2K Games' 'Civilization VI' Arrives October 21

Status
Not open for further replies.

megiv

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2011
49
0
18,530
0
I know it's not related, but what about another title in the faboules Commandos series ? it's long overdue
 

salgado18

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2007
816
202
19,370
4
I'm soo much expecting this! Changes to the formula without changing the basis of an already amazing game, more mod support, all old expansions included, this looks like the best Civ yet! (until released and reviewed, that is)

Rock Paper Shotgun has more info on the changes to the system (like city improvements now take space on the map), check them out:
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/05/11/civilization-vi-details/
 

d_kuhn

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2002
704
0
18,990
2
I've not updated my Civ version since IV, V just didn't look at all like an upgrade to me. This one looks very interesting though.
 

pizzacheeks

Distinguished
Dec 22, 2009
16
0
18,510
0
Will stick with Civ IV till they bring the the multi units per square back or they but that in as option the can be turned on or off
 

Haravikk

Honorable
Sep 14, 2013
317
0
10,790
1
The one feature I really want is better AI players don't have to cheat (as much). I know that competent AI is hard, but the one unit per tile combat system should be reasonably simple to program into the AI so that it actually withdraws injured units, fires over melee units with ranged units and so-on, as well as having it recognise bottlenecks in the terrain and good defensive positions (hills across rivers etc.).

I kind of feel like this should be the main focus, as my games of Civ V are usually a frantic race against the odds to keep pace with AI players that started with a ton of bonuses, followed by a brief period of relative balance, then boredom as I grind towards inevitable victory. I want the game to be challenging throughout without having to try to play against other people, as I prefer Marathon game lengths played solo, but the AI spoils the fun most of the time, usually requiring me to cheat (use in-game editor) so I can prop up AI players that don't seem to care about defending themselves.

In fact, the best thing about Civ V's combat system is that you can defend small civilisations really effectively, but AI players and city states make the stupidest moves, like bringing artillery out of their city and into range of something that will kill them.
 

Pmb Denton

Reputable
Apr 27, 2014
1
0
4,510
0
Wow, I hope they full support Touch screens again with being on Windows 10 and all, Beyond Earth worked really well!
http://digital-wear.com/the-most-powerful-windows-10-touch-screen-tablet-342/
 

d_kuhn

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2002
704
0
18,990
2
LOL... downvotes for calling out Civ V as not as good as Civ IV? Maybe I should have clarified... it not only wasn't as good as IV (which is the best of the series)... it was by far the worst of the series and wasn't even worth bargain bin pricing. Basically took an awesome game and stupified it so the console crowds could play. Clearly not a lot of real Civ fans on Toms.
 

cordes85

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
69
0
10,640
2
If they have civ 2 music in it I'm in, would grind hours away listening to that, plus the old style advisors arguing on what tech to go for next
 

Alec Mowat

Honorable
Jan 8, 2014
3,244
0
13,460
346


Been playing since Civ I, and I enjoyed V a lot. Even on launch day. Never really understood the criticize, I don't miss tacks of death and I do like the ranged unit combat a lot more.
 

therealduckofdeath

Honorable
May 10, 2012
783
0
11,160
70
I agree Alec Mowat. Civ V is by a huge margin the version I've played the most, and I've also played since Civ I. The change to make happiness such an important factor probably threw a lot of people off, but, once you figure it out there are an infinite number of ways to control that happiness. Especially with the gods and kings plus brave new world updates. Sure, the AI is by no means capable of handling the increased complexity in movements with the hexagon layout and one unit per tile limits, but, that's sort of understandable. Moving a big army without wasting a lot of turns quickly gets complicated with that many available paths.
 

Haravikk

Honorable
Sep 14, 2013
317
0
10,790
1
it not only wasn't as good as IV (which is the best of the series)... it was by far the worst of the series and wasn't even worth bargain bin pricing.
I suspect the down votes are more about your being an ass and stating your opinion as if it were absolute and universal.

There were a few things I liked about Civ IV, but I never really got into it like I did with Civ V. The one-unit-per-tile combat is tactical and rich, and allows a small well-managed civilisation to defend effectively against a large one, and even gain meaningfully superior units as a result. Civ IV's combat was just stacking as many units into a tile as you could, which meant that it always comes down to biggest stack wins, placement on terrain wasn't particularly important whereas in Civ V it's crucial; a couple of melee units with medic promotions and a range unit behind them can hold a river against much larger forces.

Also, simplification isn't a bad thing; Civ IV had a bunch of gameplay elements that, while interesting, never quite worked, and only got more complex with expansions, but not in a good way. Civ V made a few blunders as well; while I kind of like religion in Gods and Kings, I hate having to spread it with missionaries since it's such a chore, and having your cities flipped by a great prophet later in the game is frustrating not fun. So there's still room to improve, but I prefer it to some elements of Civ IV.
Still, I liked in Civ IV that high culture caused your borders to overturn those of your enemies, but it desperately needed to be handled a bit better or have more ways to defend against it.
 

Biscuit42

Reputable
Aug 7, 2015
49
0
4,540
1
Umm...anyone want to hazard a guess as to WHY there are dinosaur skeletons next to the amphitheater in the 'Coastal City' screenshot they released?

Is it a hint that they start the game earlier, at a time when your tribal warriors were riding dinosaurs? :)
 

the_crippler

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2010
495
0
18,960
68
I never really got into Civ V...I thought....Steam tells me that I have 214 hours in on it.

Curse this addictive game!

I barely played Beyond Earth at all, though. There was just something about that one that didn't click with me.

I really liked III&IV, but my favorite was (And I realize this is blasphemy) Call to Power 2. Looking forward to another installment, and this "spreading cities" aspect looks really cool (As does the context-based research.)
 

Tocamac

Commendable
May 12, 2016
8
0
1,510
0
FINALLY! I've been a Civ fan(atic!) since I first played Civ II all those years ago and I've enjoyed each new version in turn! Sure, Civ V was a bit barebones when it first launched but this was to be expected, since DLC had become a money spinner for most devs by then.

Once both the expansions were out Civ V was a far more enjoyable game than IV or, for that matter, Beyond Earth, ever was to me. Giant stacks of death duking it out really don't make for a very engaging experience! I sure hope they improve the AI for this newest instalment and I can't wait to get my hands on it. Take my money already!

As a side note, my last fully new PC was built right around the time Civ V released and maybe it is finally time to say g'bye to my awesome Sandy Bridge gaming rig! Bring it on!
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator


Steam tells me I have over 1200 hours on Civ V mainly because that's the game I play more than any other. I've played and won with every civilization, every type of victory except I've never been able to win with Venice for some reason. And I've also unlocked like 2/3 of the achievements.

Beyond Earth is horrible. I've tried to play it tons of times but it's definitely way more difficult even on the easy level than Civ V is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY