I decided to actually use the tutorial and it eventually explained what Amenities are. It's the happiness system. So, okay, cool. What I want to know is, though, is it the same as in part 5? Where once I have cocoa, it's an empire-wide effect? Or is it city-by-city? Can I still trade luxury goods (I haven't touched the diplomacy system yet)?
Oh and what's the delegate (I think that's the word) system about?
Amenities from luxury goods cover four cities I think? More copies don't help but can be traded. Remember Amenities are not 1=1 with luxuries. You can also get Amenities from buildings/districts/religions/stuff. Amenity is basically the happiness analogue while luxury goods are just a part of it. (A big and early part of it.)
Are you talking about Envoys? You send them to city states to make them like you. You get boosts at 1, 3, and 6 of them there. Additionally a big bonus if you have the most that is at least 3.
Except for Khmer. Where I got to 20 population easily with crappy land and no neighborhoods. I need to try them again with some more rivers and food friendly areas.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Just as a point of clarification, envoys are what you send to city-states to receive their bonuses. Delegates are actually a different system.
Using the diplomacy screen, you can offer to send a delegate to a rival empire. If they agree, they will automatically receive a small payment of gold from you, and your diplomatic visibility with their empire will increase by 1. Diplomatic visibility is a mechanic that informs you what other empires in the world are doing, such as what continents they are expanding on, what wonders they are building, what great people they are recruiting, what city-states they are working with, etc. The higher your diplomatic visibility is, the more detailed the information will be. A.I. opponents will also receive a small positive modifier to their relationship with you if they accept the delegate offer (human opponents in multiplayer may be less grateful).
Likewise, if a rival empire offers you a delegation and you except, you will receive the gold payment from them, but their diplomatic visibility with your empire will increase. Since the A.I. pretty much knows what you're doing at all times anyway, there's no real reason to ever refuse a delegate offer in a singleplayer game.
After you discover the diplomatic service civic, all of your delegates will be removed, and you will now have the option of sending embassies instead. Embassies are basically exactly like delegates, except the gold gift that comes with them is larger, and they reveal the location of the other empire's capital city on the map if you haven't already found it.
So my gal said the board games that interest her the most are the ones where she takes over the world.
So I introduced her to Civ V and accidentally got her addicted
Do not, under any circumstances, show her Europa Universalis, or really any of the other Paradox games. I mean she's probably already on the route to discovering them and disengaging from society anyway, but no reason to hurry her demise. Good luck.
I have some thoughts on Civ 6
* Girlfriend just bought Civ 5 on her macbook (huh, I didn't know Mac devices had games!) So more play time for me.
* I love the aesthetics. COME AT ME BRO
* Traders stomping roads into existence is brilliant. Not only is it less obnoxious than using Workers to build them over time, it works thematically because that's how it happens.
* Why are all the civs talking shit about my science and culture when I'm too busy killing barbarians? Where are they getting all the time and Production in the world to get such things and I'm not?
* America's soundtrack makes me want to watch O Brother, Where Art Thouagain.
My girlfriend keeps wanting to get away with facist/unhappy nations. But that would require me to introducing her to Endless Legend, my favorite 4X of all time, and she likes humans more than fantasy.
I still think going tall can work in 6. It's a fun challenge if nothing else.
Well yes, but it is not as efficient as going wide, you are just playing with a handicap.
I suppose. There isn't even one Civ that playing tall is a better option for? If so that makes me sad, it's my fav way to play.
I am hearing good things about Khmer... What I consider the biggest hurdles to going tall are
1. Limited space to build districts and wonders. In civ5 you built 3 cities, pumped up the Production and could build a pile of wonders. In 6 you do not have that luxury.
2. You only have one production queue per city and a lot of stuff takes multiple turns to build. You can compensate with gold and faith purchase, but those won't give you districts.
However, if you are going to conquer everything, then you dont need to build a lot of cities yourself. Just grab cities till you win the game.
I have mixed feelings, on the one hand I liked going tall in 5, on the other I also sort of like that a big civ2/Alpha Centauri slugfest where you gradually take over the world city by city is an option. You certainly could do dom victories in civ V but it was less taking over the world and more destroying everything but the capitals and leaving a wasteland outside your core.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I have a feeling an expansion for Civ 6 will address the building-tall issue.
1. Limited space to build districts and wonders. In civ5 you built 3 cities, pumped up the Production and could build a pile of wonders. In 6 you do not have that luxury.
Is this actually a real problem? I've had a few games now where I managed to get a theatre square completely surrounded on all sides by wonders, so I'm not sure where this idea that cities don't have enough space to build lots of wonders is coming from.
1. Limited space to build districts and wonders. In civ5 you built 3 cities, pumped up the Production and could build a pile of wonders. In 6 you do not have that luxury.
Is this actually a real problem? I've had a few games now where I managed to get a theatre square completely surrounded on all sides by wonders, so I'm not sure where this idea that cities don't have enough space to build lots of wonders is coming from.
Oh wow, that is impressive.
I usually miss a lot of bonuses from tiles when I focus on wonders early on. It also requires some pretty advanced planning to lay out your districts, your other required features and beat the AI to them.
Is this something you do later on when you specifically want a Culture victory?
it's also just beneficial to be able to get more districts because of how many bonuses and mechanics are tied to them; with three cities you can only have three theater districts (for example), which means less space for great works. And just in general you want districts for great person points.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
in any case I hope the ultra-tall Civ5 gameplay doesn't come back; it put way too much emphasis on having a great 1-2 city start location and often meant you never wound up having borders of any consequence. I like that in civ 6 you're incentivized to expand to or near the limit of available territory
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
in any case I hope the ultra-tall Civ5 gameplay doesn't come back; it put way too much emphasis on having a great 1-2 city start location and often meant you never wound up having borders of any consequence. I like that in civ 6 you're incentivized to expand to or near the limit of available territory
That is a very good point, borders are hella exciting from a narrative and a gameplay point of view. I hope Firaxis considers it as Porque no dos? In 5, the meta was tall, but there obvious and well communicated options that going wide was supported by bonuses in every aspect of the game.
in any case I hope the ultra-tall Civ5 gameplay doesn't come back; it put way too much emphasis on having a great 1-2 city start location and often meant you never wound up having borders of any consequence. I like that in civ 6 you're incentivized to expand to or near the limit of available territory
Alternatively, I really hope it comes back as an alternative but not hamstrung playstyle
Because I don't really like playing wide that much.
1. Limited space to build districts and wonders. In civ5 you built 3 cities, pumped up the Production and could build a pile of wonders. In 6 you do not have that luxury.
Is this actually a real problem? I've had a few games now where I managed to get a theatre square completely surrounded on all sides by wonders, so I'm not sure where this idea that cities don't have enough space to build lots of wonders is coming from.
Oh wow, that is impressive.
I usually miss a lot of bonuses from tiles when I focus on wonders early on. It also requires some pretty advanced planning to lay out your districts, your other required features and beat the AI to them.
Is this something you do later on when you specifically want a Culture victory?
Not really. It's just something I do over the course of the whole game, when I feel like it. I like to get as many adjacency bonuses on my districts as I can, so if I see a wonder that can be built next to one of my theatre squares, I'll usually go for it. I do like to choose the autocracy government in the early game, so that legacy bonus helps.
In the most recent game where I managed to get a theatre square completely surrounded, the wonders I built were the Apadana (classical), Chichan Itza (medieval), Mont St. Michel (medieval), Oxford University (industrial), Bolshoi Theatre (industrial), and Christo Redentor (modern).
Go to the lens views over on the left side of the screen, one of them should be continent. It's hugely relevant if you're Spain, somewhat relevant if you're England or America.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
In the most recent game i started my starting location was like 1 tile from a continent border. Literally got the boost for discovering it on my 2nd or 3rd turn.
In the most recent game i started my starting location was like 1 tile from a continent border. Literally got the boost for discovering it on my 2nd or 3rd turn.
Yes, i am a great explorer.
This happened to me the first time I played as Spain. Which suddenly makes their bonus amazing.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
If you want to go tall you will want rush scouts. First level city state bonuses add up real fast for your capital. Tall works a lot better now then it did prior to the factory change, wonders tend to be a lot better for tall empires as well, a few are borderline broken. Any wonder that gives a trade route for example.
Tall also lets you engage with the diplomacy systems, where as wide exerts so much territorial pressure on the map the AI is going to always hate you no matter how much you try and play nice. Its weird, wide is definitely the more competitive way to play but a lot of the systems are ignorable at that level, seems like it might have been meant to encourage tall play but something got lost along the way.
Kongo, Egypt and India are the original civs that come to mind for me as being better tall then wide. Arabia is close, but really requires 5 cities to shine, which I would still call tall for 6.
Yeah I’m playing England so I want to find another continent to subjugate
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Okay, this game has to be easier than Civ 5 was with regard to war because this can't be right.
I started a new game as the Aztecs in marathon speed (I like the eras to actually last rather than go by). Early on, I run into a settler from Arabia. I figured fuck it, I was going to build a settler next and earlier than I usually aim for, so I surprise-war and capture it. All this spurred by my not being in a great mood and was aiming to lose / learn a lesson or some angsty shit.
At the time I'd only met them, Rome, the Macedonians and the Australians. I had a few Eagle Warriors and pumped out nothing but them over the next short while. My second city was settled, and it became the forward-post for my attack on Arabia, but also a sort of defense buffer for my capitol. Thing is, no Arabian army came. There were a shitton of Barbarians though and they were really strong and numerous. A lot of my army went into beating them back. I ended up with my original army size by the time I reached Arabia, and they had... no units.
When I stepped up next to the capital, Rome and Australia declared war on me. I captured Cairo, eliminating Arabia from the game in the Ancient Era. I rushed my army back to the capitol. Australia was to the south and Rome to the north. No army had come from Rome, but the Australian army was split. Somehow, part of it was north of Cairo and the rest was south of me. The split made it easy to fight off. This is where shit got a little weird because I captured lots of workers and some settlers, putting down some more cities. I eventually sent a small army to Australia's capitol to capture it, and so it was done. More effort than it took with Arabia, but not hard at all.
So now I've got seven cities total, with the two of them being the ones I captured. Macedonia just declared war on Rome, and according to the game Rome has a bit of a stronger army than me. Don't think that's going to last though, apparently. I still haven't met the other civs in this round.
I'm playing on Prince by the way. In Civ 5 that was enough to wreck me once in a while. In this though... I don't get it.
So two things (based on my experiences and some light reading on Reddit):
1. The AI is shit at deploying units in a sensible formation. There have been some improvements, but generally they will be no match to the simplest of tactics.
2. Your best allies are barbarians. They will hamper the speed of enemies, will capture civilian units and will kill random single units in the field.
I think so war ai is broken... the ai can put together a defensive force, but I never see them take cities, even from other ai. I had a game with Alex, Harold, Trajan, tomris, and Montezuma, no one took any other civs city the whole game.
Can they still not capture cities? That really sucks, thought they fixed that a few patches back =(
Also, yes. It is easier then 5.
I think they can as in its possible, I have seen ai grab an undefended city state in the early game, but it is a lot more rare than it should be. I don’t know if its a mechanical issue where the ai does not understand how to get around walls, or if the ai is just too docile and wants to avoid warmonger issues (shouldn’t matter for alex though) or what. They seem to build units and declare wars, but their wars are rarely successful.
Posts
Amenities from luxury goods cover four cities I think? More copies don't help but can be traded. Remember Amenities are not 1=1 with luxuries. You can also get Amenities from buildings/districts/religions/stuff. Amenity is basically the happiness analogue while luxury goods are just a part of it. (A big and early part of it.)
Are you talking about Envoys? You send them to city states to make them like you. You get boosts at 1, 3, and 6 of them there. Additionally a big bonus if you have the most that is at least 3.
(no really, Civ 6 benefits significantly from a Wide style)
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
More luxuries, entertainment districts, wonders etc.
Also also, it is how they tried to make tall compete with wide but pretty solidly failed with housing being a big issue for tall.
Using the diplomacy screen, you can offer to send a delegate to a rival empire. If they agree, they will automatically receive a small payment of gold from you, and your diplomatic visibility with their empire will increase by 1. Diplomatic visibility is a mechanic that informs you what other empires in the world are doing, such as what continents they are expanding on, what wonders they are building, what great people they are recruiting, what city-states they are working with, etc. The higher your diplomatic visibility is, the more detailed the information will be. A.I. opponents will also receive a small positive modifier to their relationship with you if they accept the delegate offer (human opponents in multiplayer may be less grateful).
Likewise, if a rival empire offers you a delegation and you except, you will receive the gold payment from them, but their diplomatic visibility with your empire will increase. Since the A.I. pretty much knows what you're doing at all times anyway, there's no real reason to ever refuse a delegate offer in a singleplayer game.
After you discover the diplomatic service civic, all of your delegates will be removed, and you will now have the option of sending embassies instead. Embassies are basically exactly like delegates, except the gold gift that comes with them is larger, and they reveal the location of the other empire's capital city on the map if you haven't already found it.
So I introduced her to Civ V and accidentally got her addicted
Do not, under any circumstances, show her Europa Universalis, or really any of the other Paradox games. I mean she's probably already on the route to discovering them and disengaging from society anyway, but no reason to hurry her demise. Good luck.
:P
Well yes, but it is not as efficient as going wide, you are just playing with a handicap.
* Girlfriend just bought Civ 5 on her macbook (huh, I didn't know Mac devices had games!) So more play time for me.
* I love the aesthetics. COME AT ME BRO
* Traders stomping roads into existence is brilliant. Not only is it less obnoxious than using Workers to build them over time, it works thematically because that's how it happens.
* Why are all the civs talking shit about my science and culture when I'm too busy killing barbarians? Where are they getting all the time and Production in the world to get such things and I'm not?
* America's soundtrack makes me want to watch O Brother, Where Art Thou again.
My girlfriend keeps wanting to get away with facist/unhappy nations. But that would require me to introducing her to Endless Legend, my favorite 4X of all time, and she likes humans more than fantasy.
I suppose. There isn't even one Civ that playing tall is a better option for? If so that makes me sad, it's my fav way to play.
I am hearing good things about Khmer... What I consider the biggest hurdles to going tall are
1. Limited space to build districts and wonders. In civ5 you built 3 cities, pumped up the Production and could build a pile of wonders. In 6 you do not have that luxury.
2. You only have one production queue per city and a lot of stuff takes multiple turns to build. You can compensate with gold and faith purchase, but those won't give you districts.
However, if you are going to conquer everything, then you dont need to build a lot of cities yourself. Just grab cities till you win the game.
Is this actually a real problem? I've had a few games now where I managed to get a theatre square completely surrounded on all sides by wonders, so I'm not sure where this idea that cities don't have enough space to build lots of wonders is coming from.
I usually miss a lot of bonuses from tiles when I focus on wonders early on. It also requires some pretty advanced planning to lay out your districts, your other required features and beat the AI to them.
Is this something you do later on when you specifically want a Culture victory?
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
That is a very good point, borders are hella exciting from a narrative and a gameplay point of view. I hope Firaxis considers it as Porque no dos? In 5, the meta was tall, but there obvious and well communicated options that going wide was supported by bonuses in every aspect of the game.
Alternatively, I really hope it comes back as an alternative but not hamstrung playstyle
Because I don't really like playing wide that much.
Not really. It's just something I do over the course of the whole game, when I feel like it. I like to get as many adjacency bonuses on my districts as I can, so if I see a wonder that can be built next to one of my theatre squares, I'll usually go for it. I do like to choose the autocracy government in the early game, so that legacy bonus helps.
In the most recent game where I managed to get a theatre square completely surrounded, the wonders I built were the Apadana (classical), Chichan Itza (medieval), Mont St. Michel (medieval), Oxford University (industrial), Bolshoi Theatre (industrial), and Christo Redentor (modern).
This is mostly the reason I stopped playing.
Yeah wonders were really exciting to race for in 5. In 6 the bonuses are like "yay...". Was that way in BE too.
Yes, i am a great explorer.
This happened to me the first time I played as Spain. Which suddenly makes their bonus amazing.
Tall also lets you engage with the diplomacy systems, where as wide exerts so much territorial pressure on the map the AI is going to always hate you no matter how much you try and play nice. Its weird, wide is definitely the more competitive way to play but a lot of the systems are ignorable at that level, seems like it might have been meant to encourage tall play but something got lost along the way.
Kongo, Egypt and India are the original civs that come to mind for me as being better tall then wide. Arabia is close, but really requires 5 cities to shine, which I would still call tall for 6.
I started a new game as the Aztecs in marathon speed (I like the eras to actually last rather than go by). Early on, I run into a settler from Arabia. I figured fuck it, I was going to build a settler next and earlier than I usually aim for, so I surprise-war and capture it. All this spurred by my not being in a great mood and was aiming to lose / learn a lesson or some angsty shit.
At the time I'd only met them, Rome, the Macedonians and the Australians. I had a few Eagle Warriors and pumped out nothing but them over the next short while. My second city was settled, and it became the forward-post for my attack on Arabia, but also a sort of defense buffer for my capitol. Thing is, no Arabian army came. There were a shitton of Barbarians though and they were really strong and numerous. A lot of my army went into beating them back. I ended up with my original army size by the time I reached Arabia, and they had... no units.
When I stepped up next to the capital, Rome and Australia declared war on me. I captured Cairo, eliminating Arabia from the game in the Ancient Era. I rushed my army back to the capitol. Australia was to the south and Rome to the north. No army had come from Rome, but the Australian army was split. Somehow, part of it was north of Cairo and the rest was south of me. The split made it easy to fight off. This is where shit got a little weird because I captured lots of workers and some settlers, putting down some more cities. I eventually sent a small army to Australia's capitol to capture it, and so it was done. More effort than it took with Arabia, but not hard at all.
So now I've got seven cities total, with the two of them being the ones I captured. Macedonia just declared war on Rome, and according to the game Rome has a bit of a stronger army than me. Don't think that's going to last though, apparently. I still haven't met the other civs in this round.
I'm playing on Prince by the way. In Civ 5 that was enough to wreck me once in a while. In this though... I don't get it.
1. The AI is shit at deploying units in a sensible formation. There have been some improvements, but generally they will be no match to the simplest of tactics.
2. Your best allies are barbarians. They will hamper the speed of enemies, will capture civilian units and will kill random single units in the field.
Also, yes. It is easier then 5.