Civilization VI? Edit: !

[Cikomyr]

So i have heard multiple references regarding a potential Civ6 in the past days.

I was wondering if someone has heard anything concrete about it, or if there has been any leaks..?

[Narkis]

I've heard rumours from multiple sources, the most concrete being Brad Wardell, CEO of Stardock, saying in his blog he knew Civ 6 is coming out this year.

[Sian]

I'm inclined to disbelieve that a CEO from a competing company (thats currently busy releasing a game) is the one to break any sort of news.

[Cikomyr]

I'm inclined to disbelieve that a CEO from a competing company (thats currently busy releasing a game) is the one to break any sort of news.

He is certainly more in the knows than the average goer. His sales figures are dependant on rival games' releases

[Sian]

He is certainly more in the knows than the average goer. His sales figures are dependant on rival games' releases

yes and no ... one is a RTS, one is a TBS ... the overlap between the player groups is smaller than you'd suspect ...

[Narkis]

yes and no ... one is a RTS, one is a TBS ... the overlap between the player groups is smaller than you'd suspect ...

Generally I'd agree, but Stardock also publishes Galactic Civilizations 3, which is very much a TBS and is getting some expansions this year.

[scottcrowan]

I would also agree with Stardock

[Cikomyr]

He shoots, he scores!!

A new trailer, narrated by yours truly, Sean Bean.

[OrcusMcP]

So, I'm currently taking odds on whether their planned October release date will be pushed or not. Who wants in?

In all seriousness, though, this looks pretty sweet. From what I've read so far, I like the emphasis on geography they're going for to shake things up.

[Flickerdart]

He shoots, he scores!!

A new trailer, narrated by yours truly, Sean Bean.

Haha, they airbrushed the nipple out of Liberty Leading the People.

Not terribly impressed by the trailer. Bring on the gameplay footage! Or even pre-rendered footage!

[Illven]

Woo!!!!! More Civilization!

So how long till we GMR these games?

[CarpeGuitarrem]

So, I'm currently taking odds on whether their planned October release date will be pushed or not. Who wants in?

In all seriousness, though, this looks pretty sweet. From what I've read so far, I like the emphasis on geography they're going for to shake things up.

Not sure how well it'll work out, but it sounds neat!

Article highlighting the new features

I don't know if the "terrain is tied to research" will wind up being more annoying or strategically interesting.

[Silfir]

Some information on gameplay.

One Unit Per Tile persisting just about obliterated my interest, though. It's possible that they've decided to massively increase the number of tiles and the map and that units can move, since they also announced the abolishment of one city per square, which could make it more palatable. Also, instead of being able to decide on specific tech paths (which led to everyone jumping on the optimal tech route), your research is more or less dictated by the tech boosts you've collected. Guys, the solution you were looking for is Blind Research and it was just one of the many things Alpha Centauri did that make it the best Civ game to date.

Even Civ II had some measure of undirected research - it blocked out some tech choices every time you picked a new one, which occasionally sent you on a detour.

Only being half-serious here, though. The end result could work out. But I'm definitely not buying this one on release.



One very common complaint: The art style. To many, it looks too colorful; there are unflattering comparisons to mobile games thrown around. That's one complaint I don't have; to me the art style is reminiscent of Civ II in a good way.

[factotum]

Only being half-serious here, though. The end result could work out. But I'm definitely not buying this one on release.

Unfortunately, that pretty much has to be the plan for *any* Firaxis game these days. Civ 5 took two expansions before it got any good, and Beyond Earth and Starships were neither particularly great examples of their genre. I'll be reading a lot of reviews and watching some Let's Plays before deciding if Civ6 is for me.

[Cikomyr]

Well, for one I love the idea of terrain-guided research. A civilization living on the core of the mainland shouldn't have nautical tech available. You should only want to research Iron if you actually find the weird stuff. etc..

With hope, this will bring actual variety to each and every one of the games. Please perhaps steal a page from Stellaris and use the "Deck" of techs? :D

[OrcusMcP]

One Unit Per Tile persisting just about obliterated my interest, though. It's possible that they've decided to massively increase the number of tiles and the map and that units can move, since they also announced the abolishment of one city per square, which could make it more palatable.

They did announce that support units can be integrated into your units, and you can consolidate units into corps. We obviously won't know more until later, but that seems like a pretty solid tip-o-the-hat to the doom stacks of old while maintaining 1unit/hex.

Also, instead of being able to decide on specific tech paths (which led to everyone jumping on the optimal tech route), your research is more or less dictated by the tech boosts you've collected. Guys, the solution you were looking for is Blind Research and it was just one of the many things Alpha Centauri did that make it the best Civ game to date.

Eh, I personally like the idea of the tech boost system, especially if it's tied to your civ's geography. It makes a certain amount of historiographic sense. If nothing else it should help make the early game especially more shaken up, rather than just Pottery->Writing->LuxTech1->etc every game.

[Sian]

the city impovement on tiles, smells distinctly like Warlock: Master of the Arcane which was a competent and strong entry in how Civ V could have made their combat mechanics stronger (at least seen as such by my inner Civ IV Grognand), but otherwise kinda shallow waters in the macro-strategy.

If they manage to siphon off the learned experience from Warlock (and Warlock II) and refining it, I'm probably willing to give it a fair shake

[Silfir]

Why go halfsies?

When it comes down to it, a landlocked civilization shouldn't simply fail to get a tech boost for nautical techs - It should plain be unable to develop them at all, unless it has an exchange of knowledge or trade of some kind with a Civ that does have access to these techs. (Or it ceases being landlocked.)

Even if it's just the tech boosts that can be exchanged as a result of exchanges of culture, it's one way of making diplomacy more interesting. Every people has something to offer another - do you befriend them and hope to learn that way, or do you take it by force, and risk damaging it beyond repair? What knowledge will be lost for thousand years more because someone didn't remember to not burn the libraries and not kill the philosophers drawing circles in the sands?

If they go that route, more power to them. Somehow I doubt it.



Just the notion that Civ VI is intended to start with Brave New World as the baseline puts me off. Including the specific mention of archaeology and tourism. That's not stuff that belongs in a game about building empires in the first place. If this is now part of the core Civilization game, what on Earth are they going to add in the inevitable expansions?

There's not much room to be taking the game in new directions when you get the designer of Brave New World to start with Brave New World as the baseline.



What I'm saying is I'm really not holding my breath.

[Flickerdart]

Why go halfsies?

When it comes down to it, a landlocked civilization shouldn't simply fail to get a tech boost for nautical techs - It should plain be unable to develop them at all, unless it has an exchange of knowledge or trade of some kind with a Civ that does have access to these techs. (Or it ceases being landlocked.)

Why? All ancient civilizations arose near large rivers, so it's not like the concept of large bodies of water (or the desirability of being able to cross them) would be lost on land-locked nations. They may not have a reason to develop navigation technologies like star charts or telescopes, but they can have boats.

[Cikomyr]

Why? All ancient civilizations arose near large rivers, so it's not like the concept of large bodies of water (or the desirability of being able to cross them) would be lost on land-locked nations. They may not have a reason to develop navigation technologies like star charts or telescopes, but they can have boats.

Funny. There's recently been a Quebec kid who discovered a Mayan city because he observed that the Mayan civilization did not established its cities logically (near rivers).

[Cikomyr]

I hate doomstacks.

Hence why I am REALLY happy we are never going back there. I have no problem they try to tweak and solve the 1/tile to make it better, but please, NEVER go back to Doomstacks. They utterly destroyed any joy I had in playing warfare.

[Gamerlord]

It isn't like there can't be a middle ground. Attrition, logistics system ala Gal Civ, increased maintenance costs, vulnerability to certain attack methods like artillery are all good ways to keep someone from stacking all their dudes into a few squares without such a severe restriction.

[Silfir]

Why? All ancient civilizations arose near large rivers, so it's not like the concept of large bodies of water (or the desirability of being able to cross them) would be lost on land-locked nations. They may not have a reason to develop navigation technologies like star charts or telescopes, but they can have boats.

In which Civ game did crossing a river involve having to research a tech? I always presumed all Civs have access to the basic concept of boats, similar to how they start the game with stone axes for the warriors.

The first nautical tech in Civ V is Sailing. Any body large enough that it can't be crossed with a boat or circumvented should also qualify for researching Sailing. To develop something, you first have to have an idea for why you might need it.

I mean, this is the concept they're going for. They want the player's civilization's surroundings to guide them to different areas of research. Except they're going halfsies; instead of restricting the player's tech choices based on their surroundings in a way that feels authentic, they just hand out the tech boosts.

It isn't like there can't be a middle ground. Attrition, logistics system ala Gal Civ, increased maintenance costs, vulnerability to certain attack methods like artillery are all good ways to keep someone from stacking all their dudes into a few squares without such a severe restriction.

This is going to sound super obnoxious - Civ II got this right, too. Only the strongest defender gets to defend the stack; if you kill it, the whole stack dies. Civ 2 encouraged the same behavior as Civ V did - spreading your forces across the available land to avoid stack extinction - but did it without the maneuvering nightmare that comes with One Unit Per Tile. It also still had legitimate uses for stacks despite their vulnerability, with phalanxes guarding vulnerable catapults rolling up to well-defended cities.

The system they're proposing - that of creating "formations" that allow units to move in unison - honestly is just incomprehensible to me. How is that supposed to help?

[Sian]

The system they're proposing - that of creating "formations" that allow units to move in unison - honestly is just incomprehensible to me. How is that supposed to help?

until further explanation, I'm excepting something somewhat similar to Armies in Civ III

[Dhavaer]

Yes! This all sounds great and I will be buying it ASAP.

[Zevox]

Huh. And here I just picked up Civ 5. Although with my luck despite having gotten a new PC just last Christmas I may well turn out not to be able to play Civ 6 on my PC. It would figure.

I hate doomstacks.

Hence why I am REALLY happy we are never going back there. I have no problem they try to tweak and solve the 1/tile to make it better, but please, NEVER go back to Doomstacks. They utterly destroyed any joy I had in playing warfare.

Personally, it's less stacks and more the "loser always dies" nature of Civ 4's combat that made me hate that. Way too much RNG frustration involved when every battle is guaranteed to be fatal to somebody, and it's just basically a dice roll deciding who it is and how much damage the winner takes. Though stacks didn't help, and I could see them still causing problems with a Civ 5 style combat system (i.e. every army would consist of melee units stacked on top of a bunch of ranged ones that can just mass fire away without limits on how many could be in a tile), so yeah, can't say I really want that back either.

[Aotrs Commander]

Eliminating doom stacks as the end-all and be-all could be done by adding a proper supply system (which no game ever really does, to my knowledge - I mean something beyond force limits and number attrition) and capping out the maximum amount of units which can fight in a given node (tile, in this case). Then nothing prevents you from having a 100 unit stack of doom trotting around, but if you can only engage with five units at a time and your logistics can't handle it bringing tht many tea and sandwichs because there's too mnay blokes and not enough roads and carts/trucks/trains to bring it too them... (Actually, you could get WW1 with that system, where doom stacks spend agaes hitting each other and rotating less wounded unit into a fight because neither sie can achive a breakthrough to break the other guy's supply chain. That's interesting... And would make air power and strategic bombing actually something you WANT to do, as opposed to going "nah, I want it intact for myself.")

If I am to take the exact opposite to what I've been saying in Stellaris about starship tactical combat (to which I am RIDICULOUSLY biased), there is a saying that amateurs concentrate on tactics, professionals comcentrate on logistics. My Dad, author of Manouvre Group, has spent the last few years trying to play campaigns. I say "trying" because they are using real-world army organisations and the terrain system and rules allows then to play on battlefields that mean they can use real-world tactics. It took them ages to work ut what recon actually DOES. And the big thing is, war is only fought over roads (and rivers and railways, whichever is your primary logistics method). Because tea and sanswiches is basically even more important than the actual combat, since if yu screw the former, you can't do the latter anyway.

So if as much effort was put into the logistics system and to the actual combat (not that Civ's combat has ever been THAT deep...!), you could very easily strike a balance between stacks o'doom and one-unit-per-hex.

But there is a possible drawback of doing that, though.

The more real you try to make it, the harder it gets; in the real world, this stuff is HARD. Like, really hard, as any real general will tell you. And not necessarily data-manage-complexity hard, but decision-making hard, where you can't rely on the game mechanics to tell you how to win. By which I mean, there is no optimum numerical advantage to something that tells you, say "that's the best place to put people, because they get a +10 bonus" it's more like "which road to I deploy my reon units to watch?" And for some folks, that level of decision-making is not fun. (Dad describes Manouivre Group as a "geeky" system even with the contraints of th wargaming community.)

And sometimes, you do just wanna roll over spearman in your modern armour Civ 2 style, slowly while laughing. (I know I do.)

[J-H]

Huh. I only got Civ4 a year or two ago. It's pretty fun, but doomstacks do take the fun out of things. I like to run low-military while teching up fast and if the AI catches me at a bad time, it's essentially unrecoverable.

Not a big fan of the graphics, but that may change when they put out some screenshots that show the grid lines; right now, it's too chaotic and busy.

I will agree that Alpha Centauri was the best Civ game... actually, you know, I think I still have it on my hard drive. I may see if it still works.
Leonard Nimoy was fun, but the AC tech quotes were just super awesome. A decade and a half later, I still have some of them memorized.

[Grif]

Some information on gameplay.

One Unit Per Tile persisting just about obliterated my interest, though. It's possible that they've decided to massively increase the number of tiles and the map and that units can move, since they also announced the abolishment of one city per square, which could make it more palatable. Also, instead of being able to decide on specific tech paths (which led to everyone jumping on the optimal tech route), your research is more or less dictated by the tech boosts you've collected. Guys, the solution you were looking for is Blind Research and it was just one of the many things Alpha Centauri did that make it the best Civ game to date.

Even Civ II had some measure of undirected research - it blocked out some tech choices every time you picked a new one, which occasionally sent you on a detour.

Only being half-serious here, though. The end result could work out. But I'm definitely not buying this one on release.



One very common complaint: The art style. To many, it looks too colorful; there are unflattering comparisons to mobile games thrown around. That's one complaint I don't have; to me the art style is reminiscent of Civ II in a good way.

Hm. 1upt. I guess I'll keep this on the backburner then.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I personally prefer the one-unit-per-hex. Makes the whole thing feel more like a strategy/board game and less like a sim. I figure, if I'm going to play a sim-like empire game, it'll be a Paradox game like Europa IV or Crusader Kings II.

the city impovement on tiles, smells distinctly like Warlock: Master of the Arcane which was a competent and strong entry in how Civ V could have made their combat mechanics stronger (at least seen as such by my inner Civ IV Grognand), but otherwise kinda shallow waters in the macro-strategy.

If they manage to siphon off the learned experience from Warlock (and Warlock II) and refining it, I'm probably willing to give it a fair shake

Yeah, it's also in Endless Legend. Neat way to restrict a city's improvements, and it makes for more difficult decisions, which I'm a fan of.