Did Civ6 end up being good?
Civ games usually only beat their predecessors once the last expansion comes out. I stopped playing 6 after the climate change DLC. Was pretty underwhelmed. Has it matured now like 5 did?
Civ games usually only beat their predecessors once the last expansion comes out. I stopped playing 6 after the climate change DLC. Was pretty underwhelmed. Has it matured now like 5 did?
Mostly I just want the same game, made by a different company that's run by people who are less interesting in churning out DLC for $ and leaving all the quality-of-life stuff to modders.
The "4 cities" may be easiest and most obvious strategy, but there's plenty of people who beat the game on Deity via Warmongering or spamming cities all over the map as well. The game has plenty of depth.
I should have probably clarified anyway. There are other viable strategies that people have found, but I just find it very annoying how much the game shoehorns you into the 4-city strategy through the very-unfun and just... dumb?... happiness mechanic. Imo Civilization-building should be about finding optimal exponential growth based on what you have to work with in your particular game, not about optimizing against arbitrary breakpoints in the rules and/or exploiting degenerate and counterintuitive strategies (such as the mysteriously viable warrior spam).
Another big source of imbalance is of course the AI's inability to use any of the secret society powers effectively.
Couple that with an incredibly hostile UX for new/non-expert players and the massive time commitment, and the experience is one of frustration rather thay joy & escapism.
It's like work, but you just get the pain of failures and none of the rewards.
The biggest difference is that civilizations in 6 feel distinct. In 5, all of them felt generic with cosmetic differences between them - except for Venice. In 6, with each civilization (and leader) it's like playing a different game. Preserving nature with Maori, settling tundra with Canada, cramming cities and districts with Japan, pillaging with Norway, eurekas with Babylon. I can pick the game again after two months and have a fun evening, without getting bored.
Speaking of districts, I love this mechanic. It makes sense and I like the extra puzzle and planning. I see how it gives board game vibes and I'm ok with it. Seeing the Civ series as simulation games is a mistake. They never were and they can't be. The reason for that is scale - both in size and time. The map is a grid of either squares or hexagons. Each tile has one feature and units move between them. If I zoom in, I don't get sub-tiles where I can do micro decisions. This constrains how realistic the simulation can be. On a world map, a peninsula of the size of Europe can have only a handful of cities.
Time have similar problems. Bronze Age passes quicker than the Modern Era. As a consequence, building the Sydney Opera House can take a hundred of years. And that's fine, because I pick gameplay over realism any time. Even the cartoonish art style doesn't bother me at all. In fact, I find it charming and unique compared to a boring, faux-realistic style of Civ5 which steps into an uncanny valley.
If you want a simulation approach, pick Paradox games. I tried them and I didn't like them, but I understand why they have a cult following. They still have board game elements, but the games are designed with constraints in mind. The gameplay takes a couple of centuries at most. The map isn't randomly generated, but it's scalable. The kingdoms and nations have fixed place. These decisions are consistent and make for a fun gameplay because Paradox games don't try to do everything.
It's better if Civ stays with a board-game approach. Having a clear identity is better than trying to be both "gamey" and realistic. It won't be for everyone and that's ok. For me, Civ6 is a good foundation. I'd like for Civ7 to use some ideas from Humankind, like elevated terrain, stackable armies with zoomed-in combat phase, the fame victory, and traits of a civilization that evolve over time. I'd also like to delegate parts of the game if I choose to. It would help with tedious parts and let me focus on things I find interesting.
I guess I just wanted a simpler game.