How is Civ 6

[Rangaman]

There's other problems as well. The AI is pretty broken and I'm told the multiplayer is similarly fucked. And Balance is still a major issue. Germany, Sumeria and Scythia are ridiculously OP.

How OP are we talking here? We're not talking Civ: Revolution Aztec's OP, are we? As in, if they get ahead early game it actually becomes impossible to beat any one of their units, OP? Because I've got my eye on this for the sales, but that would be a deal-breaker...

Not that OP, but still pretty ridiculous. Germany is OP because their ability gives them an extra district for every city, which effectively allows you to start working towards your preferred victory type before anyone else, and they can go ham on City States (I know that doesn't sound that good, but City States can be a major pain in arse in Civ VI if you aren't the Suzerain).

Sumeria can, and will, rush you with War Carts. They also get Tribal Village rewards for pillaging Encampments, they don't receive Warmonger penalties if the person they are declaring war on is already at war with an ally of Sumeria and they pay half as much to levy City State military.

Scythia will also rush you. If they build either the Saka Horse Archer (their UU) or the Light Cavalry they get an additional copy. They also get a combat bonus against wounded units and can heal up to 50HP upon defeating a unit.

They aren't invincible for the entire game, but they are pretty ridiculous as Civs go.

 

[MHR]

The last civ game I played was civ 1. After having watched Hearthstone's Trump play a few hours of Civ 6 though I have a grasp of the game and I have to say that it really looks overly-complicated. It's like you're playing too many games at the same time and if you're not careful, one of them will spill into the rest.

Like, Trump was playing as the Kongo and not caring about the intense religious wars that the AI were having with each-other. Meanwhile the regular border-based city-building game was happening, and all along you knew that all this chaos didn't matter much unless someone started zoning in on a religious victory. Diplomacy was attempted but nobody was at peace with anyone else since ever-changing government types were always at odds, borders were becoming rigid and unmoved, and suddenly it became a game of spamming spies to steal paintings from the enemy's museum for a victory. That's not to mention a lot of little underlying systems like the great people race, trade routes, amenities, tourist attraction, spy defense, and mini-diplomacy with the city states that all had to be taken account of.

The AI was also dumb as a bag of rocks. The worst example of which during a Deity difficulty game was a militant civ with units from 2 eras ago pushed up against the border seemingly unable to move but threatening war every other turn and then once they finally declared war, even their modern units were being wiped out easily by a few stacked ranged units and all their expensive districts were pillaged for fun and profit.

I get that that's what the Civ formula is and you either like it or you don't, but It just seemed really disjointed and lacking in focus and made me want to play some of my other 4X games instead.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

The last civ game I played was civ 1. After having watched Hearthstone's Trump play a few hours of Civ 6 though I have a grasp of the game and I have to say that it really looks overly-complicated. It's like you're playing too many games at the same time and if you're not careful, one of them will spill into the rest.

Like, Trump was playing as the Kongo and not caring about the intense religious wars that the AI were having with each-other. Meanwhile the regular border-based city-building game was happening, and all along you knew that all this chaos didn't matter much unless someone started zoning in on a religious victory. Diplomacy was attempted but nobody was at peace with anyone else since ever-changing government types were always at odds, borders were becoming rigid and unmoved, and suddenly it became a game of spamming spies to steal paintings from the enemy's museum for a victory. That's not to mention a lot of little underlying systems like the great people race, trade routes, amenities, tourist attraction, spy defense, and mini-diplomacy with the city states that all had to be taken account of.

The AI was also dumb as a bag of rocks. The worst example of which during a Deity difficulty game was a militant civ with units from 2 eras ago pushed up against the border seemingly unable to move but threatening war every other turn and then once they finally declared war, even their modern units were being wiped out easily by a few stacked ranged units and all their expensive districts were pillaged for fun and profit.

I get that that's what the Civ formula is and you either like it or you don't, but It just seemed really disjointed and lacking in focus and made me want to play some of my other 4X games instead.

civ6 switched it up quite a bit mechanically from civ 5, and then civ 5 is quite different from civ 4 (civ 4 is generally still called the best one) so I wouldn't judge them with a sweeping statement.

So while I think some of those are fair statements, and civ 6 definitely is begging for some expansion packs to different parts of the game, I still think it's a solid game.