Civilization VI

[garbon]

customization of leaders - iirc you can already choose which leaders you play against

I watched the video and I think it allows you to prevent certain leaders from being pick when randomising selection.

[crazy canuck]

customization of leaders - iirc you can already choose which leaders you play against

I watched the video and I think it allows you to prevent certain leaders from being pick when randomising selection.

That makes some sense if you really hate playing against particular leaders but you still want a random selection. The article said this was useful if you wanted to play against a particular leader, but we can already do that.  If you want to play against a particular leader or leaders, you can select them and leave the rest random.

[garbon]

customization of leaders - iirc you can already choose which leaders you play against

I watched the video and I think it allows you to prevent certain leaders from being pick when randomising selection.

That makes some sense if you really hate playing against particular leaders but you still want a random selection. The article said this was useful if you wanted to play against a particular leader, but we can already do that.  If you want to play against a particular leader or leaders, you can select them and leave the rest random.

Yeah they also said that in their video so seems like an inapt statement about what the new feature allows.

[Solmyr]

Damn, I'm really tempted to play again.

[mongers]

I know this is a long shot, but has anyone here Not got Civilization 3?

As I've a spare steamcode for the complete version if anyone wants it.

[mongers]

Had third go with CIV6 when it was on free weekend trial, still couldn't get into it. 

[Josephus]

Had third go with CIV6 when it was on free weekend trial, still couldn't get into it. 

Yeah...I bought it this weekend, pretty cheap with a bunch of DLCs and XPs.

The one thing I think CIV needs is tech spread. I know you can trade techs; but it should have some form of tech spread, so that one country isn't lobbing bows and arrows whilst its neighbour is producing T34s.

[DGuller]

More generally, the problem with all Civ games is that many of their mechanics snowball rather than hit diminishing returns.  The rich get richer faster than the poor get richer, which is an unstable system.

[Tamas]

More generally, the problem with all Civ games is that many of their mechanics snowball rather than hit diminishing returns.  The rich get richer faster than the poor get richer, which is an unstable system.

Yeah but that's a generic 4X problem (with Paradox games very much included) that few tried to address.

[The Brain]

More generally, the problem with all Civ games is that many of their mechanics snowball rather than hit diminishing returns.  The rich get richer faster than the poor get richer, which is an unstable system.

And if they don't people whine about the lack of realism. More importantly though why did Civ 5 use Erik XIV as their model for Gustavus Adolphus?

[Tamas]

More generally, the problem with all Civ games is that many of their mechanics snowball rather than hit diminishing returns.  The rich get richer faster than the poor get richer, which is an unstable system.

And if they don't people whine about the lack of realism. More importantly though why did Civ 5 use Erik XIV as their model for Gustavus Adolphus?

Nobody actually cares about Sweden. It's out of the way and has ghastly climate. Ball bearings can only compensate for so much.

[Josquius]

More generally, the problem with all Civ games is that many of their mechanics snowball rather than hit diminishing returns.  The rich get richer faster than the poor get richer, which is an unstable system.

Yeah but that's a generic 4X problem (with Paradox games very much included) that few tried to address.

Its hard to think how to do this in a fun way even. Modelling decline in a way that is still enjoyable is the ultimate game design challenge.

[Tamas]

More generally, the problem with all Civ games is that many of their mechanics snowball rather than hit diminishing returns.  The rich get richer faster than the poor get richer, which is an unstable system.

Yeah but that's a generic 4X problem (with Paradox games very much included) that few tried to address.

Its hard to think how to do this in a fun way even. Modelling decline in a way that is still enjoyable is the ultimate game design challenge.

I guess I can say this because I had nothing to do with figuring the actual design out: I thought FoG Empires figured out a good way. It is quite abstract to be fair and wasn't easy to explain.

[Syt]

Other games made failing fun and entertaining: Dwarf Fortress, Rimworld, e.g. Not sure how to apply this dynamic to 4X games.

I thought one of the old Civilization board games - not the Middle Eastern one (and a mod for Civ4, I think, Ryse and Fall, IIRC - never played it, though) had the idea of you playing a succession of civilizations - i.e. first you play ancient civs, then next turn you expand with a new empire on the existing map etc.

[Tamas]

Other games made failing fun and entertaining: Dwarf Fortress, Rimworld, e.g. Not sure how to apply this dynamic to 4X games.

I thought one of the old Civilization board games - not the Middle Eastern one (and a mod for Civ4, I think, Ryse and Fall, IIRC - never played it, though) had the idea of you playing a succession of civilizations - i.e. first you play ancient civs, then next turn you expand with a new empire on the existing map etc.

I'd love that but most people would not be able to stomach it. We don't like snowballing but for a lot of people that's the exact reason to play.

Thing is, a lot of people when they roflstomp, in, say, CK3, they don't see the deep flaws with historical simulation, they see how awesome they are for beating this game.