It has its own rules for placement, unique commands that don't really correspond to existing units, and doesn't really live on the map.Įven if you do invest heavily in aircraft (which the AI can't really do effectively, since again - it's a different system from regular units) it becomes yet another thing that's tedious to manage as you have to constantly rebase your fleet as your front moves.Įspionage: The abstraction of espionage has made it super boring. As it's own self-contained system, first you have to figure out how to even use aircraft. But nonetheless, the abstraction of several game systems has made them far more passive and as a result vastly more uninteresting.Īirforce: I will never, for the life of me, understand why they've made aircraft so boring. I'm sure in the interests of reducing unit clutter and trying to streamline things - and to be fair, Civ 6 didn't start the abstraction of several of these. Lots of things which were previously "on-map units" have been abstracted. Even the localized scale feels too big, sometimes, while simultaneously feeling very cramped. You got this feeling of the actual clash of empires across the globe, while in Civ 6 it's like everything has been condensed down to a localized conflict area. Previous versions of Civ allowed for huge, sprawling maps where enormous empires would span continents and there would still be room to expand. The tedium of large empire management also contributes to the decision to make maps smaller, I'm sure. I realize this is incredibly simplistic and the actual design considerations were carefully thought through by the team, but I think the end result is suboptimal. Units take a long time to build, but the player still wants to get them in the action, so. Smaller maps can fill up with units really quickly, so. It spawns a vicious cycle, though.Įnforcing 1 unit per tile makes moving a large army long distances incredibly tedious, so. I suspect, the game intentionally tries to slow you down due to its reduced map sizes and the increased importance of a single unit due to the combat system. I'm tired of resigning myself to quitting each game half way through when the fun stops or gritting my teeth to actually finish. The game captures the sense of discovery better than any iteration in the series, and watching your humble tribe spread and fill the land with buildings and improvements is tremendously satisfying. Which is a giant shame, because Civ 6 does the early game so well. You have a tightly run, small empire pushing for science or culture and the managerial weight of each turn becomes an obstacle to simply clicking "End Turn" as you try to warp-speed your way to victory, but the game systems keep getting in the way. The bottom line is that once you hit the Industrial era, the game shifts gears down to first as the combined managerial weight of a large empire and lots of units makes each turn take forever, as you play shuffle with your army and curse as your building queues all empty at the same time so you have to go through each city again as you set up your queues. This has its own set of problems, though, which is that waging war in the late game is a logistical nightmare. So you can go full warmonger or proselytizer, which makes the late game more interesting simply because you interact with the game more. Scientific and cultural victories pretty much come down to just clicking "End Turn" over and over again until the end. This is not a surprise to anyone - everyone knows this is one of the biggest issues with the game. So, in too many words, here are my thoughts, most of which have probably been seen before.Ĭiv 6 late game is a tedious crawl towards the finish. That's the great thing about the series, isn't it? There are enough iterations that everyone can still play their favorite. I know for a lot of people Civ 4 is their high-water mark. I'll be comparing Civ 6 to Civ 2 in this post, mostly because that's the one I'm playing right now. I recognize that they are indeed my own personal tastes, and don't begrudge anyone their continued enjoyment of Civ 6 (and Civ 7!) - but if the series continues this way, it is likely not for me any more, from a playing or modding perspective. If Civ 7 is a continuation of the Civ 5/6 trajectory (and I see no reason to think it won't be) then it might be the first one I skip. That got me thinking as to why that iteration is the one that has stuck with me, and realized that the trajectory of the series as a whole - and culminating in Civ 6 - has trended away from my own personal tastes. Rather, Civ 2 (the iteration I first hopped on board the series) that I returned to. Recently, I've been itching to play some Civilization again - but I found it interesting that I had no interest in returning to Civ 6.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |