ITT: first impressions and opinions on Civ 6
IMO: I really like the hand-drawn map style for unfocused tiles, and that wonders now get their own tiles. However, I'm not a big fan of the cartoonish graphics.
shameless self bump
really curious what /v/ has to say
/v/ hated it because of its design. Then later gameplay videos and comments by the producers proved the design had actual ties to improving gameplay. So without trolling fuel, /v/ no longer cares about it.
I think it looks like a huge improvement over Civ V. Which Civ V is already one of my favorite games. About the only thing I'm not a fan of is Cleopatra being in over someone like Aknaten or Seti. I'm hoping that each civ might have multiple leader choices.
I don't care about the design. What I care about most is the AI, but Firaxis has done fuck all to improve it since Civ 3, and some argue that 5 is a downgrade.
Gonna repost what I said about this from the other thread:
I think what needs to be done is design the game with AI in mind from the very beginning, rather than adding features and hoping the AI will be able to handle them.
Sure, it wouldn't work with DLC/expansion (which, I know, has been with the series for awhile), but is this truly necessary?
I know what I'm asking for is somewhat unconventional, and it may raise eyebrows from fans of the series, but hear me out. Really, it's a question of "depth vs. breadth." I would rather have a game with fewer mechanics and lots of strategic depth (that the AI can into as well) than a game with lots of varying simulation aspects that the AI might not be able to handle (and the player would have to micromanage anyway). I would even defend hexes and 1 unit per tile as a design decision in the vein of this philosophy, so long as the AI could actually handle it (which it can't in Civ V).
>>341882743
This graphical style looks pretty good.
>>341883626
Pointless. You can't create an AI that's even close to a human.
How much do you want to bet that there will be less content than Civ V?
They did say they were building on top of Civ V, but look at what happened to Beyond Earth.
Plus it's Firaxis, the laziest developers around.
>>341884163
They already made their fans pretty angry with Beyond Earth. I
think Firaxis fans tolerate a lot, but another shitty game and they are shooting themselves in the foot.
>>341883626
No one has been able to make an AI which could work for a game of the size of Civilization. Even for a chess game, AI is too simple.
The only way to make AI work in a Civ game is to either give them massive advantages or change the entire way the game plays. Civ VI seems to be doing the second option.
>>341884163
The Civ V team is the guys who did Civ V Gods and Kings and Brave New World. The Beyond Earth team is a different team which is still working on Beyond Earth. And has no connection to Civ VI.
>>341882743
I looks great
>>341885086
Thank christ.
>>341882743
I dont mind the comic style. I just hope they dont lie about not using the same old garbage codebase anymore. The multiplayer performance was abysmal.
>>341884081
In terms of what? Feelings/emotions, or ability to play the game well?
The first might not be possible, but the second certainly is. It may be a far simpler game, but computers have been regularly beating chess grandmasters since the 90s.
AI is certainly getting there (every day, we see some new story of what Google is doing) - it's just that devs don't put the effort into games, as 90% of the players think it's fun to steamroll and exploit bad AI.
>>341885086
>Civ VI seems to be doing the second option.
Well, this actually goes along with what my post suggests - I'd rather have a simpler game with strategic depth and good AI than a wide-reaching simulation with features that the AI can barely use. I know this might be an unpopular opinion, but I think it would be really cool to see.
>>341884163
Religion and trade routes are confirmed, and they've said that almost every feature in you played with in Civ BNW will be in the game (whether you believe that or not).
World Congress is the only thing that's been said to be removed so far, which I think is because they're scrapping diplo victory and replacing it with religious.
>>341885974
>which I think is because they're scrapping diplo victory and replacing it with religious.
I never heard that. But while I've been asking for a religious victory for years, I don't want Diplomatic to go away. I can think of many ways to make Diplomatic victory work better.
They should rewrite the engine so the AI doesn't take 2 super computers to be playable in multiplayer
>>341888125
>They should rewrite the engine
Exactly what they did m8.
>>341885974
>scrapping diplo victory and replacing it with religious
Thank fuck, diplomatic was always awful. Impossible to achieve in multiplayer, and in single player it's just "bribe everyone until they declare you the winner".
How long until the complete game is reduced to a decent price?
I bought civ 5 for $6.
What's up with that shitty artstyle? Also Firaxis doesn't seem to be interested in going further with their games and just start at the same point with each new game and go from there. And after XCOM 2 I'm not buying another Firaxis game, at least anywhere near the launch date.
The changes to workers makes sense. When I first heard about it I was a bit wary.
>>341882743
Nice Clash of Clans graphics
>>341888654
About four years after launch.
>>341888654
2-4 years
Add in another vote as someone who likes the artstyle. I don't get this "Clash of Titans" meme. It looks good and that's all that matters.
>>341888654
i voted for game of the year and civ 5 was gifted to me. Pretty nice game but im not willing to spend 60$ for civ 6
>>341888816
>>341888823
Right on. In that case I can see why /v/ doesn't give a shit.
>>341884081
AI destroys humans in chess software. Chess software devs have to care about AI design, because they can't just keep adding on features and pass that off as complexity.
>>341888649
>and in single player it's just "bribe everyone until they declare you the winner".
So exactly like in real life? If one civ has 10,000 gold to waste on every city state, they should win.
The problem with Diplomatic victory is that it could be done before any other victory. They needed to activate it by researching Globalization and making it a proposal someone initiates, rather than just happening automatically every10 turns.
I wish Civ games would try and do something vastly new.
Imagine instead of just ancient - slight future tech you went from an actual tribal society where only your closest neighbors mattered, where you could compete for resources that are specific for the time, assimilate your competition into your tribe as you advance and begin your own culture, your own mint, your own laws, your own doctrines, companies that enter a global market later on in the time-line. Etc. And then have an expansion for something like Beyond Earth where now that you've conquered your world, your world now travels to spaces, you now advance in your own way of building satellites, doing recon, choosing moons and planets to travel to. Discovering how to terraform and shit, gaining new foreign resources, etc.
>>341889265
Pretty sure every version of software which has beaten a human at chess has later been beaten itself. This is mostly because chess doesn't have the complexity to have infinite moves. And even an AI has learnable patterns. A human can intentionally let his pieces get captured and bait the AI into exposing a queen or rook, leading to a loss. While the AI will never have the reasoning to see it coming. In other words, AI can only be reactionary. Just as we see in Civ games.
>>341891039
>A human can intentionally let his pieces get captured and bait the AI into exposing a queen or rook, leading to a loss. While the AI will never have the reasoning to see it coming.
Do you really think programs could beat grandmasters if this were possible? Sure, grandmasters can use other strategies to "cheese" the AI, but it never is as simple as what you suggested (and these exploits get patched over, anyway). Chess AI does very deep searches; yes, it would be able to see through the feints and it certainly wouldn't fall for the bait.
Also, I'm not going to be too quick to fall into the neural network hype, but it very well might be the future. It's slow, but it is already working:
http://qz.com/502325/an-ai-computer-learned-how-to-beat-almost-anyone-at-chess-in-72-hours/
>>341889265
Chess is an incredibly simple game when comparing to Civ.
It's almost solved for fucks sake, of course the AI is going to outperform humans.
>>341893289
Yeah, but adding complexity to a turn-based game does not necessarily make it unsolvable, nor does it suddenly make it impossible to make proficient AI.
>>341894752
True, but you don't have giants like IBM making AI software for a game that is constantly going through balance changes.
While I appreciate good AI I've come not to expect it out of most strategy games, it's simply not that viable.
>>341894876
It's all on a scale. I'd just rather see improvements in AI for Civilization than I would rather see wider-breadth simulation (I posted >>341883626)
>Be germany
>Best friends are Netherlands and Austria
>Spawn next to eachother
>Greatest enemy is Rome
>Rome keeps invading Netherlands
>Keep liberating Netherlands over and over
>3000 years later Netherlands has teamed up with Rome against me
I also dislike how the AI decides it's only going to try to win with one or two AI and the others are just support.
Post ending in 5 decides what Civ I play next.
If someone gets 00 it decides Civ and Victory Condition.
Is this start good?
Never played Venice before.
>>341896679
yeah
>>341896679
That start would be good for anyone. Also
>play Venice
>always one luxury 4 tiles away
>>341896618
if by Civ you mean which game then 3
if you mean which Civ you will play as, assuming your playing V, then russia
>>341898345
Russia it is.
>>341882743
I may be the only one, but I really like the new graphics. They're clean and easy to read and it gives the game a real boardgame feel.
>>341882743
IT LOOKS LIKE CASUAL SHIT REEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>341900193
The funny thing is that there is more information on the UI when you click the city and It's more complex in general, but it looks like Revolution
>>341898964
I agree. Readability is key, and even if they give a "casual" mobile-tier vibe, I don't give a shit as long as the gameplay and strategic depth is there.
>>341898964
I like the style of everything except possibly the leader animations. Though Teddy Brosevelt is pretty awesome.
>>341898964
Not really I do too. Better than civ iv and it has that rpg world map of the past look except it's actually hd
>>341901546
I like the leaderheads desu, they remind me of Civ IV's caricature style.
>>341901546
we've only seen two leaders, how can you even tell
>>341902048
Speaking of In game art the music is going to be Era based, not Leader only this time, supposedly getting more complex as time goes on.
>>341902403
I hope we get something like Civ III's music. I loved that games OST.
