CIV VI

[Threadfin]

Looking forward to this one as well. Lord knows how many hundreds or thousands of hours I've sunk in to the Civ series. I actually preferred Civ V over IV, mainly due to the 1UPT combat, which many old timers didn't.

I'll remain skeptically optimistic about Civ VI. Many great game franchises have been ruined by bad design choices. But I think it will be good. We'll know soon enough won't we?

[Betonov]

The impresion I got from the info on CivVI is that they're continuing what they started with CivV, but listened to complaints and wishes of the community.

[Platapus]

There has to be some compromise between a Stack of Doom (which I hated) and one unit per tile. From what little I can find out about Civ6 they are trying to address this.

But correlation between hex size and unit was never a Civ strong suit.

[Betonov]

Civ VI gets the casus belli system of Europa Universalis and Victoria games.

-By declaring an unjustified war you gain warmonger points
-Wars with CB give low or none warmonger points
-in ancient times you won't have CBs but also no warmongering points

[Threadfin]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Civ VI gets the casus belli system of Europa Universalis and Victoria games.

-By declaring an unjustified war you gain warmonger points
-Wars with CB give low or none warmonger points
-in ancient times you won't have CBs but also no warmongering points

That's interesting. EU IV is one of my all-time most played games. Little things like this can be good if implemented in the right way. It will surely be far more simple than the CB system in EU IV, which has dozens of different CBs (trade, conquest, independence, holy war, colonialism, reconquest, restore union, disloyal subject and on and on)

Anything that puts more strategy in to strategy games is fine by me. I enjoy struggling over the opportunity cost involved in making a decision. And the more decisions that the player needs to make the better as far as I'm concerned. It's one of the things that appeals so much to me about EU IV.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Threadfin

Anything that puts more strategy in to strategy games is fine by me. I enjoy struggling over the opportunity cost involved in making a decision. And the more decisions that the player needs to make the better as far as I'm concerned. It's one of the things that appeals so much to me about EU IV.

CBs itself are hard to screw up.

My main concern is how the AI will respond to warmongering points. I'd love to see coalitions formed against a warmongering empire and some sort of distance mechanic, so some far flung empire doesn't decide to declare war despite having no tech to reach me. That distance mechanics should change with eras to represent how the world is ''smaller'' in the modern age.
CBs are going to be just a gimmick if the AI will make stupid decisions on them.

[Betonov]

Sean Bean does the voice work

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Platapus

There has to be some compromise between a Stack of Doom (which I hated) and one unit per tile. From what little I can find out about Civ6 they are trying to address this.

But correlation between hex size and unit was never a Civ strong suit.

Call to Power had some interesting combat mechanics that should be looked at in more depth...actually, to be honest a lot of what CTP did could do with being looked at, it was a good game.