lot better in this than V. They scout you then return home to rally the troops. Vast improvement.
- The simcity elements add a much greater level of complexity, I'm still struggling to work it all out. Industrial zones and campuses seem the most important all round.
- Racial and leader bonuses are much more interesting than in previous editions.
- Wide>tall. No known exceptions. This is my preferred playstyle anyway, but I assume it'll wear thin after a while.

 

[Architect]

- Religion is rubbish again unfortunately. I thought they might have improved it since Civ V, but it's a complete waste of time. Stick to culture and science (after food and production of course).

How so? It can be a bit of a grind converting everybody but that's the battle

- Wide>tall. No known exceptions. This is my preferred playstyle anyway, but I assume it'll wear thin after a while.

Thanks for that, I didn't know there was a wide/tall playstyle idea, looking into it.

 

[ummidk]

Thanks for that, I didn't know there was a wide/tall playstyle idea, looking into it.

From what I read tall is not a legitimate playstyle in civ6, so don't bother.

 

[Seteleechete]

From what I read tall is not a legitimate playstyle in civ6, so don't bother.

Civ 5 have some major drawbacks for playing wide due to extra culture/science costs per city and happiness, it can be very detrimental to have too many cities in civ 5. Civ 6 on the other hand has very few drawbacks from just plopping down another city if there is space. As long as your new city makes up for a settlers/lost production value cost it's worth it.

Also in both civ 5 and 6 you can get a lot of return on investment by getting a religion. Particularly in multiplayer any advantage like that is crucial. Maybe it's less important in single player since you might make more going a more militaristic route without suffering severe drawbacks.

 

[Hadoblado]

How so? It can be a bit of a grind converting everybody but that's the battle

Because if you approach religious victory opponents can just war you, allowing them to prevent the spread of your religion. All the options within religion that are conducive to religious victory come at the cost of options that directly affect the board; for instance, if you take a faith generation pantheon, then you're missing out on the 10% empire growth option. When you go deep in culture or science, you get bonuses that are immediately relevant while also approaching your win condition.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

Just finished playing my first game of Civ6. I'm impressed.

I went with Arabia since it seemed like a campus and holy site were two of the first districts to be built by them and they provided some rad overlapping bonuses between the two of them. I ended up with a science victory but I was pretty far along with most of the other ones since I was only playing settler difficulty for my first match in order to get a feel for the new mechanics.

Definitely feels more fleshed out on release as compared to Civ5 did on release. This is very likely to become a new timesink for me.