Can I get an honest opinion on Civ 6? I'm in the mood for

They were so close to making a really solid entry into the Civ series, but the AI really and truly is fucking abysmal. I don't understand why they thought it was fine the way it is, but it's not. I wouldn't buy it until (if ever) they do some serious work on the AI.

What's with those areas that look like sketches?

>>376859270
It's parts of the map you've explored but are outside of the vision range of your cities/units.

>>376859194
Why is the AI so bad? Sometimes its tolerable, but is it really completely broken?

get civ v, save your money

>>376858971

>I want to build shit.

Buy cities skylines or empire Earth on Gog instead.

>>376859194
The only way to get good AI would be create it post-release using tons of user replays. Blizzard has the right idea with creating an API to trivialize this.

>>376859602
No, it's broken. I think the problem is that they were onto something cool with the "leader values" system or whatever the fuck it's called, where each leader is unique in what they respect and don't like (such as having a big army, strong religion, X Y and Z resources, etc), but the end result is that in a normal playthrough you'll end up having civs declare friendship and denounce you all in the span of 5 turns, then declare war, and without you even doing anything ask for peace within the next 10 turns. Every AI leader is just a fucking nutjob with no consistent behavior.

>>376860081
sounds like its based off real politicians then.

>>376860081

They want all their needs immediately met.
So if you meet England, she will hate you instantly because you dont have enough spies.. In the classic era.

>>376858971
It's pretty good. Definitely has the potential to be the best Civ yet.

The one bad thing is the narrator's voice annoys me.

>>376858971
Civ 6 has a lot of good things going for it. The districts system is very nice, the amenities is easier to keep positive and less annoying than global happiness, culture having it's own tree is a great idea.

But the AI is, like others are saying, unforgivably bad. No matter how you play, you could be the most non-aggressive, AI pleasing person ever, and it's still literally impossible to keep them friendly. They hate you and will hate you always for anything you do. France hates you right off the bat because you don't spy enough before it's possible to be spying. Norway hates you for having a weak navy even though you're completely landlocked and naval units are shit anyway. Congo will hate you for not spreading your religion when you can't even get missionaries yet. And on higher difficulties they get so many hax that it's literally just a game of catchup until the final age because the AI is so bad it literally CANNOT PLAY WELL. They couldn't make an AI that's actually good at it's own game.

>>376858971
I really like it though I haven't played it in quite a while. Got my fill for now until they make a content DLC for it.

>>376858971
It's on par with G&K IMHO. Fundamentally it is superior to Civ V at its bones but it will take one full expansion to make it superior.

I think the most important thing it needs is more units. The gap in military strength between different military tech levels is vast.

It is shit. The competitive/strategic aspect is shallow.

I might have to try cities skylines then

I really hope they try to balance the Civs going forward. Germany is hilariously broken if you know what you're doing, while Norway is so pathetically bad it'd be better to play a Civ with absolutely no bonuses. I'm not asking for perfect balance, but I wish every Civ was at least viable to play

>>376858971

CIV VI is too repetitive thanks to it's shitty AI.

You will have a lot of fun until you get all the 4 victories, then there's nothing else to do since all the games will go about the same way.

Civ5 is better in almost every way
people say oh wait for the expansions but the fundamental systems in the game like the district system are just so shit I don't really think there's any saving it

>>376860081
>roosevelt/gandhi asks you to join a joint war
>immediately denounce you for declaring war

i think they fixed that one at least

>>376861986
>fundamentals are shit
>ignores the fucked up happiness/trade/population cap system of civ v

Never buy a civ game until they release 2 expansions for it. It's common logic at this point

I'm fond of pigs.

>>376862467
the trade system and population system is no better in Civ 6 though.

Which is better, Civ 6 or Civ 5 complete?

>>376862467
happiness as a system works better than amenties in civ 6, it's just super agressively balanced so you can't expand. trade system is shit but its the same in 5 and 6, and 5 doesn't have a population cap but 6 does

Just bought it on sale today. 40% off on HB. Then again, its fun in a civ way, but it feels seriously way like civ 5.

>>376863096
that's the problem though, Civ V is an empire building game where you are objectively worse off for building your empire.

>>376863241
I agree that's probably the biggest problem with Civ 5, but Civ 6 is a puzzle game masequerading as an empire building game. It's all about micromanaging your districts and your builders and really doesn't feel like a strategy game at all.

>>376858971
solid but same problems as all the other civ games

>no SP content
>shit multiplayer
>literally just replaying skirmish mode over and over again

File: fucked up techs.png (3MB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1152px

Remember those tweets about how life sucked without gunpowder?

Good times good times.

>>376861121
I would encourage anyone who likes civ to pick up Rise of Nations. It's like civ but with an emphasis on combat, and games typically last 1-2 hours so it's not a massive time investment like civ

>>376863505
the tech trees past the medieval era are fucking absymal
it's like they're missing two full ages

>>376863593
Rise of Nations is great, but it's more an RTS Civ than a replacement for Civ.

>>376860204
Tell me when was the last time politicians decided to all band together to destroy japan and 4 turn later decided that they wanted to make peace but still blames me for being a warmongering faggot and then procees to declare war to each others before re becoming friends and declaring war on me?

Real politicians are angels compared to the hell that is civ6 AI

File: the_zulu_have_entered_renaissance.gif (2MB, 352x152px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 352x152px

it's garbo

the issues it has are so fundamental in nature i don't see how expansions will redeem it like they did for civ 5 but guess we'll see

anyway it's literally unpalyable right now just get civ 5 and nqmod and nq group access you wont regret it

>>376863806
you don't need the AI to be happy with you in Civ6, you can completely ignore them and what they think for the most part, diplomacy doesn't matter at all

File: 4chan.png (3MB, 2048x1200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1200px

>>376863870
If they fixed the AI it would be great. I would bet money in two expansions this turd will be polished.

>>376863950
That's the problem
I went in the game thinking i'll be building an economic empire, making alliances and diplomacy
In the end the only viable option is to nuke them all

>>376863505
i always liked researching the internet before computers in civ 5.

>>376864141
oh no its perfectly viable to win via the other victory conditions, it's just none of those require any diplomacy either, MAYBE culture but good luck depending on the AI to trade any of it's relics with you, it wont

>>376862986
>>376863096
WTF am I reading? Civ V they literally combined everything I just listed into one horrible system instead of bothering to make a decent set of systems. It fundamentally gimped Civ V. Trade and population caps were the same fucking thing.

>>376864246
You must be thinking of another game, trade just gives you small bonuses and you don't have a population cap in Civ 5

>>376864107
Just save your images as jpg, dude. They aren't worth 3MB and certainly not worth editing.

The A.I. is shitty in general, but the true problem is that it just can't deal with combat in a 1UPT system. That being said, this is one of the best vanilla releases in the series.

>>376864331
Don't be dense. The only reason to stay friendly with other civs in CiVanilla was good trade deals for luxuries and those luxuries determined how big your empire could be before all your yields tanked.

Just get Endless Space 2 when it comes out in 6 days.

File: sike nigga, you thought.jpg (648KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 1920x1080px

It has it's moments.

>>376858971
What's your go to build order, /v/?

>he doesn't immediately queue up 3 scouts

>>376864521
luxuries only mattered in the early game, most of your happiness lategame comes from your ideology and policies, Civ6 actually has hard population caps on cities. The diplo in Civ5 was pretty shallow but there were many reasons to stay friendly with them, unlike in Civ6 where there are basically none

>>376864236
Well what I meant was that the only viable interaction with the AI is nuking them
The game is boring after the first 3 games anyway

>>376864597
Scouts aren't meta anymore.

The cool thing to do is slinger<worker<slinger and rush archery.

>>376864674
>ideology
I'm talking about the vinalla game, the barebones that all expansions had to work around. Civ V started out with the most janked systems of the franchise.

Not sure I have buyers remorse yet.

>>376863806
>the usa nukes japan
>starts rebuilding it almost instantly after
>best friends now
>animu

>>376864809
Slinger first is basically required because the odds of getting barbarian zerg rushed are so high. It's stupid how strong the barbs are at the beginning

I really dislike the aesthetic. Very heartbreaking to make such an ugly game.

>>376858971
It's better than vanilla Civ 5 but much worse than Civ 5 with all DLCs. Get that game instead.

I just play endless legend instead. I'm sure some faggot will tell me its broken or something but I find it fun with friends

Don't get civ games if you wanna build shit.

>>376865863

There's nothing wrong with the aesthetic, you pleb.

>>376858971
It's pretty solid. I would say it's as good as 5 with all the expansions currently EXCEPT for the fucking lack of global congress. That hoses mid and late game diplomacy so much I can't bring myself to play it after I got all the victories just because I miss that fuckery so much. Before 6 released they said they were going to patch the global congress in so I'm still fucking waiting.

>>376858971

Just play Civ 4, it's still miles ahead of its successors.

>>376866780
It looks better in game but the screenshots of it that they initially released literally looked like a mobile game. It's aesthetics are worse than Civ5 for sure

>>376867463
this

File: 1489153551557.jpg (291KB, 900x696px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 900x696px

>no brutal rule
>no gas chambers
>no Anal Frank
This game isnt realistic at all.

I don't like the idea of the district system but not the implementation. It feels too cramped because of how little of an area a city can cover. The terrible world generation doesn't make it any better.

>>376868601
I like the idea but not implementation*