3032

Bought here too. I’m a sucker for all things Civ, and a builder. Changes look nice for my playstyle.

3033

I’m nowhere near a pro, but I think that the loyalty system is meant to address city sprawl. You can still send your settlers off to distant points and plop down cities, but then you will have to devote significant resources trying to avoid their loyalty flagging to the point that they break away from your empire – and even if they don’t, diminished loyalty will sap their productivity.

But we will have to see how this plays out. They are also trying to create better separation between starting locations, and an unintended result might be more cities, and without the need to build far off where loyalty is an issue.

I think a lot of Civ players are a bit schizo – they are very frustrated if the map doesn’t allow extensive expansion, but then they are frustrated when too many cities leads to, well, too many cities.

I think the biggest question, though, is whether the system where your civ’s performance each age determine whether the next age is golden, dark, or normal. If it works, city sprawl might be less unpleasant because you are always focused on picking up era points to meet your quota for this “chapter.” Honestly, I am 50-50 as to whether this will work; looking at the system on paper, I am not sure the point system or the rewards will click. But even if they don’t, I’ll bet that modders will do some great things with the system in coming weeks.

3034

Does anybody get how the disloyalty leads to flipping? I mean it makes sense, but I’m just curious on the mechanics. Will they just flip to another civ in the area or does the other civ need to do something to bring the city to their empire?

3035

The city becomes a free city first. Then that free city may fall under the influence of one of the civs in the area. Or be conquered by one. (Possibly by the original owner)

The most important thing, though, is that civs have a variety of tools to use to put stress on the cities of neighboring civs, to reduce their loyalty. This includes a spy action and the use of a governor. So very often, if a city flips to a free city, a specific civ is waiting to swoop in and grab it.

3036

Time to check out the expansion

3037

I started plinking around with this, curious to see how far it’s come since the release. Once I got a scout out to explore, I called my warrior back to the capital to just park there on defense. I had a brief moment when I was wondering why I couldn’t click on the city to recall my warrior and then I realized, “Oh right, there’s a new scout there and 1UPT”.

Ugh. I’m not sure I have it in me.

In other words, what it’s been all along. :)

-Tom

3038

To everyone who forgot to play like me, there’s no diplomatic penalty to attacking in earliest era.

3039

1 odd inconsistency still at play w/ the expansion’s installation.

When you subscribe to a mod via the workshop it defaults to enabled. This isn’t my issue as it makes perfect sense BUT, whenever you add a DLC or expansion it defaults to disabled.

Oh sure I bought and installed the expansion but had no plans on actually using it. 🙄

3040

I’m in 125 AD of my first game - playing as the Cree. Maybe it’s my feeble brain, but I think the biggest difference between Civ VI and Civ IV is a general one (besides the actual mechanics). I think in Civ IV there were much fewer moving parts that it was easier to keep track in my head what I wanted to do next, and what my longer term plan was. In Civ VI there are so many little things here and there that make me constantly evaluate what I want to do next that I feel like I’m playing by the seat of my pants. I don’t necessarily think it is a bad thing, just different.

The Era Score has made me change what I was going to do as I scrambled to get the points in the first age to avoid a dark age. Civ VI throws decisions at you pretty frequently. Upgrade a governor or recruit a new one, should I try to trigger a eureka moment, when to get another settler going, where to build districts, and on and on.

The diplomacy AI still seems eratic, I was friendly with both Queen Elizabeth and Saladin with my relations in positive territory. Bam, they both declare war on me and I never see one of their enemy units. Still, I’m enjoying managing my empire.

3041

I still haven’t bought the game, and this is why. I’ve been hoping to hear that the diplomatic AI would start making sense in the expansions; I can live with stupid tactical and strategic AIs but bad diplomacy really pulls me out of the game. And yet I still follow the thread closely hoping someone will sell me on it.

3042

Yeah, it’s annoying. I understand why they chose to do that; the DLC can break mods, whereas the mods are needed for your saves. Still, it’s a weird experience.

3043

Spent several hours today playing a first game with Rise and Fall. Cree at King level on a large continents map against random oppponents, who happened to include Lautaro as my next door neighbor and Robert the Bruce a little further off. Random observations to this point (realizing this is a sample of only one)

  • Starting location feel less cramped, and the map more interesting, with islands here and there.
  • Hills still very difficult to see under many circumstances… real pet peeve of mine.
  • The 40% rather than 50% eurekas and inspirations probably make for a better game. It’s an area where human players massacre the AI, and this mechanic really was becoming too central to game strategy.
  • Wow, is it ever inconvenient to play without the CQUI interface mod. Maybe the worst is no clear indication of how long until a trader is ready for reassignment… This is a real strike against Firaxis, in my mind more blameworthy than military AI failings, because it is entirely fixable.
  • The Mapuche look very strong, and not someone you want as a neighbor.
  • First and only case of forward settling led to Kongo losing a city to the loyalty mechanic, and the city ended up mine.
  • The new Government buildings certainly add a strategic element, but the level one buildings may not be exactly as they first appeared, at least to me. It looks to me like you usually complete the building late enough that Ancestral Hall’s settler/free builder bonus is too late for that initial expansion burst. Of course, it may time out differently on the huge maps some people play on.
  • As I saw in one of the Let’s Plays, the early ages can be a bit of a trap, at least for players like myself. Ancient Age, you almost cannot avoid earning a Golden Age for the Classical Era, but none of the resulting bonuses is all that overwhelming an advantage. But then the bar is too high to escape a Dark Age for the Medieval, not without doing things you would not otherwise be doing. Which is to say, the ages mechanic is going to require some adjustment.
  • One Emergency so far, and it did not make a good first impression. Lautaro captured an Arabian city, and for some reason it triggered the emergency mechanic. I had the option of joining, but it was not clear to me exactly what cities I would need to capture in order to succeed, and so I passed.

Overall, the game seems somewhat more tense and interesting beyond the initial land rush. And as to Robc04’s observation, yeah, it feels more complex, more things to juggle. I was actually taking notes, but that is partly because the onscreen pins are not as effective, without CQUI.

3044

For me, the stronger game design is to opt for fewer decisions that are more meaningful. Which is exactly what Firaxis did with XCOM. It’s so weird to see them going all-in with lots of niggling little decisions in the Civ series, but I guess that’s what people want.

-Tom

3045

A part of me doesn’t like the things that just ‘happen’ without my trying for it. I get a lot of eureka moments that way. There are times I plan for eurekas. If it is a way to make the game respond naturally to your actions - build a quarry to get a boost for masonry, then I think the bonus should be toned down even more, maybe 15-20% of a boost.

As with the era score, I don’t understand if the intent is for players to game the system and really shoot for things that give the era score, or if it is meant to reward players for achieving things naturally. The list of things that contribute to the era score is pretty darn large - not sure how many of the things I can commit to memory. I did game it when the first era was coming to a close and I was below the mark for a dark age. The next age I got a golden age without really trying.

For years I’ve been telling myself I’m going to replay Civ IV and I just really haven’t. It’s been so long and I’ve played so many other games since then I’m not sure I have a clear picture of all the details. No other game has captured my attention as much as Civ IV did, except perhaps the first Civ. I remember standing in an Electronics Boutique , looking at the Civ 1 box and thinking this can’t be as awesome as it sounds - but it was.

3046

I hear ya. I think the kind of stuff that can most kill the mood for me are mechanics like the Eurekas that the AI just doesn’t seem to utilize like a human player. I need to feel they’re playing by the same rules as me. I guess I also have issues with the Agenda mechanics. While I like how the agendas do give the AI a bit more character, I dislike the puzzley aspects of how you could manipulate their diplomatic favor simply by adopting some arbitrary tweaks to your gameplay that a real player would see right through.

3047

Not having a casus belli can trigger an emergency, I believe.

3048

I find it’s best for me to come with an asymmetrical point of view to the game; it’s an RPG where my character is “special” (or more to the point, my opponents are mostly cannon fodder).

3049

They need to bother you constantly with piddling decisions to distract you from the underlying incompetence of the AI players in all phases of the game. With a better underlying design or a better AI they would undoubtedly automate some things that are currently manual and abstract other features to be less annoying.

3050

I’m a builder, and so far I like this expansion. The Era and Timeline stuff is fun, and Loyalty and Governors are interesting additions. I haven’t encountered an Emergency yet. I like all the decision-making; the choices don’t seem small or trivial to me. Mostly the feeling I get is that I’m way behind where I should be!

I have some minor gripes. I do sometimes I feel the map is too cluttered with interesting distractions, and yes, hills and such can be hard to see. I have minor UI complaints, and actually an eye-candy item: I wish policies had a pretty graphic, not just a wall of text. But overall, I’m having lots of fun with it.

The military AI has never been a big concern for me, because I don’t play Civ games to fight. The diplomatic AI is more important to me. I’m only 100 turns in, at Standard speed, and my diplomatic interactions have been limited. So it’s too early to tell what’s going on with that.

I’m playing as Scotland. I expected I’d be pursuing a Science victory, and maybe I still am, but early random events pointed me toward religion: a goody hut here, a religious city state there, and next thing you know I’m founding Catholicism. I got a kick out of that. Meanwhile, the Koreans are vying with me for the tech lead, while the Aussies are expanding fast. The new music tracks are great, and the map is very pretty, especially at night (even if it’s sometimes busy). I’m looking forward to finding out how things develop.

3051

Interesting, I had not heard that, and the text did not make it clear. It makes sense.

My dubious reaction, though, had more to do with the success conditions… They wanted to sign me on to capture various cities, but they were not naming them. It struck me as another pig in a poke decision, much like asking me to promise not to settle near them, without making clear what they consider near.